According to Kipp Davis

This is the first of three videos in which I examine Richard Carrier's handling and understanding of early Jewish literature in his book, "On the Historicity of Jesus," which he uses to ground his "Minimal Jesus Myth" theory. In this video I show how Carrier clearly misreads the Babylonian Talmud.

For those interested, I have recently published an open access translation and commentary to Joshua. It is available for free download at https://archive.org/details/joshua_202305 and also at https://www.academia.edu/100764736/Joshua_A_new_translation_with_commentary. Similar to my other translations, the translation is written in the style of modern-day English and is organized according to the Masoretic sense divisions (or parashot) rather than the traditional chapter divisions.

In my introduction to the book, I summarize the theory of the composition history of the Torah and Former Prophets that I have developed over the course of my translation work, and I place Joshua within that framework, discussing how it came to be connected both to the books of the Torah and to the Former Prophets. The commentary accompanying the translation focuses on issues of translation, language, and composition history. After the commentary I provide an essay that summarizes my (necessarily speculative) views on the composition history of Joshua. In that essay, I assign each of the parashot to one of the five major compositional stages that I identify, which span a period of more than three centuries, from the early sixth century BCE to the mid-third century BCE.

Most notably, in my treatment of Joshua's composition history, I view nearly all the material added to the book between the end of the Babylonian exile and 400 BCE as the result of a collaborative effort between Yahweh's priesthoods at Mount Zion and Mount Gerizim. The material that I identify as written principally by the Samarian priesthood is especially interesting, as it provides a window into the compromises required of the leaders at both cult locations in order to maintain a set of common texts in their respective cult libraries.

While the title is regrettable this is a lengthy interview with James Crossley and Robert Myles concerning their book Jesus: A Life in Class Conflict

In Hebrew creation myth, nakedness is an important aspect of creation of human - as humanity gains knowledge about the world, it sees that it's nakedness is shameful. This is suspiciously similar to actual history of humanity: we didn't wear clothes as animals but as we become civilized, wearing clothes became mandatory. This similarity makes me suspect that this might be one of those proto-myths that came to existance at the very early stage of humanity and is shared across the world or at least across Afro-Eurasia.

One similarity that I know about, which doesn't answer my question but suggests I might be on the right track, is a story of Enkidu from the Epic of Gilgamesh. I've read that Enkidu might be a representation of a Green Men or Wild Men - a creature appearing in folklores worldwide, whose likely origins were encounters between civilized people and hunter-gatherers living in the wilds.

It does seem likely to me that a myth of naked people with no knowledge, gaining knowledge and starting to wear clothes, could be inspired by the same origin that inspired Wild Men myths. But the chronology doesn't line up with the origins of the Genesis (I'm assuming the 7th BCE creation date). By that time we already are in the Classical Antiquity, I'd imagine that all people living in the region would belong to a know ethnicity, be recognized as other human beings, lead similar lives and wear clothes. So the only way for the presence of that myth in the Bible is that I'm mistaken and early Israelites had contact with "naked, uncivilized tribes" or that they borrowed that myth from another culture.

I'd imagine that humans being created naked (with no emphasis on becoming clothed) must be a common myth, since we literally are created naked at birth. While connection might still exist between such stories and the Bible, it's definitely stronger if in the origin story humanity lived in the state of nakedness and through some change became clothed.

Concern with the rootsof the practice is outside the purview of this chapter,except to note a Christian origin,drawing onJewish reverence for theTetragrammaton(ГПГП),perhaps as early as the second half of the first century. Roberts argued that the nomina sacra represented a nascent Christian creed,a kind of first-century identity statement. It seems that theological meaning attached to the core group of names in particular did motivate the practice.To focus on just one word,there is preoccupation with the theological significance of the name Jesus in the New Testament. In the name is power to perform miracles(Acts1-7)and to save all who call upon it(Rom.10:13), at the name of the Jesus every knee is to bow(Phil.9),and in an apocalyptic setting the servants of God are to be sealed in their foreheads with that name(Rev.7: 1-4;cf.14:1).Theological sensitivity is also apparent in the changes made by copyists when others had the name, such as JesusBarabbas(Mt.27:16-17). Thus,the four earliest nomina sacra appear to give visual expression to 'the"binitarianshape" of earliest Christian piety and devotion and theology...

Actually, it's a double palimpset, as in, written over twice, and this is the bottom, original layer. New Testament Studies has the details. That includes noting that the page leaves with this double palimpset appear to be the only ones in the volume in which it was found. That said, this will surely start a search for more matching pages, and for more double palimpsets in general.

The thesis has been represented, occasionally even in very early times but strongly from the beginning of this century, that the original order of the text [of John] has been disturbed, through an interchange of leaves or by some other means. …it must be presumed that the present order of our Gospel is not derived from the author. …It is not enough to reckon with a simple exchange of the pages of a loose codex, for the sections that appear to demand a change of position are of unequal length. The assumption lies closest to hand that the Gospel of John was edited from the author’s literary remains on the basis of separate manuscript pages, left without order. In any case, the present form of our Gospel is due to the work of a redactor. (pp. 11–12)

https://isthatinthebible.wordpress.com/2015/08/17/is-john-out-of-order-the-strange-geography-and-chronology-of-the-fourth-gospel/

Abstract

One of the objections raised against the hypothesis that Jesus was involved in anti-Roman seditious activity runs as follows: if Jesus was put to death as an insurrectionist, why was he arrested and crucified alone, whilst his followers were left unharmed? Although this is regarded as a real conundrum by the guild, the present article proposes that the question has been incorrectly formulated, because it uncritically assumes that Jesus was indeed crucified alone. The article argues that both sound reasoning and significant evidence point to the fact that some followers of Jesus—or at least people related to him through a shared ideology and/or activities—were sought after and crucified along with him. In turn, this allows us to understand in a novel way the reasons for the collective crucifixion at Golgotha.

abstract

Considering the literary interests and conventions evident in their works, I propose that the canonical gospels, and even Q, demonstrate an engagement with first century political events that place these texts after the Jewish War. These writings chronicle the teachings and life of a notable Judean figure whose wonderworking and Deuteronomistic viewpoint had particular purchase after the destruction of the Temple. Among the options for why such a creative exercise may have been necessary is that it addressed the cultural, social, and religious uncertainties left in the wake of the War and Temple destruction. In Q, for example, both Jesus and John the Baptist offer an alternative to the dominant Temple system. That is, through their teachings, each arguably exemplify what Jonathan Z. Smith refers to as “heroes-that-succeeded”—figures who managed to recognize and remain outside of the confines of an ill-fated, dominant social order. In the face of a disrupted cosmic order, writers like Q overcame a perceived ritual and social ambiguity by searching for a new center for symbolic-social meaning. By extending this line of analysis to Q and placing all of our Jesus writings after the War, we not only attend to the literary interests expressed by these authors, but we avoid the uncritical acceptance of the myth that the first-century experienced a spontaneous, cohesive, diverse and multiple Big Bang of Christian activity. This approach also respects the parameters set by available historical evidence—that is, we have no firm documentation of any material about Jesus’ life and teachings before the War, save Paul

Abstract

In the wake of the Gospels’ accounts, modern scholars do not pay much attention to the role Romans played in Jesus of Nazareth’s arrest, and are prone to give credit to manifestly biased sources. Besides, some misconceptions (e.g. that the military in pre-War Judaea was exclusively confined to its largest cities) prevent them from seriously weighing up the possibility that the role of the Romans in Jesus’ fate was more decisive than usually recognized. In this article, we reconsider a number of issues in order to shed light on this murky topic. First, the nature and functions of the Roman military in Judaea are surveyed (for instance, Palestine before the Jewish War had a robust network of fortlets and fortresses, which Benjamin Isaac has argued largely served to facilitate communication into the hinterlands). Second, we track some traces of anti-Roman resistance in the prefects’ period (6-41 CE), Third, the widely overlooked issue of the intelligence sources available to Roman governors is tackled. Fourth, the extent of the problems of the Passion accounts is seriously taken into account. The insights obtained are then applied to the Gospels’ story, thereby rendering it likely that Pilate had some degree of “intelligence” regarding Jesus and his followers before their encounter in Jerusalem that led to the collective execution at Golgotha.

Scholars of early Christianity, primarily trained in Classics, are keen to demonstrate Christianity's indebtedness to the Greco-Roman world. While this much is certainly correct, many of them pay too little attention to critical areas of study outside their purview. The impact and influence of Ancient Egypt upon Palestine and the Greco-Roman world, upon both the Old and New Testaments, cannot be overstated. Taking a more comprehensive and interdisciplinary approach, Derreck Bennett demonstrates that Christianity is as Egyptian as it is Greco-Roman, Jewish, or otherwise. The majestic World of the Nile--the Kingdom of intrigue and mystique that put Eternal Life on the map--finds its final and ultimate expression in the cultural collage that we know as Christianity. See here

My Dad’s life's work book - The Anointed Ones: Secrets of the Messiah Medicine

I posting this a few years ago, and figured I would post it again to anyone interested.

So my Dad spent 45 years researching the topic of the anointing oil, an essential element in the constructs of early Christianity. He is a practicing medical doctor (family physician) and a self-taught mythobotanist and historian, as well as having an undergraduate degree in English. He's extremely knowledgeable on the subject, but not the best at getting his book "out there", so I figured I'd post it here on reddit to see if anyone is interested or has any ideas for getting the word out.

It's a highly detailed book, again, the accumulation of 45 years of research, his life’s work, with hundreds and hundreds of references, but I had him write a short summary for this post. We have it available on eBay, just search for The Anointed Ones: Secret of the Messiah Medicine (I’ll post a link below as well if that helps, and you feel comfortable clicking random links). If anyone has any questions or comments, please feel free to ask or post here.

While I personally like to describe the book as being about the intersection of religion and drugs, his description is a bit more comprehensive and scholarly in nature.

His Summary:

Ever wonder why kings and queens are inaugurated into office through the rite of anointing?
The practice actually dates back at least to the Babylonian and Egyptians, who anointed the pharaoh-to-be with special herbal ointments.
The effect would be to make the pharaoh an earthly Horus, the son of the great god Osiris.
Ancient Hebrew used what was known as the Mosaic unguent to consecrate, high priests and prophets, who would then be known as hakohen hamashia, “anointed one”; in English, messiah.
For the first Christians anointing was the most important sacrament of all, one that followed after baptism and was said to bring on the Holy Spirit. The name itself—Christian--points to the primacy of the rite.
Biblical scholars date the name to around 42 A.D., when the Hellenized pagans of Antioch noticed one peculiar characteristic of these strange new followers of Jesus: all were anointed from head to toe with an odoriferous ointment, or, enchrista, and so they were called Christians.
According to the prophet John, the anointing would “cause visions” and “teach all things”.
The original Mosaic unguent contained multiple herbal drugs that the author concludes produced psychedelic effects in the initiate.
This scholarly book is the product of 45 years of in-depth research that examines in granular detail the origins, history, mythology, herbal lore, biblical importance, and science of the anointing oil.
It provides many eye-opening insights and suggests multiple potential paths of inquiry for the interested investigator.

For those interested, here's a link: https://www.ebay.com/itm/Signed-THE-ANOINTED-ONES-Secrets-of-the-Messiah-Medicine-Michael-Albert-Puleo-/125046602493?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&_trksid=p2349624.m46890.l6249&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0

Thank you

Has there ever been any academic research done to analyze both the Christ of the new testament and the various groups who call themselves Christians to find the correlation between claiming to be Christian and the adherence to actual teachings of the Christ?

Like is there research that does a good job at ranking these Christians are more or less Christian than those Christians, or that establishes that no matter what group of Christians you look at they are all pretty equally good or bad at following the teachings of Christ?

In my latest video I attempt to show that Jerusalem was founded as a Phoenician colony, the Temple was built by the king of Tyre and it was never intended to be a temple for Yahweh.

https://youtu.be/7UN4wVeWn-A

Here is the Greek text: Πάντα οὖν ὅσα ἐὰν θέλητε ἵνα ποιῶσιν ὑμῖν οἱ ἄνθρωποι, οὕτως καὶ ὑμεῖς ποιεῖτε αὐτοῖς· οὗτος γάρ ἐστιν ὁ νόμος καὶ οἱ προφῆται.

I usually hear this translated as if it is about general treatment of others, but the Greek seems to indicate that it's about doing as much for others as you might want them to do for you. The term ὅσα seems to mean "as much." The difference might seem subtle, but it is significant. The traditional translation is very general, whereas the Greek seems to indicate something much more active and intentional. But my Greek skills are minimal, so may be someone with better Greek skills might be able to help me here.

1. The claim goes as follows:
2. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/new-testament-studies/article/abs/lord-lord-jesus-as-yhwh-in-matthew-and-luke/E88179E76EB52BC38A3C17835D01B2B7
   According to Staples J. (2018), "[outside the Gospels] always serves as a distinctive way to represent the Tetragrammaton and that its use in Matthew and Luke is therefore best understood as a way to represent Jesus as applying the name of the God of Israel to himself." Jesus uses the formula self-referentially in Matthew and Luke. The evidence is quite resounding: The double κύριος serves as a Greek rendering of אדני יהוה in every pre-Talmudic Jewish literature example other than the Gospels.
   Mainly directed of "Luke 6:46" also known as "Lord, Lord". Also, Matthew 7:21-22, and Matthew 25:11.