The amount of reading and research that goes into each of these lectures-and that’s even before putting together the actual words and the slideshow-must be tremendous. I, for one, truly appreciate it. Thank you 👍 _!!_
Thank you John and the rest of the team for these interesting lectures. I've been gradually making my way through all of them ever since I discovered this channel last year. And if I may be so bold as to suggest a topic: I would love to see you do a lecture one day about the Nazarite vow, the Nazarites and the Nazarenes. I think there is some understandable confusion about these terms, and you would do an excellent job at clarifying them.
The claim of a "House of David" reminds me of the later claim by Darius the Great that he was related to Cyrus the Great via their possibly mythical mutual ancestor Achaemanes, giving us the historiographical name for that period of Persian history.
@@CraftsmanOfAwsomenes there are several examples in the Welsh kingdoms and warlords where some of them claim ancestry to the Greeks, and to specific Greeks, and adopt Greek-ish titles. There is, of course, no genuine line of descent, or even cultural lineage.
I'd buy such a thing being accurate, but only because the parts of the Bible that date to the Iron Age and later (you know, the age when there were more people around to call BS on someone's fantastic stories), tend to mention real names and places a lot more accurately. There very well could have been a House of David, and their scribes would have painted them in the light that best shone upon them. Of course David is a man after God's own heart and of course Solomon is the wisest man in the history of the world, because that's what they were paying others to write about them. But they were probably depressingly boring men from a house that was slightly better off than others.
@@jesusnthedaisychain Yeah I can agree that there may have been an elite family actually founded by a David. He's just probably not the guy described in the text.
Another excellent Hamercopia of Knowledge this evening. Thank you again to John and everyone at Centre Place who bring these awesome lectures to us. I give this one 5 bags of popcorn, 2 sodas and a couple of timelines.
@@jasonhuttermusic424 Not exceptable 'myth' are we in the same friggin dimension.. 2plane crashes hostages resignation of pm... am i missing something.. or of course , biblical archeology is just a perspective damn the evidense.. fine i'm crap @ spelling anyways.. [ Genuine, honest, calm, humble, objective, factual, accurate, precise] are u serious !.. ok.i'm gone.. kdagPlymouthUK
Excellent, thanks. I particularly liked the chart at 1:08. I have been trying to get my mind around the relationships across that timeline for quite a while.
If you read the various David stories in the Bible, there is enough going on there for at least 5 different people. Some of it is very clearly legend in form. Some places you can see where scribes just gave up trying to copy-edit different traditions together, and just included two versions of the same story. Other times, stories starting David are found elsewhere staring somebody else. I think I agree with you that in large part, David is a mythic or legendary figure, who various stories got attached to, and where some of these narratives functioned as entertainment before they later became scripture.
Mathew Mark Luke John are the Tetramorph. Why would anyone in the Bible be a person? The Bible literally tells you it's astrology, constantly from cover to cover. Even Christians call the old testament the masoretic text, which means "related to/of the Mazzaroth". There was no Nazareth. Bethlehem means "the house of bread" , a well known reference to Virgo. Why would Judaism be real if Christianity is astrology? The people discussing these topics are just as bad as religious authorities. Just tell the truth. It's stars and planets, not people.
Leading Torah scholar Joel Baden is one of those who argue for David being a historical figure based on embarrassment. He argues that the account in Kings is the ancient genre of apology, explaining how everyone politically inconvenient to David dies in turn but it's conveniently never David's fault. I find it a compelling argument.
The question is not whether a David existed, per se, but whether a unified kingdom of north and south under David and Solomon existed. Israel Finkelstein's book "David and Solomon" says the archaeological evidence shows that David would have only been a small local chieftain or warlord. Jerusalem was a small town and Judea did not have the wealth, population or military to control the North. So a David could have existed, but the extent of his kingdom was exaggerated. David is like King Arthur, an extreme exaggeration of a possibly real person.
The figure of David is supposed to be embarrassing, the primary history is a diatribe against kingship. It's polemic. Wajdenbaum's 'Argonauts of the Desert' explores this very well.
@@justinlevy274 I haven't read that book, I'll have to look into it. The theological debate in Judges and Kings as I remember it is that a nation is supposedly judged by the actions of a king, should it choose to have one. Israel is therefore judged harshly when a king is wicked. David's story doesn't fit into that narrative arc, though. God rewards David at every step of the way, no matter how unjust he behaves. For instance, David is very conveniently in the lands of Israel's enemies at a time when Israel is defeated in battle, then a young boy in the foreign land brings David the physical crown just because (?), and therefore David becomes king. That sounds to me like whitewashing a traitor, rather than a polemic against kingship. I'm simply repeating Joel Baden's argument with less eloquence and mastery of the text, though.
@@Ken_Scaletta I'm with you. I was responding specifically to John Hamer's musing near the end of the lecture that David can't be said to be historical, despite some scholars arguing for historicity based on the criterion of embarrassment. I wanted to name perhaps the most prominent scholar who disagrees with John, if anyone wanted to explore the other side of the debate.
Considering that a few parts of the Torah reference the "Talamai" (i.e. the Ptolemys), then isn't it likely that all this Jewish history was invented during the Hellenistic period? They remembered great stories from the bronze age and coopted them. I think it is pretty clear "David" is really Tutmoses III, who captured Jerusalem as a boy, took a slingshot over the mountains to capture Meggido (Goliath) and ruled all the land between the Nile and the twin rivers. Tut even left stele around with his name: TVT, (U had not been invented yet). To the Semitic people, D and T were the same letter, so they read his stele as DVD. And Solomon is really Amonhotep III who ruled at a time of peace, and had 1000 chariots and a wife from Ethiopia. btw - Solomon means "peace-god" and Amonhotep means "god-peace." The Jews remembered these great men who ruled over the Levant and thought "they must be ours."
When I searched for the chronology of Tanakh composition, according to academic consensus, these were my notes (indented composition appears between historical events). The first layer of the Davidic story is by consensus dated to to the Babylonian exile. Of course later scribes could have altered the texts: Chronology of Tanakh composition Preexilic Song of the Sea (Exodus 15:1-18), Song of Moses (Deuteronomy 32:1-43) Song of Deborah (Judges 5:2-31) Psalm 29
I believe Gmirkin has proven Solomon is modelled after Shalmaneser III. If you want the full Hellenistic hypothesis look at the Cophenhagen school especially Russell Gmirkin, Phillipe Wajdenbaum, Gad Barnea, and Jonaton Adler. You can find a lot of their interviews and the advancement of the Hellentistic Origins of Judaism on the Mythvision and Gnostic Informant YT Channels
@@MrDarrylR The issue is that these are rather speculative dates, no one at Elephantine, Samaria, Judea, or Babylon or the surrounding cultures know anything about these texts until the Hellenistic era per Gad Barnea
The heck are you talking about? Why would Thutmose be using a Latin alphabet? All his steles recorded his name in a cartouche (a block of hieroglyphs). Also, d is dalet and t is tet in Hebrew. The two sounds are different in every single Semitic language current and ancient.
I miss your lectures with the in person crowd. as much as it kinda sucks, because they weren't edited, I like the realness. it felt like I was seeing a real class
There have been 50 failed Jewish "Messiah's" since Jesus. At what point does God saying if a prophets prophecy does not come to pass, to know the prophet spoke presumptuously, and the prophecy was not His? We're talking over 2000 years. No wonder Jesus, in the Aramaic Matthew, said to not say he was the Messiah? or go after those who said he is? Maybe the whole "Messiah" thing is ignoring the passages where God said He is the one who would cause certain things to happen - but they continued to reject Him, just as Christians do to this day?
Another great Centre Place lecture. In particular I appreciate being given such a concise summary of the non-Biblical attestation to various kings of Judah and Israel.
It appears that the writers of the accounts of Solomon and David in the Old Testament were projecting the power and status of neighboring enemy kingdoms upon Solomon and David, to give the Israelite ancestry greater prominence than they actually had.
believers? wait. there is tons of evidence here and on other channels that MUST make you believe, no longer, in traditonal bible christianity. How is it that you are still a believer? I am incredulous. Stop having blind faith when there are better spiritual systems out there and other real gods to pray to and worship. "..a place for believers..." Are you a bot? are you faking or brown-nosing?
@@lukeyznaga7627 why does matter to you?! Mind your business. Sorry. I believe in something that you don’t believe in. I’ve seen a lot of the evidence against the Bible. I don’t believe in a lot of what is written but I’m gonna still believe in Christ. Doesn’t mean you have to.
Per the Shapira scrolls, Idan Dershowitz has done updates on YT interviews proving the reasons the scrolls were rejected in the 1800's was due to lack of knowledge about ancient texts. All the objections then have been solidly refuted - the search for the scrolls to verify by modern standards is all that needs to be done now. Old objections were greatly flawed.
What are the reasons for centralizing worship. Is it mostly for economic reasons, for reasons having to do with efforts to establish a single unified system of worship, both, neither or are there other reasons for doing so?
So, John, how do you retain enough under that small head such huge gobs of information that so enlightens us? I know, no answer, just a sidelong compliment, after the many windows of topics splayed across the screen. Thanks, get a thanks button.
The Chronicles of the Kings of Israel. This one almost definitely existed at one point because it would actually be really weird for a kingdom on the Fertile Crescent not to have one. We actually have very similar books from Ugarit.
Curious that recent excavations by at sites by archaeologistis like Garfinkel have not been referenced. There's much debate, to be sure, but there seems to be quite a bit of evidence pushing our understanding of the borders of Judah during the late 900s BCE and perhaps even back into the Davidic dates (early 900s). So there is some realia going back quite early that shows at least a growing kingdom. Moreover, the speaker does not mention that the inscriptions we find for later kings during the neo-Assyrian and neo-Babylonian kingdoms just simply doesn't exist in earlier periods. We have very little from *any* kingdom in the 11th-mid 9th centuries BCE throughout the Levant. And finally, the idea that Chronicles was writtern to replace the Deuteronomistic History is proposterous. There's nothing to suggest anywhere that the two were pitted against each other; in fact, the Chronicler assumes we're reading Samuel and Kings alongside it. That changes the dynamic of how we understand the book, especially in its relationship to Sam-Kings.
The exodus was more of a separation from Egyptian rule , rather than a physical migration out. It's about Egyptian Jews establishing themselves during the bronze age collapse. This came after a period of Semite occupation under the Hyksos. Study the Late Bronze age Collapse. The Jews were among many tribes going through an Exodus
The Magen David is an astrological symbol. Who else from astrology is a real person? The entire book is about magens (stars) and magicians (astrologers) yet every single astrologer mentioned in the text is just a reference to a star. Such as the 3 Magi; Orions belt.
Why couldn’t there have been an oral tradition that was later written down? I thought that was common in ancient texts. Why in Greece and India but not Israel? I meant it doesn’t prove anything, but why are you saying that there was no oral tradition?
He explains quite clearly why the United Monarchy and "House of David" could not be what the Bible states. There is a complete lack of infrastructure needed to be a strong Military kingdom which did exist in the time of Omri.
And here we are today with people thinking Netanyahu is some how related to David. Most likely he is related to king Harrod. Well when you get it all figured out , we both will be surprised.
I'm so thankful for your posts putting things out for us all to see. You are a wonderful teacher. We all need to know these things. Have you investigated the Shapira scrolls as they relate to the teachings of Jesus in Matthew? That's been my focus for a while. I had to conclude Paul was a liar and wrote "Romans Proves Paul Lied".
When the scholars say David didn’t exist I was sad. So if Jesus thought he was the heir of that kingdom he believed in a myth like so many do today. It’s crazy.
He may have existed, but not in the manner discussed in the Bible. Consider the legends the romans had about Cheops, who they believed built the Great Pyramid vs what we know about Khufu, the real person who built it.
Crazy… maybe we are to take the teaching of the Bible and be learned enough to decipher between the teachings of fallible man and the message of God. In other words do like Jesus said when we read scripture and look for him and his message because they speak of him. (John 5:39-47) those people in that chapter thought they was doing the “righteous & lawful.” Things of God to.
I presume the “House of David” was in reference to a semi-mythic figure derived from of one or possibly (a conflation or interpolation) of several tribal confederal figures with military strongman or religio-political credentials that existed and persisted in popular legend & oral traditions [ one can compare Tecumsah and his prophet brother and their confederacy ] So you have parties from both “Northern/‘Samarian’” but also especially “Southern/‘Judahite’” extraction with ‘Davidic’ heroic traditional legitimation, and then this native popular heroic and largely mythic tradition is legitimized by the Persian ‘emancipation’ of the exile-captive elites, after conquest of the Neo-Babylonian empires, as a political tool to ‘triangulate’ vs the local headmen in the North [ Samaria-Israel ] and South [ Jerusalem-Judah ] in their sponsorship of select ethnarchs via support of the Davidic dynastic legitimacy claim + also the package-deal of the Yawhist-Judahite extreme monalatrist-aniconistic-ritualized purity party that came out of the Babylonian exile / captivity.
I agree. Just cause one little piece of stone says House of David, only means that there was a man named David that lived. However, it doesn't attest to a specific David, his supposed riches, and a unified Kingdom. We can't automatically say everything is the bible about David is true because one piece of rock said House of David.
The era of judges was one of more or less republican government, where the secular and spiritual leaders were chosen by a council of elders, and could be impeached for bad conduct or failing to deal with the problems of the day. The assertion of kings was when Israel lost favor in the sight of God the most high, and the ark of the covenant was returned to Egypt for Alexander to finally find and inspire the Ptolemies to revive the Tauran cults of Ptah/Chiron of the tau-rho anhk and chi-rho christogram and try to purge the pantheon of demon gods and goddesses of dark sex and death magic, child trafficking and human sacrifice. When you get that the Roman's IOVI was a translation of the Hebrew's YHWH, you'll gain a lot of ground sorting out the truth of fractured scriptures and godspells by competing cults of "one".
REF. 26:29: "...many of them believed that they found what they were looking for..." yeah, charismatic "faith" but not accepted in a real, accurate scholarly way. No real evidence that any ruins [ if any ] pointed to a Davidic kingdom for if the writings of some those books in bible were real.
Davids city still stands , how can you disprove the stones call you a liar. The pool of shilom has been their scince christ walked. Your entire premise is flawed. You want to completely ignore archeology entirely? The city of David still stands , the tunnel and the well is there , the very stones call you a liar
Excellent topics. I supposed most Israelites (jews and non-jews) today are not waiting anymore a biblical "Mesias" because they realize now that every single nation needs its particular political ruler. Anything else it is just an excuse or pretext.
Re: the last question, I place a lot more value in the Criterion of Embarrassment, the closer the text is written to the events it is describing, because the way I see it, the reason for the Criterion in my view is that whatever was seen as embarrassing would have to be well known enough, among the audience, to want to produce apologia about in the text itself. This doesn't preclude texts written significantly after from having the Criterion be applicable, if for instance there were records or oral tradition that would make whatever embarrassing material more well-known than the passage of time would indicate, but at some point it becomes an inference based off of an inference based off of an inference, if there's nothing to indicate the embarrassing material was at all remembered.
Sometimes scholars use something called the criterion of dissimilarity, which means when an author records or repeats something contradictory to views the author has already expressed. So an author can be compared to his or her SELF sometimes. But you are right, "embarrassment" is not an objective criterion. Mythology is filled with stories that make its heroes or gods look bad, including in the Bible. The Patriarchs often do things that are dishonest or brutal to innocent people but no one calls it "embarrassing."
Does not the bible say HEZEKIAH WAS the greatest king of Judah far greater than King David and lets face it David wasa bit of a wet as a king . alway pleasing himself and then the writer claiming God had forgiven him , because he walked in the ways of the Lord
John, would you consider guest lecturing? There is a large group here in Miami, active at the 3 colleges, would love to have you. Is there someone to contact?
There is a reference to the "House of David" in Egyptian hieroglyphics in the Karnak Inscription, a hieroglyphic record of Pharaoh Shoshenq I's military campaign in Israel and Judah, where a section is interpreted as possibly referring to the "Heights of David" in the southern region of Judah; this is considered a potential mention of the Davidic dynasty in Egyptian records. That makes 2 possible historical references to the "House of David", the Dan stele and the Karnak inscriptions. So both the Arameans and Egyptians knew of the "House of David". That is a thought to consider. Remember it used to be believed that the Hitites were a myth. It seems that myths often have a basis in history or fact.
In a study published in August 2017 by Marc Haber et al. in The American Journal of Human Genetics, the authors concluded that: "The overlap between the Bronze Age and present-day Levantines suggests a degree of genetic continuity in the region."[18]A 2021 study by the New York Genome Center found that the predominant component of the DNA of modern Palestinians matches that of Bronze Age Palestinians (Canaanites) from around 2500-1700 BCE.[17]. The Palestinian people are the original israelites and judeans.
They have certainly been there a very long time. It would be difficult to explain the Palestinian Christian community, which is probably the oldest Christian community on the planet. Sadly, that community is in danger of completely disappearing, as the conflicts of the past 100 years have put a large amount of pressure on them, coming both from the Israeli settler movement, and the burgeoning growth of the Palestinian Muslim community. As Palestinian families grow, both Muslim and Christian, there’s fewer and fewer places in Occupied Palestine to go, as the Israeli occupation routinely denies building permits to Palestinians, causing the massive overcrowding in both the Gaza Strip and what little of the West Bank which has at least nominal “control” over its population enclaves. So many Christian Palestinians have simply emigrated, in order to obtain a better future for their families, especially their children. It’s extremely difficult to get any higher educational opportunities in Palestine, which wasn’t always the case. At one time, Palestinians were among the most educated group in the Arab world, in terms of the proportion to the general population. This has drastically changed since the turn of the 21st century, dominated by right wing Israeli governments.
Interesting the levant includes syria, israel, Jordan, Lebanon, parts of Egypt and arabia. Cannan includes Lebanon, Jordan, israel and syria. How do you know that a person specifically comes from the area called the holy land
@@talksmoke1190 In 2018, Elhaik stated that the Ashkenazi maternal line is European and that only 3% of Ashkenazi DNA shows links with the Eastern Mediterranean/Middle East, a 'minuscule' amount comparable to the proportion of Neanderthal genes in modern European populations. For Elhaik, the vehicle by which unique Asiatic variations on Ashkenazi Y-chromosomes occurred, with Haplogroup Q-L275,[103] was the Ashina ruling clan of the Göktürks, who converted to Judaism and established the Khazar empire.[104]
Have you ever thought that maybe there are so many contradictions in Hebrew is because the texts were all copied from the Original Greek. Everyone was speaking Greek in those lands at that time. Aramaic Sumerian and (ancient) Hebrew were already dead or dying languages. When you copy a language that has over one million unique words, into a language that only has 7000 unique words, you're going to have some issues and repetition. All the Monist religions have their origins in the Bacchic Rights and Ancient Greek Mystery Schools. (I dont recommend reading the sources unless you have a strong stomach. An open mind would be helpful also.) Reading these extra-biblical Ancient Greek text and the Original Ancient Greek Bible, I'm convinced that the elegant and gorgeous flow of Ancient Greek came first. The Hebrew Bible is an attempt (they tried) to copy the Greek into Hebrew. Read the sources and see for yourself. Peace to you Hail the Muse
Where is the Biblical bottleneck beginning for the entirety of the Jewish faith? In the Book of 2nd Kings 22, it was during the reign of King Josiah, the Ruler of Judea, that the Books of Moses were "rediscovered" in a hiding place of the prevailingly-devolved pagan Jerusalem Temple. It was at this time in the 7th Century BCE that King Josiah's pagan priesthood chief, at the King's command, went retro and took a many-generations forgotten, archaic Hebrew text and designed a fresh religious practice around it. Essentially, they went from poly to "mono." From a Josiah-specific time-frame to this most modern era, that invented religious practice is now called Judaism.
There is no archaeological or other evidence for any knowledge of the books of Moses or any widespread knowledge or practice of Mosaic law before the Maccabean period (1st Century BCE). They were never monotheistic before then. Jews in Elephantine, Egypt had their own temple in Egypt, were polytheists and show no knowledge of Mosaic law, or of Moses or the Patriarchs even into the 4th Century BCE. They were writing to the Jerusalem Temple and asking for help renovating their temple in Elephantine. The Temple in Jerusalem seems to have had no problem with it even though Josiah's reforms were supposed to have only one temple, the one in Jerusalem. It's also weird since the Elephantine temple was offered sacrifices to two other gods besides Yahweh (one of them a female). Yonatan Adler, the archaeologist who has done the work on this, is begging anyone at all to show evidence for knowledge or practice of Mosaic law before the 2nd Century BCE. The books could have existed somewhere but they were not being read and the laws not practiced.
@@Ken_Scaletta The hard physical evidence relates that you are correct ... but the faithful still have a perspective of TRUTH for their fantasies and myths. What I have done is show by the logic of their own truths that the Bible itself relates a fable-rich, cyclical tale of community apostacy and cultural religious extinction regarding their own distinct rituals of worship. During a time when cultural illiteracy was the most common community environment, Aurthurian-style legends were so much easier for an exclusively very small, literate community class to easily revise its own history. When such revisions are specifically mandated by the superior priesthood an interdependently-evolved, conquering culture (the Persians), the Judeans took to the task with fervor. Their own "returned" oligarchs invented a fabled history of ancestors better than the Persian administrators could have imagined. Even so, what was invented was still only historical fiction. Also back then, there were no investigative journalists.
Um, not a myth. Seems you haven't been keeping up with all modern archeology taking place. More than one piece of evidence has been found in the last 6 years for David and his temple as well as one of the prophets. Thanks .
Yeah, and who pays for these studies? A bunch of fanatical Zionists looking to lay claim to the West Bank? Sounds like the same playbook as the Nazis looking for proof of the Aryans all over Europe 😂
More than one piece of evidence? Tell us what they are, and content produced by fringe Christian churches, creation ministries and pseudoarchaeology don't count.
All of them have been severly questioned and the majority of archeologists that study these regions and histories have suggested that discoveries do not prove the existance of David/Soloman let alone a combined kingdom of either. These discoveries are on a similar basis of those from the past....people needing to prove the truth of the histories proposed in the bible.
Shmah Israel is a short pray practiced many times daily by religious jews and it says: Listen Israel, God our lord, is one God. Might be an attempt to shift the israelis to Jehova, in fact, uniting El the Israeli god from Shomron with Jehova
i love history. there was an Egyptian empire. there was a Babylonian empire. there was a Greco Roman empire. THEY impact TODAYS civilization. "kingdom" of who? what? I rest my case.
The source argument about earlier material that Deuteronomic historians could have used is not entirely valid because ancient literature is full of references to fake/fictitious sources that never actually existed it and this practice was not uncommon in ancient times because naming made-up sources gave the writings some credibility. A good example is Plato, who names Solon as the source of the Atlantis story, who he claimed to have received his information from the temple of Neith in Sais, but although the stone foundation of the destroyed temple has been found in Sais, no traces of the Atlantis story have been found, and the consensus among scholars is that Plato lied about Solon and invented the Atlantis story on his own.
Yes, I believe Plato has another one in his 'Laws' where he says some Egyptian priest told him of some older civilization which lived in perfect harmony and Plato was going to relate those laws to the readers or some such nonsense.
maybe this myth was created so that the Israelites of that period [post Babylon captivity, Persian captivity ] could have power or fake respect or wanted to pretend that they were greater than they were? Shame for who they really were? Or maybe it was to make money which they could make, if they made their people believe that Judaism was real and their priests had knowledge and power over them? ref. 1:4:00 to 1:4:14.
how come your channel has no subscriptions or content? almost all real channels have subscriptions of channels they watch. you have nothing. NO content at all. Are you a bot? How long have you been on youtube?
So ppl please don't let me down. Dont give up on me i usually make a ass out of myself cause im mad. Not happy and TOOKEN advantage of cause everything i say on social media thry steal my knowledge but Jesus Christ wont fail im connected i have the relec. The truth to show you like Micah prophesies Egypt
This guy admits there was a House of David 100 years after the Biblical David but there was no David? the Bible isn’t all true but it is a historical document. Why is it never given any weight by historians just seen as something that bears the burden of proving itself?
It's not exactly hard to understand the possible or even probible existence of David, a hypothetical chieftain of a small backwater, of which nothing is known about, because he wasn't particularly important except to his descendants, the future kings of Judah, doesn't have any bearing on the historicity of David, the biblical character who ruled over a vast kingdom.
It is never given weight because for over 150 years people have tried to prove the historical reality of the bible. Over that time rather than proving it has effectively done the reverse. In the UK we have the myth of King Arthur.....and like David, he may of existed but is there any real evidence versus wishful unsupported evidence to prove an exist belief....he was also called King but any writen reference to him is from centuries after he supposedly existed, just like David. Arthur may of existed but was he a king of the whole of Britain (which didn't exist at the time) or a battle chieftain.....no different to David.
The namesake of the Merovingian dynasty was the son of a sea monster. There is much less than one hundred years between the sea monster and historical evidence for the sea monster's descendants.. Does this prove the existence of sea monsters?
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
The amount of reading and research that goes into each of these lectures-and that’s even before putting together the actual words and the slideshow-must be tremendous. I, for one, truly appreciate it. Thank you 👍 _!!_
Thank you John and the rest of the team for these interesting lectures. I've been gradually making my way through all of them ever since I discovered this channel last year.
And if I may be so bold as to suggest a topic: I would love to see you do a lecture one day about the Nazarite vow, the Nazarites and the Nazarenes. I think there is some understandable confusion about these terms, and you would do an excellent job at clarifying them.
Great presentation as per usual! Would be awesome if you could do the Hyksos and Shasu ;)
Religion never really got me, but this show differentiates dogma from history.
Well done thoroughly enjoyed the narrative.
The claim of a "House of David" reminds me of the later claim by Darius the Great that he was related to Cyrus the Great via their possibly mythical mutual ancestor Achaemanes, giving us the historiographical name for that period of Persian history.
@@CraftsmanOfAwsomenes there are several examples in the Welsh kingdoms and warlords where some of them claim ancestry to the Greeks, and to specific Greeks, and adopt Greek-ish titles. There is, of course, no genuine line of descent, or even cultural lineage.
I'd buy such a thing being accurate, but only because the parts of the Bible that date to the Iron Age and later (you know, the age when there were more people around to call BS on someone's fantastic stories), tend to mention real names and places a lot more accurately. There very well could have been a House of David, and their scribes would have painted them in the light that best shone upon them. Of course David is a man after God's own heart and of course Solomon is the wisest man in the history of the world, because that's what they were paying others to write about them. But they were probably depressingly boring men from a house that was slightly better off than others.
@@jesusnthedaisychain Yeah I can agree that there may have been an elite family actually founded by a David. He's just probably not the guy described in the text.
Another excellent Hamercopia of Knowledge this evening. Thank you again to John and everyone at Centre Place who bring these awesome lectures to us. I give this one 5 bags of popcorn, 2 sodas and a couple of timelines.
how come your channel has no comment and you haven't subscribed to anything? I checked out your channel.
This is my favourite place on RUclips. Genuine, honest, calm, humble, objective, factual, accurate, precise.
Agreed. Love his talks.
@@jasonhuttermusic424 Not exceptable 'myth' are we in the same friggin dimension.. 2plane crashes hostages resignation of pm... am i missing something.. or of course , biblical archeology is just a perspective damn the evidense.. fine i'm crap @ spelling anyways..
[ Genuine, honest, calm, humble, objective, factual, accurate, precise] are u serious !.. ok.i'm gone.. kdagPlymouthUK
Excellent, thanks. I particularly liked the chart at 1:08. I have been trying to get my mind around the relationships across that timeline for quite a while.
If you read the various David stories in the Bible, there is enough going on there for at least 5 different people. Some of it is very clearly legend in form. Some places you can see where scribes just gave up trying to copy-edit different traditions together, and just included two versions of the same story. Other times, stories starting David are found elsewhere staring somebody else. I think I agree with you that in large part, David is a mythic or legendary figure, who various stories got attached to, and where some of these narratives functioned as entertainment before they later became scripture.
did you read my strong and intelligent comments?
by the way, I like those computer games you have on your channel. wows.
All religions started as entertainment
Mathew Mark Luke John are the Tetramorph. Why would anyone in the Bible be a person? The Bible literally tells you it's astrology, constantly from cover to cover. Even Christians call the old testament the masoretic text, which means "related to/of the Mazzaroth".
There was no Nazareth. Bethlehem means "the house of bread" , a well known reference to Virgo. Why would Judaism be real if Christianity is astrology?
The people discussing these topics are just as bad as religious authorities. Just tell the truth. It's stars and planets, not people.
Apocryphal?
Leading Torah scholar Joel Baden is one of those who argue for David being a historical figure based on embarrassment. He argues that the account in Kings is the ancient genre of apology, explaining how everyone politically inconvenient to David dies in turn but it's conveniently never David's fault. I find it a compelling argument.
It was a very interesting book! Have you come across other books that have the same argument?
The question is not whether a David existed, per se, but whether a unified kingdom of north and south under David and Solomon existed. Israel Finkelstein's book "David and Solomon" says the archaeological evidence shows that David would have only been a small local chieftain or warlord. Jerusalem was a small town and Judea did not have the wealth, population or military to control the North. So a David could have existed, but the extent of his kingdom was exaggerated. David is like King Arthur, an extreme exaggeration of a possibly real person.
The figure of David is supposed to be embarrassing, the primary history is a diatribe against kingship. It's polemic. Wajdenbaum's 'Argonauts of the Desert' explores this very well.
@@justinlevy274 I haven't read that book, I'll have to look into it.
The theological debate in Judges and Kings as I remember it is that a nation is supposedly judged by the actions of a king, should it choose to have one. Israel is therefore judged harshly when a king is wicked. David's story doesn't fit into that narrative arc, though. God rewards David at every step of the way, no matter how unjust he behaves. For instance, David is very conveniently in the lands of Israel's enemies at a time when Israel is defeated in battle, then a young boy in the foreign land brings David the physical crown just because (?), and therefore David becomes king. That sounds to me like whitewashing a traitor, rather than a polemic against kingship. I'm simply repeating Joel Baden's argument with less eloquence and mastery of the text, though.
@@Ken_Scaletta I'm with you. I was responding specifically to John Hamer's musing near the end of the lecture that David can't be said to be historical, despite some scholars arguing for historicity based on the criterion of embarrassment. I wanted to name perhaps the most prominent scholar who disagrees with John, if anyone wanted to explore the other side of the debate.
Thanks John wishing you well in the new year
Considering that a few parts of the Torah reference the "Talamai" (i.e. the Ptolemys), then isn't it likely that all this Jewish history was invented during the Hellenistic period? They remembered great stories from the bronze age and coopted them. I think it is pretty clear "David" is really Tutmoses III, who captured Jerusalem as a boy, took a slingshot over the mountains to capture Meggido (Goliath) and ruled all the land between the Nile and the twin rivers. Tut even left stele around with his name: TVT, (U had not been invented yet). To the Semitic people, D and T were the same letter, so they read his stele as DVD. And Solomon is really Amonhotep III who ruled at a time of peace, and had 1000 chariots and a wife from Ethiopia. btw - Solomon means "peace-god" and Amonhotep means "god-peace." The Jews remembered these great men who ruled over the Levant and thought "they must be ours."
When I searched for the chronology of Tanakh composition, according to academic consensus, these were my notes (indented composition appears between historical events). The first layer of the Davidic story is by consensus dated to to the Babylonian exile. Of course later scribes could have altered the texts:
Chronology of Tanakh composition
Preexilic
Song of the Sea (Exodus 15:1-18), Song of Moses (Deuteronomy 32:1-43)
Song of Deborah (Judges 5:2-31)
Psalm 29
Assyrian conquest of Israel 732-722 BCE
Isaiah 1-39,
Amos, Hosea, Micah 1-3
Josiah 640-609 BCE
Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings (original layer)
Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah
Neo-Babylonian conquest of Judea 587 BCE
Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings (revision)
Isaiah 40-55, Jeremiah, Ezekiel
Obediah, Micah 4-7
Psalms 1-89
Lamentations
Persian conquest of Neo-Babylon 539 BCE
Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus & Numbers (JE) (original layer)
Isaiah 56-66, Haggai, Zechariah 1-8, Malachi
Ezra returns to Israel, compiles Torah 458 BCE
Joel
Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah
Ruth
Greek conquest of Levant 332 BCE
Jonah, Zechariah 9-14
Job, Ecclesiastes, Proverbs
Psalms 90-150
Ruth, Song of Songs
Septuagint 260 BCE
Tobit, Sirach
Maccabean revolt against Antiochus IV Epiphanies 167-164 BC
Daniel, 1 Maccabees, Judith, 2 Maccabees, Esther
Roman conquest 63 BCE
3 Maccabees, Wisdom of Solomon, 4 Maccabees
I believe Gmirkin has proven Solomon is modelled after Shalmaneser III. If you want the full Hellenistic hypothesis look at the Cophenhagen school especially Russell Gmirkin, Phillipe Wajdenbaum, Gad Barnea, and Jonaton Adler. You can find a lot of their interviews and the advancement of the Hellentistic Origins of Judaism on the Mythvision and Gnostic Informant YT Channels
@@MrDarrylR The issue is that these are rather speculative dates, no one at Elephantine, Samaria, Judea, or Babylon or the surrounding cultures know anything about these texts until the Hellenistic era per Gad Barnea
The heck are you talking about? Why would Thutmose be using a Latin alphabet? All his steles recorded his name in a cartouche (a block of hieroglyphs). Also, d is dalet and t is tet in Hebrew. The two sounds are different in every single Semitic language current and ancient.
@@andrewsuryali8540 Of course Tutmoses used Egyptian letters. I would have thought that obvious. That is why I did not mention it.
I'd love to see a lecture on the Psalms, their history and usage.
I miss your lectures with the in person crowd. as much as it kinda sucks, because they weren't edited, I like the realness. it felt like I was seeing a real class
it's no nice though not having to hear the same person ask 86 unrelated questions.
That's a lot to digest.
I'll have to go through this a few times.
Thank you
Thanks!
Pharoah was some dude. He totally destroys Gezer , kills all the inhabitants and gives it to his daughter. Thanks, Dad!
A master class...as always Centre Place spreading pure joy for the intellect, Aristotle's heaven
I am just wondering has John done a video lecture on the book of Jeremiah? I'm not sure as cant locate.
There have been 50 failed Jewish "Messiah's" since Jesus. At what point does God saying if a prophets prophecy does not come to pass, to know the prophet spoke presumptuously, and the prophecy was not His? We're talking over 2000 years. No wonder Jesus, in the Aramaic Matthew, said to not say he was the Messiah? or go after those who said he is? Maybe the whole "Messiah" thing is ignoring the passages where God said He is the one who would cause certain things to happen - but they continued to reject Him, just as Christians do to this day?
Another great Centre Place lecture. In particular I appreciate being given such a concise summary of the non-Biblical attestation to various kings of Judah and Israel.
It appears that the writers of the accounts of Solomon and David in the Old Testament were projecting the power and status of neighboring enemy kingdoms upon Solomon and David, to give the Israelite ancestry greater prominence than they actually had.
Thank you very much for this interesting lecture.
I love this channel. A place for believers to congregate but also a place for us to critically analyze the Bible.
believers? wait. there is tons of evidence here and on other channels that MUST make you believe, no longer, in traditonal bible christianity. How is it that you are still a believer? I am incredulous. Stop having blind faith when there are better spiritual systems out there and other real gods to pray to and worship. "..a place for believers..." Are you a bot? are you faking or brown-nosing?
your channel has absolutely no content, and no subscriptions or even visits to other channels. Since 2009, no activity.
@@lukeyznaga7627 why does matter to you?! Mind your business. Sorry. I believe in something that you don’t believe in. I’ve seen a lot of the evidence against the Bible. I don’t believe in a lot of what is written but I’m gonna still believe in Christ. Doesn’t mean you have to.
im not a believer, im just here to study where the stories of the bible came from before it became THE bible
'Atlas that I routinely pored over', not 'poured'.
Learn something new every day!
Per the Shapira scrolls, Idan Dershowitz has done updates on YT interviews proving the reasons the scrolls were rejected in the 1800's was due to lack of knowledge about ancient texts. All the objections then have been solidly refuted - the search for the scrolls to verify by modern standards is all that needs to be done now. Old objections were greatly flawed.
Hezakaiah was like the Canaanite Akhenaten. Promoted monolatry, then had his changes reversed.
Interesting. Thanks for posting.
why did you choose to make slides which cut off mid-sen
tence?
What are the reasons for centralizing worship. Is it mostly for economic reasons, for reasons having to do with efforts to establish a single unified system of worship, both, neither or are there other reasons for doing so?
So, John, how do you retain enough under that small head such huge gobs of information that so enlightens us? I know, no answer, just a sidelong compliment, after the many windows of topics splayed across the screen. Thanks, get a thanks button.
Mulțumim!
I came in late to the live and was lost so came back in to start at the beginning
These lectures are great. What do you think about the references in the Old Testament to a history book “The History of the Kings…”?
The Chronicles of the Kings of Israel. This one almost definitely existed at one point because it would actually be really weird for a kingdom on the Fertile Crescent not to have one. We actually have very similar books from Ugarit.
I've always loved historical maps as well. We always had an atlas at home when I was a kid in the '60s.
{:o:O:}
Curious that recent excavations by at sites by archaeologistis like Garfinkel have not been referenced. There's much debate, to be sure, but there seems to be quite a bit of evidence pushing our understanding of the borders of Judah during the late 900s BCE and perhaps even back into the Davidic dates (early 900s). So there is some realia going back quite early that shows at least a growing kingdom. Moreover, the speaker does not mention that the inscriptions we find for later kings during the neo-Assyrian and neo-Babylonian kingdoms just simply doesn't exist in earlier periods. We have very little from *any* kingdom in the 11th-mid 9th centuries BCE throughout the Levant. And finally, the idea that Chronicles was writtern to replace the Deuteronomistic History is proposterous. There's nothing to suggest anywhere that the two were pitted against each other; in fact, the Chronicler assumes we're reading Samuel and Kings alongside it. That changes the dynamic of how we understand the book, especially in its relationship to Sam-Kings.
The exodus was more of a separation from Egyptian rule , rather than a physical migration out. It's about Egyptian Jews establishing themselves during the bronze age collapse. This came after a period of Semite occupation under the Hyksos. Study the Late Bronze age Collapse. The Jews were among many tribes going through an Exodus
The Magen David is an astrological symbol. Who else from astrology is a real person? The entire book is about magens (stars) and magicians (astrologers) yet every single astrologer mentioned in the text is just a reference to a star. Such as the 3 Magi; Orions belt.
Why couldn’t there have been an oral tradition that was later written down? I thought that was common in ancient texts. Why in Greece and India but not Israel? I meant it doesn’t prove anything, but why are you saying that there was no oral tradition?
He explains quite clearly why the United Monarchy and "House of David" could not be what the Bible states. There is a complete lack of infrastructure needed to be a strong Military kingdom which did exist in the time of Omri.
"and so forth" 😄
Poor Munich. Only 100 Oxen for an entire Oktoberfest.
Stop pretending that ancient people didn't have technology. They actually had more advanced technology but it wasn't mass produced or marketed.
And here we are today with people thinking Netanyahu is some how related to David. Most likely he is related to king Harrod. Well when you get it all figured out , we both will be surprised.
This dude is solid💪🏿🎤💯📚
💯
how come your channel doesn't have any content, and you still haven's subscribed to any favorite channels? How long have you been using youtube?
Peace on Earth will be achieved when only one Warlord remains.
May the Warlord bless and keep you. The alternative is rather unpleasant.
Litotes = understatement !
I'm so thankful for your posts putting things out for us all to see. You are a wonderful teacher. We all need to know these things. Have you investigated the Shapira scrolls as they relate to the teachings of Jesus in Matthew? That's been my focus for a while. I had to conclude Paul was a liar and wrote "Romans Proves Paul Lied".
David Divide Mk 3:24 --- however re content title choice of words "myth" Mtt 12:36
When the scholars say David didn’t exist I was sad. So if Jesus thought he was the heir of that kingdom he believed in a myth like so many do today. It’s crazy.
He may have existed, but not in the manner discussed in the Bible. Consider the legends the romans had about Cheops, who they believed built the Great Pyramid vs what we know about Khufu, the real person who built it.
If Mary was pregnated through the Holy Spirit, how can Jesus be in the line of David? Someone from his lineage has to have sex.
Crazy… maybe we are to take the teaching of the Bible and be learned enough to decipher between the teachings of fallible man and the message of God. In other words do like Jesus said when we read scripture and look for him and his message because they speak of him. (John 5:39-47) those people in that chapter thought they was doing the “righteous & lawful.” Things of God to.
Well done.
I presume the “House of David” was in reference to a semi-mythic figure derived from of one or possibly (a conflation or interpolation) of several tribal confederal figures with military strongman or religio-political credentials that existed and persisted in popular legend & oral traditions [ one can compare Tecumsah and his prophet brother and their confederacy ]
So you have parties from both “Northern/‘Samarian’” but also especially “Southern/‘Judahite’” extraction with ‘Davidic’ heroic traditional legitimation, and then this native popular heroic and largely mythic tradition is legitimized by the Persian ‘emancipation’ of the exile-captive elites, after conquest of the Neo-Babylonian empires, as a political tool to ‘triangulate’ vs the local headmen in the North [ Samaria-Israel ] and South [ Jerusalem-Judah ] in their sponsorship of select ethnarchs via support of the Davidic dynastic legitimacy claim + also the package-deal of the Yawhist-Judahite extreme monalatrist-aniconistic-ritualized purity party that came out of the Babylonian exile / captivity.
Who is the lecturer?
John Hamar, the American-Canadian historian and map maker
@ Thank you.
A lot of this seems to be a historical 'retcon' written around 500 BC.
I am still skeptical of David. "house of David" doesn't mean there was a king or empire run by a "David".
I agree. Just cause one little piece of stone says House of David, only means that there was a man named David that lived. However, it doesn't attest to a specific David, his supposed riches, and a unified Kingdom. We can't automatically say everything is the bible about David is true because one piece of rock said House of David.
I suspect the 'David' of the "House of David" is most likely a mythical or legendary figure, like the legendary founders of Irish clans
@thealmightyaku-4153 that's plausible
What about the Kings Daughters? 1:13:28
My guess is that Solomon is associated with Melchizedek
How did people count years before 0
It's explained in full length in this lecture.. they'd count during a reign of a certain king, f.e. year 20 in the era of Solomon
The era of judges was one of more or less republican government, where the secular and spiritual leaders were chosen by a council of elders, and could be impeached for bad conduct or failing to deal with the problems of the day. The assertion of kings was when Israel lost favor in the sight of God the most high, and the ark of the covenant was returned to Egypt for Alexander to finally find and inspire the Ptolemies to revive the Tauran cults of Ptah/Chiron of the tau-rho anhk and chi-rho christogram and try to purge the pantheon of demon gods and goddesses of dark sex and death magic, child trafficking and human sacrifice. When you get that the Roman's IOVI was a translation of the Hebrew's YHWH, you'll gain a lot of ground sorting out the truth of fractured scriptures and godspells by competing cults of "one".
Jeremiah was the first Jew to rewrite history to justify stealing land!! He should be the patron saint of modern Israel!!
REF. 26:29: "...many of them believed that they found what they were looking for..." yeah, charismatic "faith" but not accepted in a real, accurate scholarly way. No real evidence that any ruins [ if any ] pointed to a Davidic kingdom for if the writings of some those books in bible were real.
The chart of the kings at 36:42 is just amazingly good. If John didn’t teach religious history, he would teach data representation.
It's pretty much what he did before his religion gig. Not teaching, but he produced maps and other graphics for books. 😊
at least it is easy to remember the shape
Davids city still stands , how can you disprove the stones call you a liar. The pool of shilom has been their scince christ walked. Your entire premise is flawed. You want to completely ignore archeology entirely? The city of David still stands , the tunnel and the well is there , the very stones call you a liar
Excellent topics. I supposed most Israelites (jews and non-jews) today are not waiting anymore a biblical "Mesias" because they realize now that every single nation needs its particular political ruler. Anything else it is just an excuse or pretext.
Israelites are Jews.
Re: the last question, I place a lot more value in the Criterion of Embarrassment, the closer the text is written to the events it is describing, because the way I see it, the reason for the Criterion in my view is that whatever was seen as embarrassing would have to be well known enough, among the audience, to want to produce apologia about in the text itself. This doesn't preclude texts written significantly after from having the Criterion be applicable, if for instance there were records or oral tradition that would make whatever embarrassing material more well-known than the passage of time would indicate, but at some point it becomes an inference based off of an inference based off of an inference, if there's nothing to indicate the embarrassing material was at all remembered.
Sometimes scholars use something called the criterion of dissimilarity, which means when an author records or repeats something contradictory to views the author has already expressed. So an author can be compared to his or her SELF sometimes. But you are right, "embarrassment" is not an objective criterion. Mythology is filled with stories that make its heroes or gods look bad, including in the Bible. The Patriarchs often do things that are dishonest or brutal to innocent people but no one calls it "embarrassing."
11:49.. Sounds like the capitalist faction of early Israel
Does not the bible say HEZEKIAH WAS the greatest king of Judah far greater than King David and lets face it David wasa bit of a wet as a king . alway pleasing himself and then the writer claiming God had forgiven him , because he walked in the ways of the Lord
So where did greater Israel that is from the Nile to the Euphrates come from?
Genesis 15:18
@@KevinPascal-lv9xr Thank you.
A mythical god
John, would you consider guest lecturing? There is a large group here in Miami, active at the 3 colleges, would love to have you. Is there someone to contact?
Just in time. I just asked myself whether this can be shown.
There is a reference to the "House of David" in Egyptian hieroglyphics in the Karnak Inscription, a hieroglyphic record of Pharaoh Shoshenq I's military campaign in Israel and Judah, where a section is interpreted as possibly referring to the "Heights of David" in the southern region of Judah; this is considered a potential mention of the Davidic dynasty in Egyptian records. That makes 2 possible historical references to the "House of David", the Dan stele and the Karnak inscriptions. So both the Arameans and Egyptians knew of the "House of David". That is a thought to consider. Remember it used to be believed that the Hitites were a myth. It seems that myths often have a basis in history or fact.
👍
In a study published in August 2017 by Marc Haber et al. in The American Journal of Human Genetics, the authors concluded that: "The overlap between the Bronze Age and present-day Levantines suggests a degree of genetic continuity in the region."[18]A 2021 study by the New York Genome Center found that the predominant component of the DNA of modern Palestinians matches that of Bronze Age Palestinians (Canaanites) from around 2500-1700 BCE.[17]. The Palestinian people are the original israelites and judeans.
They have certainly been there a very long time. It would be difficult to explain the Palestinian Christian community, which is probably the oldest Christian community on the planet. Sadly, that community is in danger of completely disappearing, as the conflicts of the past 100 years have put a large amount of pressure on them, coming both from the Israeli settler movement, and the burgeoning growth of the Palestinian Muslim community. As Palestinian families grow, both Muslim and Christian, there’s fewer and fewer places in Occupied Palestine to go, as the Israeli occupation routinely denies building permits to Palestinians, causing the massive overcrowding in both the Gaza Strip and what little of the West Bank which has at least nominal “control” over its population enclaves.
So many Christian Palestinians have simply emigrated, in order to obtain a better future for their families, especially their children. It’s extremely difficult to get any higher educational opportunities in Palestine, which wasn’t always the case. At one time, Palestinians were among the most educated group in the Arab world, in terms of the proportion to the general population. This has drastically changed since the turn of the 21st century, dominated by right wing Israeli governments.
Interesting the levant includes syria, israel, Jordan, Lebanon, parts of Egypt and arabia. Cannan includes Lebanon, Jordan, israel and syria. How do you know that a person specifically comes from the area called the holy land
@@talksmoke1190 In 2018, Elhaik stated that the Ashkenazi maternal line is European and that only 3% of Ashkenazi DNA shows links with the Eastern Mediterranean/Middle East, a 'minuscule' amount comparable to the proportion of Neanderthal genes in modern European populations. For Elhaik, the vehicle by which unique Asiatic variations on Ashkenazi Y-chromosomes occurred, with Haplogroup Q-L275,[103] was the Ashina ruling clan of the Göktürks, who converted to Judaism and established the Khazar empire.[104]
@@joes3256 explain how you can pinpoint a Levantine cannanite exclusively to the holy land
@talksmoke1190 dna testing of cananites burried in Palestine matches the DNA of Palestinians.
I dont understand much but the subject its very interesting i guess with AI i can make it translate in french and with good understandable talking 😮
Can't unsee the unclipped rooster
Smh
another amazing lecture, thank you so much, John!
Have you ever thought that maybe there are so many contradictions in Hebrew is because the texts were all copied from the Original Greek.
Everyone was speaking Greek in those lands at that time. Aramaic Sumerian and (ancient) Hebrew were already dead or dying languages.
When you copy a language that has over one million unique words, into a language that only has 7000 unique words, you're going to have some issues and repetition. All the Monist religions have their origins in the Bacchic Rights and Ancient Greek Mystery Schools. (I dont recommend reading the sources unless you have a strong stomach. An open mind would be helpful also.) Reading these extra-biblical Ancient Greek text and the Original Ancient Greek Bible, I'm convinced that the elegant and gorgeous flow of Ancient Greek came first. The Hebrew Bible is an attempt (they tried) to copy the Greek into Hebrew. Read the sources and see for yourself.
Peace to you
Hail the Muse
So much detail on the history and he calls it myth. Nothing he said shows the Bible isn't true.
Thank you again for yet another well planned, thoughtful lecture.
Where is the Biblical bottleneck beginning for the entirety of the Jewish faith? In the Book of 2nd Kings 22, it was during the reign of King Josiah, the Ruler of Judea, that the Books of Moses were "rediscovered" in a hiding place of the prevailingly-devolved pagan Jerusalem Temple. It was at this time in the 7th Century BCE that King Josiah's pagan priesthood chief, at the King's command, went retro and took a many-generations forgotten, archaic Hebrew text and designed a fresh religious practice around it. Essentially, they went from poly to "mono." From a Josiah-specific time-frame to this most modern era, that invented religious practice is now called Judaism.
There is no archaeological or other evidence for any knowledge of the books of Moses or any widespread knowledge or practice of Mosaic law before the Maccabean period (1st Century BCE). They were never monotheistic before then. Jews in Elephantine, Egypt had their own temple in Egypt, were polytheists and show no knowledge of Mosaic law, or of Moses or the Patriarchs even into the 4th Century BCE. They were writing to the Jerusalem Temple and asking for help renovating their temple in Elephantine. The Temple in Jerusalem seems to have had no problem with it even though Josiah's reforms were supposed to have only one temple, the one in Jerusalem. It's also weird since the Elephantine temple was offered sacrifices to two other gods besides Yahweh (one of them a female). Yonatan Adler, the archaeologist who has done the work on this, is begging anyone at all to show evidence for knowledge or practice of Mosaic law before the 2nd Century BCE. The books could have existed somewhere but they were not being read and the laws not practiced.
@@Ken_Scaletta Add Gmirkin and Barnea to the reader list for anyone contesting your claims. All 100% accurate.
@@Ken_Scaletta The hard physical evidence relates that you are correct ... but the faithful still have a perspective of TRUTH for their fantasies and myths. What I have done is show by the logic of their own truths that the Bible itself relates a fable-rich, cyclical tale of community apostacy and cultural religious extinction regarding their own distinct rituals of worship.
During a time when cultural illiteracy was the most common community environment, Aurthurian-style legends were so much easier for an exclusively very small, literate community class to easily revise its own history. When such revisions are specifically mandated by the superior priesthood an interdependently-evolved, conquering culture (the Persians), the Judeans took to the task with fervor. Their own "returned" oligarchs invented a fabled history of ancestors better than the Persian administrators could have imagined. Even so, what was invented was still only historical fiction.
Also back then, there were no investigative journalists.
@@Ken_Scaletta Thank you.
@@Ken_Scaletta The Yale course on this was great right? 😅
Um, not a myth. Seems you haven't been keeping up with all modern archeology taking place. More than one piece of evidence has been found in the last 6 years for David and his temple as well as one of the prophets.
Thanks .
Are we supposed to take your word for it or do you have citable examples?
False,it is a myth.
Yeah, and who pays for these studies? A bunch of fanatical Zionists looking to lay claim to the West Bank? Sounds like the same playbook as the Nazis looking for proof of the Aryans all over Europe 😂
More than one piece of evidence? Tell us what they are, and content produced by fringe Christian churches, creation ministries and pseudoarchaeology don't count.
All of them have been severly questioned and the majority of archeologists that study these regions and histories have suggested that discoveries do not prove the existance of David/Soloman let alone a combined kingdom of either. These discoveries are on a similar basis of those from the past....people needing to prove the truth of the histories proposed in the bible.
Amazing lecture! Thank you all!
Shmah Israel is a short pray practiced many times daily by religious jews and it says: Listen Israel, God our lord, is one God.
Might be an attempt to shift the israelis to Jehova, in fact, uniting El the Israeli god from Shomron with Jehova
And the comments of the religious ppl always have to make their story true of their god
Have you ever seen the Exodus Decoded, by James Cameron?
And; Archaeological evidence that proves the Bible is true, by Don Patton?
The hand waving to explain that everything about David is mythical is just that, hand waving. The truth could easily be quite different
i love history. there was an Egyptian empire. there was a Babylonian empire. there was a Greco Roman empire. THEY impact TODAYS civilization. "kingdom" of who? what? I rest my case.
❤ cool!
1:16:58 Dang Blinged Hilkiah!
Brilliant. Absolute brilliant scholarship and presentation. Bravo.
The source argument about earlier material that Deuteronomic historians could have used is not entirely valid because ancient literature is full of references to fake/fictitious sources that never actually existed it and this practice was not uncommon in ancient times because naming made-up sources gave the writings some credibility. A good example is Plato, who names Solon as the source of the Atlantis story, who he claimed to have received his information from the temple of Neith in Sais, but although the stone foundation of the destroyed temple has been found in Sais, no traces of the Atlantis story have been found, and the consensus among scholars is that Plato lied about Solon and invented the Atlantis story on his own.
Yes, I believe Plato has another one in his 'Laws' where he says some Egyptian priest told him of some older civilization which lived in perfect harmony and Plato was going to relate those laws to the readers or some such nonsense.
Saints are me saint Michael is here the arch angel protector holy protection of Christ. Im here
Im gonna succeed 💪
They ate all that meat damn we're trying to hard to be like them
maybe this myth was created so that the Israelites of that period [post Babylon captivity, Persian captivity ] could have power or fake respect or wanted to pretend that they were greater than they were? Shame for who they really were? Or maybe it was to make money which they could make, if they made their people believe that Judaism was real and their priests had knowledge and power over them? ref. 1:4:00 to 1:4:14.
As always,total pleasure and uplifting to study with you.
how come your channel has no subscriptions or content? almost all real channels have subscriptions of channels they watch. you have nothing. NO content at all. Are you a bot? How long have you been on youtube?
Thnx for the info and u probably will be fascinated if you complement the article with what the quran says about david and soloman
So ppl please don't let me down. Dont give up on me i usually make a ass out of myself cause im mad. Not happy and TOOKEN advantage of cause everything i say on social media thry steal my knowledge but Jesus Christ wont fail im connected i have the relec. The truth to show you like Micah prophesies Egypt
53:12 I see what you did there, John.
Good stuff. Really intense
I kust not he in the us. So listen please. District 9 Yemen district 9 was Indiana state college. Bucks county
This guy admits there was a House of David 100 years after the Biblical David but there was no David? the Bible isn’t all true but it is a historical document. Why is it never given any weight by historians just seen as something that bears the burden of proving itself?
The bible is a historical document but it does not necessarily document history. There is little archaeological evidence for much of it.
It's not exactly hard to understand the possible or even probible existence of David, a hypothetical chieftain of a small backwater, of which nothing is known about, because he wasn't particularly important except to his descendants, the future kings of Judah, doesn't have any bearing on the historicity of David, the biblical character who ruled over a vast kingdom.
Intellectual honesty at work.
It is never given weight because for over 150 years people have tried to prove the historical reality of the bible. Over that time rather than proving it has effectively done the reverse. In the UK we have the myth of King Arthur.....and like David, he may of existed but is there any real evidence versus wishful unsupported evidence to prove an exist belief....he was also called King but any writen reference to him is from centuries after he supposedly existed, just like David. Arthur may of existed but was he a king of the whole of Britain (which didn't exist at the time) or a battle chieftain.....no different to David.
The namesake of the Merovingian dynasty was the son of a sea monster. There is much less than one hundred years between the sea monster and historical evidence for the sea monster's descendants.. Does this prove the existence of sea monsters?
Israel has become Goliath, and Palestine, David. Go David!
Wrong again, considering the backers Hamas has.
Free David!
So, you’re pro-terrorist imperialism.
@@DeadCanuck I was thinking more "David" doing that thing he does to Goliath.
Solomon the truth of the Sheba treasure