Відео

Ok.. so i just have to ignore Revelation 19:11 “And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.” That's not Jesus? lol. Sorry your just grabbing verses and forcing them into your theory. Your not seeing the overall picture.

The first beast isnt actually a beast. It starts off as a beast but quickly receives a heart of flesh (no longer a heart of stone) and the stands. A beast does not stand. Read Ecclesiastes 3:14, Isaiah 21:3, Psalm 40:3.. and you will understand who the first beast is. Also read Ezekiel 11:19.

Heb 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

I admit I haven’t a clue. ✨🙏

Thank you James 🙏🙏. This was incredible I’ve learned soooo much 🙏🙏❤️❤️

Will enjoy this series, hope you cover Paul at some point. It’s easy to spot corruptions when a forged text can be compared with its source as in the Synoptic Gospels, or when historical timelines are broken like in Psalm 51. I agree with your Josephus, but believe “BOTH OF THE JEWS AND THE GENTILES” was original. Interpolations usually create falsehoods, or conflicts within the original text. This text not only agrees with the main idea of the sentence, but preaching to Jews and Gentiles is exactly what Jesus did according to other accounts in the Gospel. After all the devotional fluff is removed, it’s clear the original author does not identify as a Christian, and the main idea is that followers of Jesus were still present at the time of writing. Persecution of Christians intensified following the crucifixion, which may explain why the author felt the need to point out their continued existence. The important sentence regarding Jesus is “…, a wise man for he was the doer of wonders”, because it offers insight into what people in first century Judea were thinking. Josephus never met Jesus, and could only be reciting what he heard. Regardless of what one thinks today of the accounts given in the Gospel, people who witnessed Jesus thought of him as a “doer of wonders” according to the text. Contrast that with a character like David Koresh, who was thought of by his contemporaries as a cult leader living a lie. Regardless of ones belief, it’s an undeniable fact that Mark 13:22 could be predicting the likes of David Koresh with his claim to have opened the seven seals. The issue of sacrifice is an important part of Jesus’ message and purpose, and recognizing the Jewish traditions surrounding it can help identify corruptions. Regardless of when Genesis was written, it’s clear from Genesis 4:3-4 that sacrifice was a very early part of Jewish tradition. But the only text where sacrifice is actually demanded in Genesis is chapter 22:2. And its purpose is not a demand for sacrifice, but a test of faith. Imagine a teacher intending to test a student through demonstration, asks the student to bring a bottle of wine. The student automatically assumes the wine will be consumed, so he brings an open bottle with two glasses. Seeing the student passed the test, there is no harm at this point in letting the student revel in his success. And this tradition gets reinforced as a central part of the Exodus story with the Passover. Anyone with an interest in human behavior will recognize that the human elements contained in texts related to the cleansing of the Temple are all too real. The now harmful issues being addressed in Mark 11:17 are believable in terms of human experience and give the text a sense of truth. No man stands as an intermediary between God and another, and yet a tradition evolved that made flowing robes and the best seats in the house an expected luxury, where those with self-proclaimed authority tax others to have their sins forgiven. Mark 2:10 serves as preamble to Jesus’ cleansing of the Temple, but because of Jewish tradition, you will read the misunderstanding about sacrifice repeated in numerous texts. Jesus wasn’t making an argument for sacrifice, he was pointing to the serious transgression the tradition evolved into, and Mark 11:17 serves as a reference to identify the corruption in Isaiah 56.

👍

Wish you were born 1800 years ago. The way you understand the religious texts, Christianity would be like purified Judaism not what it is as today.

Thank you very much!!

Professor James Tabor, we are immensely grateful for your revolutionary work on the fraud called Christianity. The gospel of Matthew is infamous for quoting passages from the Hebrew bible and deliberately applying them OUT OF CONTEXT. The gospels are filled with lies written by liars. The gospels are notoriously ANTI-JEWISH. It is clear to me now that the days of Christianity are numbered. CHRISTIANITY IS FINISHED

. Philippians 2:5-6 “You must have the same attitude that Christ Jesus had. Though he was God, he did not think of equality with God as something to cling to.” John 1:18 “No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.“ John 10:33 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.“ John 5:18 “This was why the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.“ 1 John 5:20 “And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true; and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.“

A mere man can not die for the sins of the world. Raise the dead. Die only to take up his life again and return from heaven to judge the living and the dead

There were many heros from history who were born of virgins. I cant help but believe this means they were born in Virgo.

This commentary does not make sense. The text of Daniel clearly refers to the entity coming on the clouds in the singular. For example, ....."ONE ..like the Son if Man". Or. ..."dominion shall be given to HIM". All singular! To stretch the interpretation to mean something COLLECTIVE is not logical.

Rabbi Tovia Singer addresses this NT slight of hand brilliantly don’t u think Mr Tabor?

🤍

There is the 6th favour that is Rulership/Kingship... followed by The Holy Land....

The tense was also changed from the Hebrew in Isaiah. It says " the young woman has conceived" (past or possible present tense). It's not in a future tense. Prophecy isn't about something that's already happened.

Excellent,ty Dr. Tabor

Thanks Dr Tabor! ⭐️

I suggest the lost in translation series should cover John 1:1

Jesus jean baptiste is a davidique dynastie exact ?

Righteousness is such a loaded word in the Judeo-Christian tradition that it is hard to use it sensably. In the New Jerusalem Bible uses the wording, "Abram put his faith in Yahweh and this was reconed to him as uprightness." Using this word, it simply means that Abram did the right thing in this case.....he used all his faculties and experiences with Yahweh to arrive at the right thing to do in this situation and that was to trust that Yahweh was good for his word. Abram also did the right or upright thing when Yahweh presented his first request and he trusted the voice he heard, and was obedient by packing up and leaving the land of Ur. While Enosh walked with Yahweh and Noah listened, trusted and obeyed, it is Abram who is remembered as the Father of Faith. What I think is remarkable about Abram's example is that it effectively reverses the disobedience of Adam and Cain who did not trust Yahweh and consequently, did not obey. It is Abram's faith paradigm....listening-trusting-obeying, the upright thing to do in all circumstances, that is the basis for the maturing of the children of Yahweh (all mankind) into sons and daughters....capable of co-operating and participating in the restoration of all creation. I like the word "upright" for it dodges all the muddled connotations we have built up around "righteousness."

From what I have gleaned in the past, if Isiah had wanted to specifically reference the virginity of the young woman, the word betula would have been used specify this condition. The method of using references from the Hebrew Scriptures in the four gospels to prove various points, that in light of critical biblical scholarship, are being discovered as false references, is very interesting. The apostle Paul, in waging his battle against those who were presenting a gospel other than the one he had recieved from Jesus and preached from the beginning to everyone everywhere....one that presented a different teaching, with a different Jesus and involved a different spirit, said in his and his co-worker's defense that at least they did not distort the use of scripture like the others did in their preaching. Is this false use of prophecy from Isaiah to prove the claims of the gospel of Christ and eventually used by the authors of Mathew, is this false use of scripture what Paul was fighting against?

In other words, the people who wrote the Gospels went out of their way to yank verses -- or phrases from verses -- from the Tanakh completely out-of-context and PRETEND that they were 'prophecies' about Jesus. But Jews who knew their own scriptures were not fooled by such nonsense and knew not to accept the supposed Christian 'revelation'. And many Christians forgot about turning the other cheek and never forgave the Jews for rejecting their bogus claims about Jesus having been prophesied in the same scriptures that Jews knew front-and-back but Christians don't seem to know at ALL, not reading the full context out of which these supposed 'prophecies' were pilfered.

apocrypha states mary was taken to the temple age 4. as a temple virgin, they did serve the high priests. then at menarche, should she become pregnant from one of the high priests, they would have sent her home to some discreet gentleman, joseph, who may have step fathered other children from the same sources. but still the son of high priests would be very special. hence jesus also had siblings.

The point is that the prophet Isaiah didn't know how right he was. Indeed, he probably saw the Suffering Servant as Israel. However, he had unknowingly perceived something else. Prophets are intuitive people, like artists and musicians. They have no perfect method of prophesying. Because they rely on the inspiration of the Spirit, they don't know the exact meaning of what they say. But we can know the deeper meaning, because we have the hindsight of history. It's the same thing with the author of Genesis 15:6, where we are told that Abraham "believed the Lord, and he counted it to him as righteousness." Indeed, the author probably thought that it only referred to God's promise. But he didn't know how right he was. Paul, in Romans 4, has all the right in the world to interpret this as pointing to the realization that it is faith, not works, that credits a person with righteousness. The Pauline revelation began this way, as a little mustard seed in the OT, and it grew into a big tree. The bible is God-breathed. It must be read with spiritual eyes. The problem with many UA-cam exegetes is that they reason only in linguistic and cultural terms. "In those days 'these' exact words were understood in 'this' exact way." They think that the prophets and scribes knew exactly what they wanted to say and were clear about their prophetic intent. No! They perceived things dimly. They looked through a glass darkly. After all, they didn't know about the revelation of Christ. But we can know the deeper meaning. So, Christian theologians, including Paul, have *not* misinterpreted the OT. They have interpreted it creatively, which is perfectly fine, because it is a spiritual book. Reading the OT is like looking into a dark crystal where we discover religious truth. But religious truth cannot be pinned down in exact linguistic formulations. "The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life" (2 Cor. 3:6).

Thousands of theologians over 2000 years have affirmed the Blessed Virgin Mary in all Her attributes....

No he did not he was talking about the birth of Hezekiah....nothing to do with your jesus...

There was no virgin birth. You need to read the apocrypha in the Dead Sea Scrolls to find that. The Roman empire created it because they worship IHS it's their logo. Isis, Horus,Set. The truth is Torah and the ancient prophets that witness the old testament. If the father didn't say it than man made it. Example....blood of man to save. That's abomination to Torah and new testament freemason writings. Seek the ancient! The name of the father, the law,the land and people. That's what matters. Everything else is man made. If you compare the modern English with ancient Hebrew or Aubry it's a completely different message

You must have received my “signals” , I’ve been wanting this translation. I don’t believe in the virgin birth idea, even the Buddhas birth was given a false narrative, so it’s just how they did things. It doesn’t take away from who the Buddha and Jesus really were.

Its interesting to note that Socrates Scholasticus, Epiphanius, Cyril of Jerusalem and Eusebius say a man named jointly as Terebinthus/ Buddas conversed with the apostles in Jerusalem (pre 70) with four Indian books and claimed to have been born from a virgin. They say one of his books was titled Euangelion (Gospel) which would make it the earliest attested book with that title

James was written before the Crucifixion.

Paul vs James is a false narrative. It assumes, incorrectly, that the Apostle Paul had been redeemed. from the Law when James wrote his epistle. Actually, the Crucifixion that would accomplish that redemption was still in the future. Both James and Paul talk about faith but from two drastically different perspectives. James from his day to day experiences with Jesus before the Crucifixion, and Paul, decades later, from his supernaturally derived lessons from the Ressurected Savior.

Um.. so he discounts all the deciples and prophecies etc. I don't see him stating what he believes , or has he wasted his life studying ancient people who were only fools?

Fulfillment of true prophecy is the repeating of divine patterns. All of creation is built upon the fulfillment of the pattern of messiah among both minor and major bloodlines of chosen species and chosen peoples. The big M Messiah is the culmination of all the little m messiah missions we are witnessing unfold today.

Thanks Dr. Tabor. I did a study of this a few years ago as I began to step away from the Christian religion. It’s laughable to think that Isaiah would be predicting an event 700 years or so into the future when Ahaz would be long dead. Another good example of “context … context … context”. As far as the Bible burnings are concerned, I remember reading about that before. Supposedly a pastor brought a blowtorch and burned an RSV in the pulpit, commenting that “it is like the devil - it’s hard to burn” 😂

Amazing God can created a endless universe but unable to create life in a human female?

Good stuff, as usual.

Very grateful for your insights.

great channel!... new sub

SCRIPTURAL TTUTHS (NO: 29). PHILOSOPHICAL MATHS : NUMERICAL ONE DECLARATION. Isaiah 45:5-7 is not only a confirmation of the Shema Yisrael but it is actually a NUMERICAL ONE declaration, in terms of Philisophical Mathenatics, let us examine this: Isaiah 45:5-7 l am YHVH, and there is no other; apart from me there is no God. I will strengthen you, though you have not acknowledged me, 6so that from the rising of the sun to the place of its setting people may know there is none besides me. l am YHVH, and there is no other. 71 form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I YHVH do all these things. A) l am YHVH : ONE YHVH B) And there is NO OTHER : And (Plural) or DOUBLE CONFIRMATION of Singular/ONE which is (No Other). C) Apart from me : MINUS everything (Numerical One) D) There is NO God : Another Minus everything or Numerical One. E) From Rising of the Sun to the place of its setting Numerical ZERO (One cannot find) F) There is None besides me : None is "0", besides is "+", Me is "1" = (0 + 1= 1). G) l am YHVH : Singularity Numerical One H) And there is no other : Double Zero (IS and No other) I) I form the light and create darkness : I is "1" formed light/darkness "1x1" = (1 x 1 x 1= 1) J) I make peace and create evil : (1 x 1x 1 = 1) K) I YHVH do all these things : I YHVH do ALL (1 X 1= 1) To add, this is when God Himself will punish Edom (Christians) and He will fight them ALONE!! (Where's Jesus??). Isaiah 63:1- Who is this coming from Edom, from Bozrah, with his garments stained crimson? Who is this, robed in splendor, striding forward in the greatness of his strength? "It is I, poclaiming victory, mighty to save." 2Why are your garments red, like those of one treading the winepress? 3"I have trodden the winepress ALONE; from the nations NO ONE WAS WITH ME. I trampled them in my anger and trod them down in my wrath; their blood spattered my garments, and I stained all my clothing. 4It was for me the day of vengeance; the year for me to redeem had come. 5I look but there was NO ONE TO HELP, I was appalled that NO ONE GAVE SUPPORT; so my own arm achieved SALVATION FOR ME, and my own wrath SUSTAINED ME. Edom represent Christianity because Esau and Jacob are twins and they wrestle against each other even during childbirth while ishmael represent Muslim/Islam. The above will put to rest all teachings about the Trinity or other MAN MADE UNBIBLICAL NONSENSE, especially the word "ECHAD" which Christology rely on to validate the concept of Trinity.

Ive seen many vids of James and find them interesting. However i never see what he believes , or what he thinks is real , Jesus or what prophecies etc. He should not just say what he disagrees with but where he stands on the tough topics. If he doesnt believe in the bible or Jesus then say that. Its like being against a war , but not having a plan or idea of what to do with the enemy problem. Just pointing out the bad parts of war.....no alternatives....

I love this series; it was a bit hard to find this out with the interlinear and strong concordance. I'm glad you are doing this to make it easier for others. Another word that i see so many Christians' misusing is the word "rebuke". Would be cool to see the true meaning of that and how it is applied in the bible.

I left Christianity when I was 13. Nothing made sense. At 28 I went back to Sunday school, i though maybe i was blind back then. Everyone went nuts when i asked a question about Jesus having the line of Joseph when he didn't even touch Mary and for my understanding, in the OT one has to have the blood from the father to acquire his lineage. No one could explain it lol they all like to isolate texts to make their stories true.

There’s nothing in the word _‘almah_ that suggests the young woman was unmarried.

Dr Tabor fails to mention that Hebrew has a *_different_* word, בתולה [b'tula] which *_does_* mean 'virgo intacta', a sexually mature female with an unbroken hymen. Torah law has a number of provisions regarding this status, e.g. the Aharonic high priest was restricted to a bride with this status, and could not marry a widow - otherwise permitted to Aharonic priests who are not the high priest. Greek, on the other hand, uses παρθένος predominantly as the precise word for a physical virgin. A good example is the Greek pagan goddess Pallas Athena whose virginity is one of her defining attributes. Her standard epithet is παρθένος. Greek has another word, κόρη, which is much closer to the Hebrew עלמה than παρθένος is. By failing to mention this Dr Tabor is perhaps unconsciously bending the intention of the Matthaean author. The obvious meaning of the gospel text is the virginal pregnancy of the Nazarene's mother, a well-known trope of Hellenistic pagan myth. The proof text from Isaiah is almost irrelevant and is the best the myth maker could come up,with, given the paucity of connection between the nascent Jesus-cult with actual Hebrew prophesy.

Even if the word "virgin" is used, many virgins become pregnant. After intercourse of course.

John 6:42 : "And they said, "Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, ""I came down from heaven?""..."

Thank sir❤