On the earliest references to Israel & YHWH

Dan misapplies a lot of his information. Christianity is most certainly pagan occultism but what Dan is saying is in the same genre So I wouldn't listen to him either

You ever noticed how Dan says we know that the scripture was changed around the 4th century to 9th century CE.... Well if we know that why doesn't Dan ever say who it was 🤔 And it's because it goes against the rules of the game they're playing and if Dan were to ever reveal absolute truth he would be blackballed and his scholarship would be taken from him and he would not be able to get work if he ever were to tell who what when where and the complete truth. And that is just the fact of the matter

@@yerpyaboy You're spamming your ignorance. People like you are why Dan never reads the KZhead comments.

I am so glad that you are happy but I would love to know what was forbidden?

​@@yerpyaboyHow is it Pagan occultism? Waiting. Let's see it.

more like Nile song

Or a D&D module

Archaeology could be a great source for metal album & song names

Parliament Funkadelic, y’all.

@@MarcosElMalo2 Sun Ra.

Do you know where Steely Dan got its name? Look it up.

@@emptyhand777I forget the exact verse, but it’s in the Gospel of Bill.

A rough translation of the stele in question is “they got a name for the winners of the world/I want a name for when I lose/They call [undeciperable but assumed to be Pharaoh] the Crimson Tide/Call me Deacon Blues”. Hope this helps.

Remind me of an ancient Egyptian inscription I saw once: Hapi Don't Lose That Number

@@MarcosElMalo2 - yes, William Burroughs novel "Naked Lunch" had a steam powered dildo called Steely Dan. Now you know the rest of the story. Good day.

"Often"?

All monotheists are atheists, one case removed. Atheism, is simply a lack of belief in any god. I prefer the more refined, insufficient evidence to warrant belief in any god. A rock is not atheist [or theist] because it does not possess the attribute of cognition or belief. Gnostic/agnostic are claims about knowledge. At the heart of warranted knowledge is epistemic warrant. techniques and methods give rise to warrant to accept or reject. Absolute proof or disproof is not rigourous outside of pure mathematics. Why, because pure math is about numerical, symbolic logic. A language for numerical descriptions. Plug some real data into the equations, and you have applied math, science, etc. People often invest heavily in their faith, I know I did. You don't seem happy with the theology of Judaism. My two cents? If you are Jewish, then other Jews are your people. You are not obliged to believe what others believe. Whether that is from other Jews, or anybody else. This could cause friction. It could even end family or friendships. This is the harsh, non-fluffy side of community religious belief. Some people will be tolerant, and others not. In my experience, tolerance and acceptance decreases with the level of fundamentalism. But at the end of the day, it should be all about humanity and religious freedom. And in my "book" "freedom of religion" automatically implies freedom FROM religion. So don't let people "gaslight" you. Strange to relate, but I think morality is an emergent property of the biological and cultural evolution of social animals [including humans of course]. I can't and won't dictate what you should do. Relationships will be strained. And being an atheist is harder in a multitude of ways. Say you have a moral dilemma? For the fundamentalist, they just need to look to their holy book, and they are good to go. For thinking atheists, theists, etc, things are not that simple. I go by the "wellness" principle. What action causes the LEAST harm? And critical thinking, with no "sacred cows". That is the only way I can be an honest moral agent. As for the concept of "souls", particularly of the "disembodied" variety? I don't think that it has much traction in the form of evidence. In other ways, atheism can be both fun and rewarding. Suppose you have two religious friends, who subscribe to two different faiths? Yup, you get to be moderator in their debates. Since you have no 'skin in the game" [you subscribe to neither faith position, you would be a good candidate as a reasonably objective referee. And sure, atheists can be as subjective as other folks. But what an honest atheist cannot do is appeal to a god or religion in an argument! This can hone one's skills in arguing at a secular level. For example, I have no religious arguments for, or against the death penalty. This can pay dividends because a secular argument can work with the faithful and faithless. An argument against the DP would go like this: 1. The law is imperfect, so mistakes can be made. [Guilty are sometimes let free, innocents are sometimes executed]. 2. Death is not reversible. [Suppose new evidence comes to light to prove the innocence of the convicted? Oops!] 3. Ergo, imprisonment, not execution. I didn't even appeal to the inhumanity or cruelty involved in execution. Partly because I didn't want any "deflections" from my argument. eg, Those who view legal "corrections" as vengeance or retribution. Retribution is understandable, but can get quite "iffy" in a moral sense. Death? Hard for everyone. My most recent death experience was my beloved dog. I handled it the way I do with all others. Either I am right, and I will never see the lad again, and one day I will die myself, in which case, the pain will case. or I am wrong, and I could be re-united with those I have loved. Either way, there is not much I can do about it. And if heaven or hell exists, not much I can do about that either. The only thing I can be sure of is the life that I am living NOW. So life is precious. Works for me.

You should find Justin Sledge and Alex O’Conner, Absolute gold.

@@Limited_Light It just depends on my mood.

It’s not exactly a cold case, there is enough evidence to build a picture. From a war god, taking the more important powers of another local weather god, to eventually the god of all regions, with an invisible body. To god of everything with no body.

@@anthonycraig274 Not to mention all the social stuff going on that underpins those concepts. The movements of people groups, political developments, economic developments, cross pollination of cultures etc. etc. It'd take some pretty dramatic new evidence to move the needle away from the "storm deity to monotheism" hypothesis.

Great reading

I really want to re read that book

Like, can you see a Ugaritic text mentioning YHWH as a son of El? Or mentioned alongside Baal or another pantheon member?

​@@alanb8884As far as I know we don't. We have inscriptions of "Yahweh of Samaria" (Israel) and "Yahweh of Teman" (from Edom/southern Levant). The theory is the Early Israelites (and maybe the Edomites) introduced Yahweh to the region and inserted him into their version of the Canaanite pantheon. First on the level of Baal and replacing him as storm/warrior god and later on upgrading him to the position of El.

My understanding gas always been that YHWH was brought in from outside the boundaries of the Northwest Semitic Pantheon, and gradually replaced Baal, or at least took on the attributes of Baal. You can see in Deut 32 a fragment of Elyon being understood as higher, as Elyon divides the lands amongst the b'nei elohim, and YHWH's portion is Jacob/Israel.

@@MrBlakeD82 I'm asking about the timing of that.

@@thomasdalton1508 I believe the "second tier deity" status was in a different culture than the Israelite one. Often Dan is delivering information within a specific context, and I recall most mentions about the timeline of YHWH becoming a bigger Israelite god were often not speaking to the other cultures which had known of it.

There are indications Yahweh was (also) worshipped as vulcano/metallurgy god (mountain, fire, smoke, lightning). But what I read that originated near Edom/Sinai. There is an inscription "Yahweh of Teman" (from Edom/southern Levant).

That's an interesting paper for sure

I think that early polytheism was far more plastic than we think about it. Thunder gods could also be fertility gods-probably because people realized that a plot of land that sees lots of lightning would be more fertile than similar land without lightning (lightning can break atmospheric nitrogen bonds, making it easier to bond with oxygen, creating nitrogen oxides that then fall to the ground as rain). Storm deities are often depicted with a hammer and live/show themselves at the top of mountains; and it’s not that far off iconographically from that to a smith god in a volcano. That said, I would be interested to see how they reconcile the idea with the (barely visible) portrayal of culture-hero figures in the OT narrative as being from the wrong side of the tracks, so to speak (Cain’s descendants are the creators of metallurgy, musical instruments, pastoralist & city dwelling, and the like, as one example). I’ll see if I can find the article online. Thanks for the suggestion!

Reply to my above comment: Wow! $110.00 CDN to access the article (in fairness, I think it’s to access the entire journal history, not just the one article). Regardless, I think I’ll see if my alma mater will let me read the article in person at the library.

@@DneilB007 take a look at Sage Journals, the article is $29. On the info page you can find some references of which some might be cheaper to look up or for free.

that is how some people pronounce it. even though the sounds don't match the letters themselves. it's basically a stand-in word because uttering the divine name exactly as spelled and pronounced is sacred. that is my understanding. someone can correct me if that's wrong.

Adonai is the “respectful utterance”. I don’t think you’ll get in trouble for saying it the way you say it. It’s not “YHWH or the highwai”.

@@Fire-Toolz Basically, yes. Dan actually has a video where he expressly states that he uses the respectful pronunciation "Adonai" in place of the tetragrammaton out of respect for his Jewish colleagues and friends who have religious objections to people stating YHWH straight out. In scholarly settings he will (typically) use the "Yah-weh" pronunciation, as it's the standard and is distinctly academic, not to be imposed upon by personal theology or beliefs. He has made a concession out of decency to use "Adonai" in his public-facing efforts/social media posts.

That sounds like the opening crawl of a Star wars movie

@@scripturalcontexts it’s historical fact as far as can be shown.

I agree with you but it does sound like the opening crawl of a Star wars movie The Way that you worded it

@@scripturalcontexts what do you mean by the word crawl?

@@nancyhope2205 have you ever watched a Star Wars movie? Do you know the bit right at the beginning that lays out the starting situation in text that rolls up the screen, larger at the bottom and smaller at the top, like the text is getting further away?

Yodeling Hitchhikers Wearily Hopping

@@rainbowkrampus Good one!

He does it out of politeness toward those who might be offended.

It's a sign, the images of a true god bleeding out into reality. It's all connected.

​@@themightycaolf6549 No.

Only issue there is you basically just suggested YHWH is Indo-European when he is clearly Semitic. The language groups are not linked according to linguistic experts.

@@epicofatrahasis3775 How do I argue with that, lol.

Obviously, to avoid using the NAME in vain, as in the Commandment. Jews use “Adonai” commonly, so unless he wants to deliberately offend, that is what would be safe (especially with subtitles).

He hasn't to my knowledge and I doubt he ever will. Though this shouldn't be too surprising. He kinda rejects the framework of definitions. So any meaning you bring to "christian" is not necessarily something he shares. What he does mean by that, I can only guess at. Though I imagine his meaning is heavily tied into ideas of social cohesion and group identification rather than being overly dependent on things like definitively asserting a thing called "a god". What he thinks about a god concept, I can't even hazard to guess.

@@rainbowkrampus that's pretty much what I gather. Personally, I wouldn't call that Christian - I'd say that Christianity requires the acceptance of some set of propositions regarding a god and Jesus. But I'm not here to assert a definition... Just think that what he means in identifying as a Christian likely isn't what most people would understand that to mean. But, for all I/we know, maybe he actually does believe something compatible. Maybe he believes something compatible to an extent with Christianity but just understands the Bible as being highly fictional and/or edited in writings about a deity that does exist. I asked the question without assuming to know the answer.

Except he has a house. I have a couple hundred expensive books. If I spent their monetary value on housing, it'd only cover a few months. And that'd despite the many books I got as gifts or at less than full price.

Tell me you're offended by having your ignorance demonstrated and being unable to refute it due to a lack of comprehension without _saying_ you're offended by... you get the idea.

Actually, his house is entirely constructed from university press books. The wall paint is made out of bleached and pulverized t-shirts. He never actually wears the same shirt twice. It's technically more valuable than its same weight in gold. Ya know, if you ignore all of the screws holes that were made to hold the books together.

Here's a cookie 🍪 😉

😂😂​@@johnburn8031

@@johnburn8031 😂🫶🏾

Backseat theologians are the worst. Try keeping your comments in a single thread, troll.

Are you really this ignorant? This has to be baiting. Clearly you don't understand _why_ Dan pronounces the tetragrammaton as "Adonai." It's a respect issue, which you clearly have even less of an education in than biblical criticism.

Dan says Adonai in order to not pronounce YHWH which might offend some Jews…at least that’s what he’s said in previous videos.

Jews were already returning to the Levant after the Ottomans defeated the Mamelukes. The Ottomans weren’t opposed to Jews occupying their traditional homeland. Although I could see how they wouldn’t be keen on this homeland being self-governing. Is it worth noting that under the Mamelukes, there was a lot of Arab immigration into the Levant, the Mamelukes followed a policy of oppression the Jews, and many Jews were driven out? Other noteworthy stuff: At the founding of modern Israel, over a million Jews were uprooted and deported from their homes in Arab countries and came to Israel as refugees.

@@MarcosElMalo2 Yes. Roman Emporor Hadrian renamed Israel Palestine after Philistines Assyrian Greeks after Bar Kochba rebellion against Rome by Jews was lost in 135CE. Bizarre warped alter history versions from their theology. תודה רבה שלום

The seven day week is probably Mesopotamian, since there's references to periods of 7 days from at least 2100 BCE and stories like the Epic of Gilgamesh reference events taking 7 days over and over again. It was initially believed that the Hebrews picked up that from the Exile, but there's some evidence suggesting it was older, but that in itself doesn't mean it didn't it didn't originate in Sumer and was just adopted through contact, just as other cultures have adopted the seven day week without it having been imposed on them since.

@@keith6706 To create a seven day week, a certain structuring of time needs to be formulated and other objects within the solar system and their movements needs to be apparent. If these are hidden throughtout the scriptures then other such understandings as to how money is related to this structure are also hidden from the reader. The basis of the creation story is a narrative that is using such understandings yet not revealing the understanding itself, which is a source of confabulation by people using conjecture as to what is written to explain its meaning. As the above video points towards YHWH, which if not understood in light of this structuring, all types of confabulatory meaning can be expounded upon using conjecture and in the end are utter nonsensical in application to the truth of what scriptures are telling.

Dan talked in one of his podcasts, and maybe one of his other posts, about how the idea of the Sabbath referred originally to the high holy days, but after the destruction of the temple and the exile, they made one day a week a Sabbath because if they couldn't worship in a place or with sacrifices, they would substitute a day as holy and use that as a way to continue their religious traditions. Then they wrote it into the law as if it came from Moses to give it more textual authority.

@@LEgregius But that misses the point im making. If moses introduces a seven day week, it comes from an understanding and this understanding is a construct. The construct will dictate certain rules. To just accept the ruling without understanding the construct, is blind obedience to the person telling you what rules you follow. If the rules you follow do not lead to freedom from the illusion, then its a mind trap designed to keep you subjugated by those that understand the construct. You might as well become a muslim.

This is a channel about the Bible, so I don't think Dan is going to lift his mind out of the Bible any time soon. The history of calendars and the history of economics are very interesting, but they aren't what this channel is about. The seven day week and currency both predate Israel by a millennium or more (although the Babylonians started a new cycle with each full moon, having four weeks in each lunar month and then an extra day or two that weren't in any week while they waited for the next new moon, so the Israelites had a slightly different system, the origins of which aren't known).

Since Dan's usage is both consistent and unambiguous, I don't see any issue of trust. He has said repeatedly that he says Adonai out of respect for those for whom the Tetragrammaton is sacred. That seems kind rather than untrustworthy.

@@johnmcgimpsey1825 Out of respect? It's BS, not respect. He is denying religious aspects for billions. Meanwhile, he can't pronounce Jahveh due to respect. Either this is cognitive dissonance or some agenda. It's just dumb not to call things by their names.

@@MrVeryfrost Since you would need to know the vowel sounds to pronounce YHWH today, how exactly do you propose we can do that? Is it Yahweh, Jehovah or something else entirely? It seems to me you are pushing an agenda here and Dan, for whatever reason, has fallen under your ire. You provide us with a reliable and consistent method of supplying the vowel sounds and then we may have a basis for discussion otherwise it's just your dogma.

@@grantpritchard7492Sorry, it’s yahway or the highway. 😉 hit the road, grant. 😊

@@grantpritchard7492@grantpritchard7492 Jahveh or Jehovah-both are fine because it is transliterated from JHVH. But Adonai is not a name. It's a substitution. Somehow, we are all fine calling Jeshua Jesus, and we don't substitute him for the Son of God every time we talk about him. If it's not agenda or cognitive dissonance, then all this Adonai business is a bizarre appeasement for Jews for whatever reason.