The video says Jesus applied the title “Son of Man” to himself. Been awhile since I looked into that, but as I recall he always used the term in third person and usually set the Son of Man as a coming figure. I’ve not found any explanation as to whether it was a period practice to speak of oneself in their person as a coming figure. If it wasn’t, this leads me to believe Jesus didn’t think himself the messiah…assuming the canonical Gospels generally convey his words with reasonable accuracy.
How was Jesus accused of exorcising the demon out of the man with Satan's influence if Satan as a single individual, as you said in another video, was not apart of Jewish mythology? Wouldn't that mean he was exorcising the demon using the power of an agent of God? Thanks for any answer in advance.
@Nervousification By that time, Satan was seen as the supernatural enemy of god. The earliest Jewish mythology did not have that concept of Satan, but it developed gradually over time. You may recall from my video that I quote Elaine Pagels, who traced the final stages of the development of Satan (into a cosmic evil entity) to about the time of the Maccabean Revolt, which was a hundred or so years before Jesus.
Luke 11:14-30 said Jeasus was casting out a devil. Some enemies of Christ said he was doing it by the power of Beelzebub. Jesus responds with every kingom divided aginst itself is laid waste. In other words, Satan or Beelzebub would not cast out a devil he created in this man because he is acting against himself and his kingdom would surely fall. While it says what you say about Ninevah, you missed the most important part.
@TheSapphirestation You've only repeated what I've said, but skipped out on the parts about Solomon and the Queen of the South, so I think it's you who is missing the point, selectively quoting what you want and ignoring the rest.
@TaylorX04 You are talking about the Bible and not the Talmud. Maybe the Talmud thinks Sheba was a sorceress, but the Bible does not. Sheba tested Solomon and then departed to her own country. You make a huge jump when you say Solomon was involved in witchcraft. Solomon made his errors in his later life for sure, but he generally was considered a great king. Jesus only said he was greater than Solomon. Not that He was a sorcerer. You make dangerous jumps and lead people astray.
@TheSapphirestation So when Jesus speaks of Solomon and the queen right after casting a demon out of a person, and he implies that he is greater than Solomon, that means... what, exactly? Did he just randomly decide to say that? Why would he say something that many would've taken as a hint at the legends of Solomon controlling demons and working sorcery? You're only afraid of the implications, but you don't seem to have another, better explanation.
@TaylorX04 It means He is greater than Solomon. There is nothing in the Bible, which is what we are supposed to be talking about, that indicates Solomon built his temple by sorcery. It talks in detail about it in 1 Kings chapters 6-11. Chapter 11 also talks about how God became angry with Solomon and what He did about it. To prove your point, you keep mixing things with the Talmud that we don't know for sure how Christ's followers regarded. The queen asked hard questions, was happy and left.
@TheSapphirestation I guess you do think he just randomly chose to say that. Whatever, I suppose that's your prerogative. But if you think the New Testament authors don't ever refer to other texts outside the canon, you're sorely mistaken.
@TaylorX04 I don't think it was a random statement, it just wasn't what you think it is. It seems you can't explain what Jesus did, so you conclude it was sorcery. Other texts may be referred to in the New Testament, but what you are saying is so outrageous. They are really dangerous concepts. Sheba came to question Solomon because she had heard of his wisdom. After a lot of hard questions, she was satisfied and left with some of Solomon's gifts. It doesn't even hint at sorcery in the Bible.
@TheSapphirestation What's outrageous or dangerous about it? The bible speaks of sorcerers many times, such as Acts 8:11, Acts 13:6-8, and Exodus 7:11. In the last case, we find sorcerers able to match some of the wonders of Moses. The bible may condemn the works of sorcerers in general, but when a man of god works signs and wonders, it's "good sorcery". I think Jesus or the author of Luke considered Solomon to be a "good sorcerer," because he did his wonders by the power of god, not demons.
@TaylorX04 If you look at Acts 8 & Acts 13 verses that you gave me there are sorcerers. But if you read around those verses, you will see that both men were converted. In Exodus that isn't true, but Moses' serpent ate the other magicians serpents. God or men of God don't use sorcery at all. It may look like that to you, but they don't. Solomon wasn't a sorcerer either. The building of his temple wasn't done that way. The Bible goes into great detail about how it was made. No sorcery was involved
@TheSapphirestation "God sure had a problem with it and I am sure Jesus did too" - Prove it with scripture. God had a problem with the women's gods and turning Solomon away from God not the fact that he had up to 1000 sexual partners.
@ABTechie And for successfully tricking the queen of Sheeba thus forcing her to have sex with him. Hooray for rape because 1000 women are just not enough for one man.
I enjoy your videos but this one seems rather week to me. When asking in the title do you know your bible and then using gnostic, Talmud and other non cannon books to make your points. I would say stick with disproving the accuracy of scripture with scripture and you would get a better argument from apologetics. Other wise they simply ignore your findings as non legitimate sources.
Yes, it is, but what other queen traveled far to meet Solomon and learn his wisdom? Archaeology and some traditions support that Sheba was in Southern Arabia.
However, I think there is a reasonable debate who the "Son of Man" refers to. In Ehrman's book "God's Problem", he points out that Jesus was most probably an apocalyptic preacher, in the mode of other apocalyptic preachers, who also used the term. Compare the way JC talks about "the son of man" with how John the Baptist talks about "he who is to come", and they are similar.
Christians take this to refer to JC, but it could be interpreted differently.
Yeah, I've heard this before, but I don't know that there's much support for it, other than noting how Jesus referred to the Son of Man in the third person and future tense. It's definitely possible, but seems no more likely to me than that he was speaking of a second coming.
Just to add to your video: Celsus, a 2nd Century Roman philosopher had this to say about Jesus.
"Jesus, on account of his poverty, was hired out to go to Egypt. While there he acquired certain (magical) powers which Egyptians pride themselves on possessing."
The passage also seams to me to imply the end of the world within one generation, which obviously did not happen! However I guess it depends how you read it.
I was wondering if you could point me towards your sources in the Talmud associating Lilith with the Queens of Sheba. Ive heard of the Targum on the Job although I still mean to see it, but all it says it that Lilith assumed the guise of the Queens of Sheba, maybe Lilith can look like anyone.
Taylor, Two things do I really like about your videos. Elegance and depth. This means that you have respect for your viewers, not assuming that we all are a bunch of willfully ignorant people. I am officially impressed. When I start producing my own videos, you will realize how difficult it is to impress me and why.
1: 20 I thought that biblical scholars had decided that Jesus was not referring to himself when he talked of the coming of the Son of Man. Since Jesus was already here, why would he prophesy himself coming?
Of course, part of the problem is that there is no way to know what Jesus actually preached, since none of the "historical" accounts date from his preaching amongst the mostly illiterate.
Yes, some scholars think Jesus was prophesying the coming of a future prophet/messiah when he spoke of the Son of Man, but I don't know that there's much evidence for it other than simply noting that Jesus uses the third person and future tense. It doesn't seem to be any better supported than the traditional view that he was prophesying his second coming.
Perhaps the Son of Man is the baby of pregnant Arnold Schwarzenegger used in that movie?
Kidding aside, if ever there really is progress in science to the point where men can carry and safely give birth(-why- is a question best left unasked), how much do you want to bet that some fundies will 1)rise up against it (like they do all science and medicine unless they need it) and 2)claim that the first child born that way is the messiah?
(Assuming that there is some foundation to the rumours of his life.)
For him to have prophesied a second coming, he would have had to know that he'd be crucified as an insurgent. Since he could not have known that (rumours of his "divinity" being inventions) he would not have been able to predict something that has not materialized in 2,000 years.
I think it's most likely that once Jesus was killed and the remainder of the cult had concocted the whole rise-from-the-dead (originally as a spirit from the common grave) and will-come-again-in-glory theology - it would be useful to have Jesus reference his own 2nd coming in the Gospels. Compare the 1st Gospel, Mark to the others - very few references to 'coming again' in comparison.
The video says Jesus applied the title “Son of Man” to himself. Been awhile since I looked into that, but as I recall he always used the term in third person and usually set the Son of Man as a coming figure. I’ve not found any explanation as to whether it was a period practice to speak of oneself in their person as a coming figure. If it wasn’t, this leads me to believe Jesus didn’t think himself the messiah…assuming the canonical Gospels generally convey his words with reasonable accuracy.
Cathmoytura 4 weeks ago
How was Jesus accused of exorcising the demon out of the man with Satan's influence if Satan as a single individual, as you said in another video, was not apart of Jewish mythology? Wouldn't that mean he was exorcising the demon using the power of an agent of God? Thanks for any answer in advance.
Nervousification 3 months ago
@Nervousification By that time, Satan was seen as the supernatural enemy of god. The earliest Jewish mythology did not have that concept of Satan, but it developed gradually over time. You may recall from my video that I quote Elaine Pagels, who traced the final stages of the development of Satan (into a cosmic evil entity) to about the time of the Maccabean Revolt, which was a hundred or so years before Jesus.
TaylorX04 3 months ago
@TaylorX04 I see.
Nervousification 3 months ago
Comment removed
Nervousification 3 months ago
I think Jesus was a sorcerer. :I
As evidence, ALL THE SORCERY.
rkyeun 5 months ago
Nice boobs.
helltrackrider 5 months ago in playlist Biblical Problems
brilliant work my friend.
soccerwizard975 6 months ago
@TaylorX04 What's the song used in this video?
doobdoob2 6 months ago
@doobdoob2 "A Sorcerer's Pledge" by Candlemass.
TaylorX04 6 months ago
I love Solomon. The most famous magic user, aka witch, in the Bible and no Christian even realizes it.
HimesInu 7 months ago
Ninevah will stand in judgement because they were faced with their destruction by God and they repented and saved their lives and city.
TheSapphirestation 8 months ago
Luke 11:14-30 said Jeasus was casting out a devil. Some enemies of Christ said he was doing it by the power of Beelzebub. Jesus responds with every kingom divided aginst itself is laid waste. In other words, Satan or Beelzebub would not cast out a devil he created in this man because he is acting against himself and his kingdom would surely fall. While it says what you say about Ninevah, you missed the most important part.
TheSapphirestation 8 months ago
@TheSapphirestation You've only repeated what I've said, but skipped out on the parts about Solomon and the Queen of the South, so I think it's you who is missing the point, selectively quoting what you want and ignoring the rest.
TaylorX04 8 months ago
@TaylorX04 You are talking about the Bible and not the Talmud. Maybe the Talmud thinks Sheba was a sorceress, but the Bible does not. Sheba tested Solomon and then departed to her own country. You make a huge jump when you say Solomon was involved in witchcraft. Solomon made his errors in his later life for sure, but he generally was considered a great king. Jesus only said he was greater than Solomon. Not that He was a sorcerer. You make dangerous jumps and lead people astray.
TheSapphirestation 8 months ago
@TheSapphirestation So when Jesus speaks of Solomon and the queen right after casting a demon out of a person, and he implies that he is greater than Solomon, that means... what, exactly? Did he just randomly decide to say that? Why would he say something that many would've taken as a hint at the legends of Solomon controlling demons and working sorcery? You're only afraid of the implications, but you don't seem to have another, better explanation.
TaylorX04 8 months ago
@TaylorX04 It means He is greater than Solomon. There is nothing in the Bible, which is what we are supposed to be talking about, that indicates Solomon built his temple by sorcery. It talks in detail about it in 1 Kings chapters 6-11. Chapter 11 also talks about how God became angry with Solomon and what He did about it. To prove your point, you keep mixing things with the Talmud that we don't know for sure how Christ's followers regarded. The queen asked hard questions, was happy and left.
TheSapphirestation 8 months ago
@TheSapphirestation I guess you do think he just randomly chose to say that. Whatever, I suppose that's your prerogative. But if you think the New Testament authors don't ever refer to other texts outside the canon, you're sorely mistaken.
TaylorX04 8 months ago
@TaylorX04 I don't think it was a random statement, it just wasn't what you think it is. It seems you can't explain what Jesus did, so you conclude it was sorcery. Other texts may be referred to in the New Testament, but what you are saying is so outrageous. They are really dangerous concepts. Sheba came to question Solomon because she had heard of his wisdom. After a lot of hard questions, she was satisfied and left with some of Solomon's gifts. It doesn't even hint at sorcery in the Bible.
TheSapphirestation 8 months ago
@TheSapphirestation What's outrageous or dangerous about it? The bible speaks of sorcerers many times, such as Acts 8:11, Acts 13:6-8, and Exodus 7:11. In the last case, we find sorcerers able to match some of the wonders of Moses. The bible may condemn the works of sorcerers in general, but when a man of god works signs and wonders, it's "good sorcery". I think Jesus or the author of Luke considered Solomon to be a "good sorcerer," because he did his wonders by the power of god, not demons.
TaylorX04 8 months ago
@TaylorX04 If you look at Acts 8 & Acts 13 verses that you gave me there are sorcerers. But if you read around those verses, you will see that both men were converted. In Exodus that isn't true, but Moses' serpent ate the other magicians serpents. God or men of God don't use sorcery at all. It may look like that to you, but they don't. Solomon wasn't a sorcerer either. The building of his temple wasn't done that way. The Bible goes into great detail about how it was made. No sorcery was involved
TheSapphirestation 8 months ago
There were many wonder workers in the that jesus is said to live so it is possible that jesus was a wonder worker as well
ellimist6 11 months ago
Funny, no Gospels say Jesus was hung[no homo] LMAO, just shanked to death.
HybridD91 1 year ago
Praise for Solomon, the man with 700 wives and 300 sex slaves. Jesus didn't have a problem with that. Why should we?
ABTechie 2 years ago 15
@ABTechie God sure had a problem with it and I am sure Jesus did too, because the two think alike always. God became angry with him.
TheSapphirestation 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheSapphirestation "God sure had a problem with it and I am sure Jesus did too" - Prove it with scripture. God had a problem with the women's gods and turning Solomon away from God not the fact that he had up to 1000 sexual partners.
ABTechie 8 months ago
@ABTechie Dude I love your comment!
doobdoob2 8 months ago
@ABTechie And for successfully tricking the queen of Sheeba thus forcing her to have sex with him. Hooray for rape because 1000 women are just not enough for one man.
mehja1 5 months ago
I enjoy your videos but this one seems rather week to me. When asking in the title do you know your bible and then using gnostic, Talmud and other non cannon books to make your points. I would say stick with disproving the accuracy of scripture with scripture and you would get a better argument from apologetics. Other wise they simply ignore your findings as non legitimate sources.
ouTandAbOut231 2 years ago 2
i don't think the mentioned Queen of the South means Sheba.
for it says that she WILL rise at the judgement with the men of this generation and condemn them.
that word WILL is for future tense , isn't it?
inday811 2 years ago
Yes, it is, but what other queen traveled far to meet Solomon and learn his wisdom? Archaeology and some traditions support that Sheba was in Southern Arabia.
TaylorX04 2 years ago 2
Jesus said "OF THIS GENERATION."
and not of THAT generation of Solomon.
inday811 2 years ago
He said she would judge that generation, yes, but he also said she had visited Solomon. It's really not that difficult to understand.
TaylorX04 2 years ago
yes. of course! that can happen.
but i based mine on WHAT i believe.
and i understand as how it is.
thanks.
inday811 2 years ago
Candlemass!!!
lotanddaughters 2 years ago 4
Only one of the best doom metal bands in the world!
TaylorX04 2 years ago
Definitely! Great choice!
lotanddaughters 2 years ago
Great vid...
However, I think there is a reasonable debate who the "Son of Man" refers to. In Ehrman's book "God's Problem", he points out that Jesus was most probably an apocalyptic preacher, in the mode of other apocalyptic preachers, who also used the term. Compare the way JC talks about "the son of man" with how John the Baptist talks about "he who is to come", and they are similar.
Christians take this to refer to JC, but it could be interpreted differently.
maddogdelta 2 years ago
Yeah, I've heard this before, but I don't know that there's much support for it, other than noting how Jesus referred to the Son of Man in the third person and future tense. It's definitely possible, but seems no more likely to me than that he was speaking of a second coming.
TaylorX04 2 years ago
yet another great video. thanx man.
TxHeathen 2 years ago
Gnostics... bunch a fuckin wierdos.
GnosticDjinn 2 years ago
wow, D&D just took on a whole new significance!
Level 4 Wizard Jesus casts fireball spell....
1n354a 2 years ago
Very interesting...great job.
utoad9 2 years ago 2
It's all fables, parables and tall stories, believed by fools and advocated by mischief-makers.
OccamsView 2 years ago 4
Great video. Many thanks.....
I like to think of Jesus like a ninja, fighting off evil samurai.......
MATZAMAN76 2 years ago 2
Very good.
Just to add to your video: Celsus, a 2nd Century Roman philosopher had this to say about Jesus.
"Jesus, on account of his poverty, was hired out to go to Egypt. While there he acquired certain (magical) powers which Egyptians pride themselves on possessing."
templarart 2 years ago
Interesting, thanks for posting.
The passage also seams to me to imply the end of the world within one generation, which obviously did not happen! However I guess it depends how you read it.
kandtell 2 years ago
I was wondering if you could point me towards your sources in the Talmud associating Lilith with the Queens of Sheba. Ive heard of the Targum on the Job although I still mean to see it, but all it says it that Lilith assumed the guise of the Queens of Sheba, maybe Lilith can look like anyone.
applshmpoo 2 years ago
Wizard Jesus very interesting.Great vid.:)
vonVlunt 2 years ago
I agree with LexZender57732, below. You are polite, informed, well spoken and detailed in your work.
5*s
nishbrown 2 years ago
Taylor, Two things do I really like about your videos. Elegance and depth. This means that you have respect for your viewers, not assuming that we all are a bunch of willfully ignorant people. I am officially impressed. When I start producing my own videos, you will realize how difficult it is to impress me and why.
All the best!
LEX
lexZender57732 2 years ago
1: 20 I thought that biblical scholars had decided that Jesus was not referring to himself when he talked of the coming of the Son of Man. Since Jesus was already here, why would he prophesy himself coming?
Of course, part of the problem is that there is no way to know what Jesus actually preached, since none of the "historical" accounts date from his preaching amongst the mostly illiterate.
musekiteer 2 years ago
Yes, some scholars think Jesus was prophesying the coming of a future prophet/messiah when he spoke of the Son of Man, but I don't know that there's much evidence for it other than simply noting that Jesus uses the third person and future tense. It doesn't seem to be any better supported than the traditional view that he was prophesying his second coming.
TaylorX04 2 years ago
Perhaps the Son of Man is the baby of pregnant Arnold Schwarzenegger used in that movie?
Kidding aside, if ever there really is progress in science to the point where men can carry and safely give birth(-why- is a question best left unasked), how much do you want to bet that some fundies will 1)rise up against it (like they do all science and medicine unless they need it) and 2)claim that the first child born that way is the messiah?
EdwardHowton 2 years ago
// prophesying his second coming //
Silly of him not to get it right the first time!
(Assuming that there is some foundation to the rumours of his life.)
For him to have prophesied a second coming, he would have had to know that he'd be crucified as an insurgent. Since he could not have known that (rumours of his "divinity" being inventions) he would not have been able to predict something that has not materialized in 2,000 years.
musekiteer 2 years ago
I think it's most likely that once Jesus was killed and the remainder of the cult had concocted the whole rise-from-the-dead (originally as a spirit from the common grave) and will-come-again-in-glory theology - it would be useful to have Jesus reference his own 2nd coming in the Gospels. Compare the 1st Gospel, Mark to the others - very few references to 'coming again' in comparison.
templarart 2 years ago
Interesting, I'd never considered that angle before. I had never heard about Solomon being able to command demons, or anything of that nature...
JBSauce 2 years ago
When we Wiccans say Jesus was a witch, we'ere not lying.
ginkiba3 2 years ago
I remember when I read that article about the bowl of the magician Jesus.
MagnusIan 2 years ago
Both you and ProfMTH totally kick ass!!! Keep up the excellent work!
rubenzall 2 years ago 5
Six Six Six the Number of the Jebus!
petehjr1 2 years ago
Hm, interesting. 5/5
Derrshmoz 2 years ago
Comment removed
Derrshmoz 2 years ago
I hate it when some queen tries to test me. Oh, wait. Different context.
Very nicely done.
ProfMTH 2 years ago 24
Epic
roboldguard 2 years ago 3
mmn. queen testes. erms. tests.
Neeboopsh 2 years ago
Hey Prof! Love your vids.
Derrshmoz 2 years ago 2
Lol. I think we both know you really wouldn't mind it if a queen put a spell on you though.
Glad you liked the video. Looking forward to your next one.
TaylorX04 2 years ago
rofl
WouldbeSage 2 years ago