The Jesus Dynasty--Why the Royal Family of Jesus was Forgotten
Vložit
- čas přidán 15. 05. 2022
- Few think of Jesus of Nazareth as part of the royal family of David--even though Paul affirms the same as our earliest source--namely that he was descended from the messianic lineage of King David (Romans 1:3). Given that pedigree, that means Jesus' brothers and sisters, as children of Mary, which I have argued elsewhere, would likewise be this royal family. Thus when James/Yaaqov, brother of Jesus, succeeds him in leading the Nazarene movement--we are talking about a Dynasty or Caliphate with bloodline succession. This lecture deals with that issue and why the emerging Christian Church was so bent on either playing down or in some cases erasing this dynastic family of Jesus. Hence the title of my best-selling book, The Jesus Dynasty (Simon & Schuster, 2006), which I hope viewers will consider reading:
www.amazon.com/Jesus-Dynasty-...
This lecture is part of a Biblical Archaeology Seminar hosted by the Biblical Archaeology Society. I highly recommend their magazine, programs, seminars, and especially membership in the BAS Library--that contains thousands of previous articles, books, videos, and other materials for a very low subscription price. See www.biblicalarchaeology.org
This was better than a murder mystery. Tabor really does a great job keeping it interesting.James is such a key to origins of the early movement.
Faith is trusting in God especially in bad situations. That’s exactly what I’m doing. I’m still struggling to provide for my two autistic children since losing my job over declining the vaccine. I declined due to my pre existing health condition (Lupus) and Heart disease. I was denied my medical/religious exemption from Forsyth Hospital. My husband passed away three years ago, so I’m all alone. Both of my sons are non verbal so things are more difficult for me. Every month I don’t know how we are going to make it through. Every month is a struggle, a battle to not end up on the streets.
I’m so embarrassed by my situation. I’ve been put down and mocked over my circumstances. It’s hard to hold my head up at times BUT because of my faith God shows up every month and provides. Even as I face homelessness with two young children. I know that God will provide. He won’t leave me. Thank you Jesus.
Jesus was not God. By putting your faith in Jesus you put faith in a man; a dead man never risen; a dead man turned bones. Reject Jesus and put your faith in God.
My sister has lupus, heart condition, liver, and many more, and has had 3 Vaccines, moderna, the stongest one.
Even combined the Moderna, w shingles and another one at one visit, And yes, she was strongly subdued, but it passed and she's OK.
Trusting God, he will provide, he won't leave me...
I wouldn't count on it.
not even the popes get any help from God in their health. they all died also, no exception. Even Jesus the man died and suffered.
And the current debate of all suffering in the world.
So expecting God to...
Better, in addition to medics, have an almost perfect nutrition.
Heavy into fruits and veggies.
And if overweight, even more. A lean body is healthier.
Good luck. Haven't had my sister really commit to food as a help. She's almost morbidly obese. Won't really try.
And just like my dad, medicines did nothing.
The more he was into following Dr's orders, the worst he/she became.
Have you seen how fat medics are?
You are a real life superhero, Jesus will help you, stay strong.
Speaking as an RN, if you have heart disease, it is a reason to have the vaccine. It may be a secondary target of Covid but lethal none the less. Easy to find stories particularly of young one experiencing cardiomyopathy from Covid. Risk of any reaction is so low (but still could happen) that imo is well worth the risk. It’s been a couple years now of having the vaccines and they have tested out. On the other hand it’s a shame your employer doesn’t consider your situation.
Through Dr. Tabor, I’ve recently discovered James, and I found this entire lecture riveting. I can tell already, I will listen to this over and over again. Thank you, thank you! ❤
check out Robert Eisenman on James
@@PatriceBoivin I’ve heard he’s done a lot of work on James. I’ve been thinking about ordering his book - I’ve read it’s the best work on James thus far. You’ve convinced me. I’m going to order it today. 😊
@@PatriceBoivin I did it! I ordered (and received) Dr. Eisenman’s book on James. It’s absolutely fascinating and I’m enjoying it so much. Thank you again for your recommendation. ❤️
Me too!!!!!
I was James, my people stoned me, i reincarnated, read my parables please, 👍👍How many parables Jesus gave us? 50-60? He was bigger than Jesus. Shlomi the Messiah from Israel gave us more than 200 parables. My favorite is called 'The poor farmer and the precious wine' 🙏🙏
Just bought your book, Dr Tabor, and I'm starting it tonight. I'm really looking forward to it. Keep up the great work, I'm slowly catching up with your posts.
been hooked on Dr. Tabor's lectures... so much interesting stuff, can't stop watching
Love the work of Tabor and Eisenman. Their lifetimes of work I consider miraculous and inspiring…the family of Joseph and Mary deserves more inspection and serious study.
This is a very interesting perspective on this topic, hoping to see more on it.
Bless you Dr. James Tabor.
Thanks for posting this -
I'm a catholic
I have no trouble with this. The essentials dont change
God is love. We are called to love. Through whatever spiritual practice you do , you receive the spirit to help you love.
Thank you Dr Tabor. You bring to life the history of ancient times.
James & John the Baptist is the two edged of the sword that comes out jesus's mouth metaphor , ? Makes more since then James& Jude, since Jesus considered him his Messiah , Jude got tossed n to finish there dynasty out ,& appears a fade out of ending story , getting these people mindset , & learning there's a 3rd major team involved wow ! Great job of searching with your soul earnestly,
A fascinating talk by James Tabor, with lots of lines to consider! I think where he departs into his own suppositions is where he re-writes the story to the effect that Jesus, his disciples and followers were preparing to take over the governance of Jerusalem and the Temple. Bart Ehrman similarly creates his own 'gospel' in which he re-writes the story to follow his own ideas, thus leaving written texts and imagining an 'alternative director's script' for which there is no written foundation.
....what makes this surprising is that while Tabor and Ehrman are more than happy to use written sources to professionally present the points they find evidence for, when it comes to their re-writing of the gospels with their alternative unspiritual version, they present no evidence from any written sources to support their suppositions. I think both Ehrman and Tabor who are both talented men, would serve their readers much better if they kept to research for which they have reasonable evidence, instead of including diversions into their own preferred 'alternative stories'.
In particular the alternative stories run into problems, when they are compared with the New Testament and early historical movement of the faith in Jesus as the Messiah - they don't fit and actually create problems and questions which show inconsistencies with the faith and history. In order for their alternative 'stories' to have credence, they would need to be consistent with the written sources of the NT and early history, but that is where they fail. For instance, how does James Tabor's alternative gospel explain spiritual conversions, if the movement was really only about a future physical government taking over? How does it account for some individuals being radically converted to Christ, when they were previously of a totally different mind - Paul for instance converted to Christ turning 180 degrees from being a known persecutor of Christians, to being a follower of the Christ who he only hours earlier hated with a vengeance? How does the alternative gospel explain many people following Jesus because they were being healed, drawing crowds of 5000 and 6000 men alone, if the gospel was only about a 'future' coming of the Son of Man as the Messiah to rule over Israel? If the 'alternative gospels' of Tabor and Ehrman are the true replacement for the written gospels we actually have, then how do Tabor and Ehrman explain the growth of the actual gospel movement from the 1st to the 4th centuries, during which there was phenomenal growth, if the Messiah had not returned as per the alternative gospels tend to propose? Not least, how indeed is the faith in the resurrected Jesus leading to thousands of conversions, with over 500 reported sightings of the resurrected Jesus, to explain the proposed immediacy of a replacement government of Israel?
In general, the 'earthly alternative explanations', do not fit the process of the New Testament writings contents, at all and thus such alternative gospels create an unsolvable problem.
Nevertheless, Tabor presents some interesting ideas and observations from the texts.
Yes, I agree here. I remember in the debate with Jimmy Akin, both brilliant, he tries to make it seem as though Mark did not think Jesus was divine in nature. He goes on to recount the gospel with the premise that Jesus was shocked at his crucifixion, and only the Roman guard recognized that Jesus was the Son of God. Then Akin pushed back on him, saying that Jesus did not just cry out 'Why have you forsaken me' out of pain, but in quoting Psalm 22, where the narrator triumphs despair and is united with God by the end of it. At the end of the debate Ehrman admitted that he thinks Mark wrote Jesus as divine. It's strange. Good scholars, but studies show that scholars have bigger blindspots than ordinary people.
Yes, isn't the free will grand in it's myriad of applications within the concept of perspective alone? It's wonderful to be human.
I think, and I’m surmising here because I don’t think that he actually says this, is that the early Jesus movement was following a similar path to the Essene community, where there was a belief that the Apocalypse would occur about 40 years after the death of the Founder of the movement-the Teacher of Righteousness for the Essenes, and Jesus for the Jesus movement.
What Paul does is open up the possibility that the Kingdom of God is spiritual and internal, rather than physical and external. He still believes in a physical Apocalypse, I think; but the Kingdom pre-exists the Apocalypse within the believer.
As for the idea that someone could not completely reverse their life and beliefs without divine intervention, that really involves ignoring nearly all of human experience. It’s not at all unusual for someone to completely reevaluate their life after a near-death experience. And whether you think Paul had a stroke, an epileptic seizure, heatstroke, or an encounter with the divine, it’s without question that he took his experience as a sign that he had to change his life completely.
Why?
Because it was not that long before then that his master Gamaliel literally said not to persecute Jesus’ followers because if their belief was without merit it would go away by itself, and if it was from God it would withstand their persecution *and they would find themselves opposing God*. Fast forward a bit, and Paul has a vision where God says exactly that-“Why are you opposing me?”
His master and mentor planted the idea in his mind, and it blossomed when he had his (literal) Damascus Road incident.
The thing that I find most interesting about what Dr. Tabor teaches is that so much of what he says is consistent with what is within the Bible, but just not as we want to interpret it today. He’s really just saying that Christianity is always adjusting and adapting to meet people where they are throughout time.
@@DneilB007 You make interesting points, but notice carefully that in doing them, you are subtlety bending the scripture to your own design. Tabor does this also.
You do this by carefully omitting both the context and the details that have been written in the text, so that you are producing only the extract which supports your narrative. Ehrman does similarIy. I don't mind you having an opinion or your own narrative, as long as you are honest in stating that not all the details and the context are consistent with or agree with your ideas and that therefore there are other interpretations which are closer to the actual text than your own extraction.
@@theonlyway5298 No, what I am doing is accepting the events as laid down in the Scriptures but not accepting the intentions that the writers ascribe to other people whom they would have had no access from which to learn what their intentions were.
fascinating and riveting! Thank you.
Dear Mr. Tabor: I highly respect you first of all. My friend has verbally told me about all of your books in detail. It triggered my memories. I know about Jesus' sister Salome and I would like to speak with you somehow for a moment. Thank you. Blessings.
I think the Talpiot tomb is legit. When we put the ossuaries inside in combination with the James ossuary we have the entire family.
I was watching a documentary where a statistician discussed the probability that all those names would be in there together and not be the Jesus family and he said the odds were infinitesimally low.
Thank you Mr Tabor for this lecture. I really enjoyed it.
JESUS HAD A SON VIA MARY MAG John 19:25-27
25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother[Mary], and his mother's sister[in-law], Mary the wife of Cleophas[mother Mary's brother], and Mary Magdalene.
26 When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by[Mary Magdalene], whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy [grand]son! [in Mary Mag's womb/pregnant.]
27 Then saith he to the disciple[Mary Mag], Behold thy mother[in-law/Jesus' mother Mary]! And from that hour that disciple[Mary Mag] took her[Jesus' mother] unto his[Jesus'] own home [The home of Jesus and his now pregnant wife Mary Magdalene] in a midwifing arrangement.
@@termination9353why do you miss read, John 19: 25-27. Christ is not talking about, Mary Magdalene as the Disciple he loved.
But John is referring to himself. The evidence is that John never referred to himself as John, but always referred to himself as the disciple whom Christ loved.
Christ is telling Mary his mother that John is now to be considered her son and telling John to take his mother, to his house and that he, John is responsible for her as a son would be to his mother.
If Mary Magdalene was pregnant with Christ’s son, that would mean that Christ had sinned, unless he was married to her. If not, it would’ve been fortification. There is no evidence that Christ was married to Mary Magdalene. So how could Christ have died on the cross without sin, if he sinned?
Don’t just tell a lie! Prove it though scriptures and not just what you say in brackets!
@@Tro349 John didn't write the book of John. Gospel says John wasn't at the crucifixion cause the Apostles were in hiding "for fear of the Jews." Gospel says Lazarus and Mary Magdalene are the disciples Jesus loved. There never was multiple Gospels by multiple authors. The Gospel was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.
John 21:24 "This is the disciple[whom Jesus loved/ Lazarus] which testifieth of these things, AND WROTE THESE THINGS: and we[Apostles] know that his testimony is true."
John 11:5
Now Jesus LOVED Martha, and her sister(MARYMAGDALENE), and LAZARUS
John 11:3
Therefore his sisters sent unto him{Jesus], saying, Lord, behold, HE[Lazarus] WHOM THOU LOVEST is sick..
John11:36 Then said the Jews, Behold how he[Jesus] LOVED him[Lazarus]!
@@Tro349 How is Jesus having a child a sin?
@@Tro349 why would Jesus mother go live in a strange man's home when she was not a widow, Joseph is not dead or gone, and she was not destitute?
It is mind opening to hear this hypothesis, it does has convincing evidence if we were to dig more deeply. Thank you James.
I am really enjoying this book it reads as well as any thriller and is so fascinating. I am learning so much and the insight on what is written in scripture is amazing. You are laying out what you have found with the evidence but without making absolute assertions leaving us to make up our own mind. Thanks Dr Tabor great read!
Dr. Tabor, I've been following you for a couple of years now and your life's work fascinates me. Thank you for sharing what you know on this amazing topic! My question is this: What can we believe about Christ's Church now? Looks to me like the "Dynasty" failed and now I'm very suspicious of the Paulian legacy... Catholic Church?
isn’t the RCC the Petrine legacy?
Enjoying your research. When you or anyone else can prove Paul knew Yeshua please let it be known. Blessings to all.
Yeshua Stopped him on the road on his journey. He said I Am the Lord. The Lord is described throughout scripture as Jesus Christ/Yeshua...as The Lord God. I take it you dont believe the Holy Scripture but take a mans word/studies over the bible. Im asking..
I think its enlightening that apart from James, many of the original apostles were sons of high priests and similar.as judaism/early Christian period was a theocracy, with titles like high priest handed down from father to son. So many of the apostles were wealthy and influential in Israel, which explains a bit why the pre Pauline Christians were considered dangerous.
Alecbrown66• where is the proof of what you are saying? If most of the apostles were rich, then why didn’t they just go buy the food to feed the multitude instead of relying on Jesus to produce a miracle.
The Word does say that the apostles fed the people not Christ.
If all the Apostles had all this power and influence, why were they all crucified, stoned, and beheaded?
@@Tro349it might be because any types of a conceivable threat to the power of roman authority was instantly dealt with death. The temple worshipping was only allowed because it was an easy way to continue to keep the Hebrew people superstitiously emotionally pacified by allowing them to continue to worship their GODS EL and Yahweh in the temple. It's a much safer way to be able to control the Empires annexed province, and its people. As long as the priesthood didn't preach revolting against the roman occupation, then the Romans wouldn't have to pay the expenses for the military to have to put down the revolution against rome. The people were already paying taxes as a tribute to the power of rome for their protection from other invaders.
James Tabor is a great intelectual and communicator.
🤡
Brilliant as usual. Thanks
Very interesting…I find this so intriguing, glad I found this….I’ve always wondered about this in the New Testament and the way you have pointed this out makes a lot of sense to me. Since there is nothing left from our history ancestors, except the Bible and our ancestors culture, we are left with still more questions than answers, but God always finds away in which He can enlighten ourselves with various bits and pieces that may be right or a wrong assumption. I love listening to these lectures. It puts an interest into researching my own Biblical information….👍❤️🙏🏼🥰🤔
LOVE THESE.
Would expect to have the date of the presentation. Looks like about 2002.
Oh it's your channel - very good then. I find this super-duper important. So was this presentation timed with the publication in 2006?
another great lecture by Professor Tabor. No student loans needed!
If John Baptist said Jesus is the great one everybody was waiting for... then how come there were two separate groups; Jesus and his disciples while there was John and HIS disciples. How was it that John did not step down and hand over his followers to Jesus?
I love your channel. Thank you for your hard work!
@@termination9353 Aside from Jesus, John is one of the most significant figure in the gospel. His birth parallels that of Jesus but was also such a momentous event similar to the birth of Isaac to Sarah and Abraham. John’s ministry was like those “The end is here” type ministers but I would imagine due to the events of those times the scenario makes since. So it’s like Jesus spoke of love where John spoke of the end but the message of both was the same, “the kingdom of heaven is upon us”. I don’t think the disciples of the 2 would have been able to commingle because the disciples followed based on the message or I guess delivery style of Jesus and John.
@@ImaginaryWear John is "least in the kingdom of heaven'.
@@termination9353did you not watch this video? Dr Tabor addresses that quote in the first 15-20 minutes.
There are a lot of references to the handout. It might be useful to provide the handout in pdf form.
Indeed
I think Occam's Razor leads us to BROTHER MEANS BROTHER.
There's so many James because it was actually one of the more common names, Jacob. The KJV translated all instances of Jacob except for the most famous, to James in honor of the king.
That's correct and that's why in my Complete Jewish Bible translation it is Ya'akov (Jacob) Thanks so much for reminding me !
Was it done to honour the King, or was it because James as the Greek form of James? The New Testament was written in Greek "as she is spoke," with differences from the literary "koine."
@@douglaidlaw740 Iakobos is the Greek form of the name, not James
@@douglaidlaw740 Yes and No. When "Jacob's Well" is mentioned in the NT, it is not called "James' Well" it is just called "Jacob's Well." But also, neoJacob was not translated as "James" in order to "honor the king of England"... it was translated as "James" because it was an already English sounding word that meant "Usurper" which is what "Jacob" means "Yah(weh) Usurps". The guy that translated the more original Latin version into the "pre-King James Version" said he didn't like how confusing the Latin version "Jacobus" confused people with thinking there was a deeper or mythical connection with the Old Testament. Thus he figured a "white lie" or "half truth" by changing only the "new jacobs" into "james" would only help Christianity and thus assure him theo-fascistic-monarchial immortality.
Years ago I was in Jerusalem visiting an antiquity shop, Venus gallery. While I was there, the owner introduced me to Mr. Ogden Golan. Mr. Golan asked if I thought the James ossuary was authentic? I replied if he knew of the Evangelist Oral Roberts? Mr. Golan, replied yes. I said well then Reverend Roberts saw a six-story Jesus. Which means to me the family would be much too large to fit in that small ossuary. 😮 This was during the Court trials. Later, the owner of Venus gallery stated, you know, Ogden hasn't laughed that hard in a long time...😊
Just outstanding
I came for the Ebionites & was fulfilled somewhat. To the victors goes the spoils of war. Hence why we'll never know the truth.
Dr. Tabor is fantastic bringing Jesus to the masses but, the sound quality is not good for older folks.
More solid Awesome from Dr. Tabor.
Why is Professor Tabor still speaking as if the Talpiot tomb could possibly be related to the family of Jesus? This was conclusively disproved years ago.
Disproved? The "evidence" they use is the commonality of the names inscribed on the ossuaries and their faith that if Jesus was bodily resurrected, he wouldn't need an ossuary for his bones. But the constellation of all those names connected with Jesus in one tomb makes it statistically likely that this was indeed the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth and his family, and Tabor has spoken and written repeatedly about what the Biblical understanding of resurrection involved. It wasn't a reconstitution of the decayed flesh, but a spiritual resurrection.
Jesus seemed to know this was a last opportunity for Israel which would be destroyed without a great awakening. Did he foresee all the death and destruction. Or the great falling away even after all he suffered for us? Yes, i suppose. He certainly understood the prophets--completely beyond me.
Khalaf means progenitor a person or thing from which a person, animal, or plant is descended or originates; an ancestor or parent.
"his sons and daughters were the progenitors of many of Scotland's leading noble families"
At 23:00 I believe this word is also related to the Arabic caliph which I think is of Aramaic origin.
Interesting. Also, not a coincidence that Christians are called Al-Nasaara in Arabic. Same as the Nazarenes.
@@ahmedopone4080the real followers of Christ followed the Thora
if james was the leader it could have been redundant to say to the particular audience luke was writing for because it was known.
Cleophas is mentioned as the husband of one of the Mary's at the foot of the cross in John but there was a Cleopas in Luke 24, who was one of the guys on the road to Emmaus.
It is presumed that Cleopas was the surname of Simon Cleopas because Luke records Jesus appearing to Simon and it could not have been Simon Peter that he was referring to.
Luke 24:34 - Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon.
I mean, I'm just guessing but up to that verse, Jesus hadn't appeared to any of the apostles but He did appear to the two men on the road to Emmaus.
But scholars said that in those day people had no surname.
@@solomonlee4503 - And this is what I love about "scholars". I never heard the word "surname" until I started reading the King James Bible. (I was like 17-years old at the time.)
Now the "scholars" (who are so much smarter than I am) are telling me that people didn't have surnames in those days. Gee, I wonder where the translators got their stupid information. The translators don't know as much as these brilliant "scholars".
Trust me. That's not scholarship, that's bull ship.
I read The Jesus Dynasty the year it was first released, as well as book James the Brother of Jesus and The Lost Religion of Jesus. I had converted from Christianity to 12er Shi'ite Islam in 1999 at the age of 39, so I was very interested in the research done by Dr. James Tabor and others. There is the concept of 12 Imams which follower those Prophets who are also Messengers (i.e. bring a divine law). So, I personally believe the was a Jesus Dynasty. We name Peter, James, Simon, and Jude as the first four "Imams" after Prophet Jesus the Christ.
Dr. Tabor's comments on the list by Eusebius is really helpful because we didn't know how to deal with the extra names in the list.
I shared this video on Facebook for my Christian and Muslim friends interested in these things. We may draw different conclusions, but the knowledge also demonstrates what Jews, Christians, and Muslims do have in common.
Peter Voerding Very interesting! Can you give a source for the first 4 Imams being Peter, James, Simon and Jude? I'd like to look it up.
Are you a Muslim now?!!! czcams.com/video/DR7_YQ53lfI/video.html
Hope these videos will help you further...
Salamunalaykum wa rahmatollahi wa barakatu
Can you let me know if you find aprils book on the gospel of Thomas
They all think they are correct, and none can prove it. That is what they have "in common".
Good riddance... don't come back.
We Are Still Here ❤ , AB negative
Whew, at just two minutes into this video I am aghast by the creative assertions about John and James. Theories rivaling Q-anon! But, I do find fiction fascinating. Dr. Tabor, a rational historian, is interesting as a free thinker, but I pray he returns to his Messiah and His Church, before it's too late (death). I'll watch the rest of the video for my entertainment and the occasional gems he drops. Peace (from the Restoration and Unity Movement)!
Wow! if this is true then it's because of Paul that we have anything at all truly truly profound
Dr. Tabor, you have somewhat convincingly shown that Jesus' brothers James, Simon, and Judas were included in the 12 apostles. However, in Mark chapter 3, Jesus chose the apostles but then in Mark 3:20-35 we read that Jesus' family including his brothers tried to restrain him from preaching. Does this not put in question your thesis?
Not sure if this matters, James, but in the Hispanic culture, multiple children can have the same name. Within his family, several boys are named “Ruben”. My husband’s mother had 10 siblings; and of the girls were named “Maria.”
That appears to be a Catholic tradition. It is the same in Canada. It used to be all boys had the first name of Joseph and the girls all had the first name of Mary (Maria is Spanish, Marie in French, Moira in Irish) given on their birth certificate by the priest, then the parents would give the second given name which was usually the name used by the family, example Mary Lorraine, or Joseph Donald.
George Foreman named all his kids George I think
@@ChristopherCudworth I was going to write: "George Foreman would." But you beat me to it.
What the hell is wrong with this grammar in your sentences?
@@ChristopherCudworthPtolemy I named both of his sons Ptolemy. So this definitely happened at that time as well, especially in the Hellenistic world that the Moabites were rebelling against and thus were obviously contemporaneous with.
If John Baptist said Jesus is the great one everybody was waiting for... then how come there were two separate groups; Jesus and his disciples while there was John and HIS disciples. How was it that John did not step down and hand over his followers to Jesus?
Seriously? They would've worshipped Moses' bones if they'd have found them, they were a very superstitious people, for lack of a better term, that would follow anyone exhibiting any type of Supernatural knowledge.
Actually, none of what you just said happened anyway because, hate to break it to you, Jebus wasn't real. He's made up, in your head, fake, fiction, created by man to control man, not a real person.
It really is that simple.
@@Fred-hk7wk Nobody cares what you don't believe.
@@termination9353 good for you. I just can't believe that in this day and age, with all the knowledge and experts we have, with how many times this stuff has been conclusively proven to be all lies, that people are still so gullible as to believe a 2000 + year old book, written by ancient, ignorant, uneducated primitives, to control more ignorant, uneducated primitives.
That basically means that anyone that still believes this garbage is 10 X dumber than anyone that lived over 2000 years ago. Hardly something to be proud of.
For the record, I was a Christian, until I was at an age where I was smart enough to figure out that it's all garbage, 10.
Spent the next 30 studying the Buybull and now know more than any Christian ever will.
Don't be a fool for life.
John the Baptist was pointing to the coming of the Messiah. He never said that he was the anointed one. Rather, his ministry was to remind the people that "one greatet than he" was coming. When Jesus came to John to be baptized, he said, "Behold, the Lamb of God." At that moment John understood that Jesus was now on the scene and that his duty to tell everyone about the coming Messiah was done. "He must increase and I must decrease. At this point, John's followers began following Jesus.
Great Content.
More important than knowing who is the brother of who is knowing that Jesus was 100% human and never claimed he was more than that.
The LORD JESUS CHRIST is GOD!! Scholars believe themselves to be smarter than GOD but they know nothing....God sits in the Heavens and laughs at them because they teach things they know nothing about.
@@SometimeAgo65You speak like you're God. How do you know God sits and laughs at anything?
@@mehere337 BECAUSE THE HOLY SCRIPTURE TELLS US THAT HE SITS IN THE HEAVENS AND LAUGHS 😁
@@SometimeAgo65 So... you're just repeating. It's not what you actually know.
@@mehere337 I don't understand what you're asking. How do I know? I know because the Holy Scripture tells us that God sits in the heavens and laughs. We laugh, don't we? We are created in HIS image. Also, I believe and I know. I just assume you don't believe. Why else would you ask that question? Do you want PROOF that GOD exists? Repent from your heart to HIM/JESUS CHRIST and CALL out to HIM. Read the scripture, fast and pray...talk to the LORD and you WILL receive your proof. I don't know what else to tell you. Receiving the HOLY SPIRIT is a GIFT from the LORD GOD.
robart graves spells out a very similar story in his book 'King Jesus'. recommended.
Best you tube video I've watched about Jesus family, and recommend everyone watch it twice, second time with a decent Bible. Kevin Hogan
Having a meditative experience of Christ makes you a brother of Christ.
They always say that celibacy is foreign to Judaism, but the Essenes were celibate and they were Jewish. I think it's only foreign to later Judaism, not to it as it was 2000 plus years ago.
Essenes were a Zoroastrian cult and Judaism was a created religion in 2Kings 17 by mixing Ashima/Hashem with the worship of Yahuah.
The God Culture has excellent research that proves it out
Celibacy is certainly foreign to the Old Testament. It was only Later Judaism (such as sects called Essenes) that had mixed with Zoroastrian and Buddhist monastic ideas that wanted to "purify" themselves by "doing one better" than avoiding the wife during her "monthly unclean time" by avoiding a wife at all... many Greco-Roman priestesses already did this and remaining virgin was seen as a "superpower" to a lot of lusting dummies.
@@lisakimbrell1406checked them out and he's claiming the garden of eden was in the Philippines. No surprise he has a Philippina wife. Pass
@@Baccanaso they don't "claim" anything. They literally PROVE IT.
Your loss ...
Mr. Tabor's opening comment that Jesus' statement "but he who is least in the Kingdom is greater than he" is easily and plainly reconciled. And, yes: Jesus said it. Why? Jesus tells you: "The law and the prophets were until John" (Luke 16:6). John the Baptist may have been the greatest prophet in the Old Testament where the Holy Ghost was external to all men, but Jesus represents the New Testament where even the least person has the Holy Ghost dwelling in them, making even the smallest Christian greater than any Old Testament prophet bound to ritual, sacrifices, and waiting on God. Surely, this is not that hard to figure out.
Actually, I think it's possible Jesus might have said that, but the reason his follow-up is reconcilable is not because of the new covenant replacing he old one or that Christian interpretation is superior to the Jewish one as you seem to imply. That's Pauline doctrine, and would not reflect Jesus' own teaching, which are still very committed to the law of Moses (remember, Jesus said he came not to abolish the law but to fulfill it; that is, he wasn't trying to say, like Paul, the Old Testament is no longer important, so much as he was trying to redirect people to the spiritual basis for the law).
The Holy Ghost has always dwelt among the righteous of Israel. It's an idea that goes back to the Old Testament called the Ru'ach hakodesh and has nothing to do with Trinitarianism which is definitely not Jewish. It can be understood as inspiration; God's inspiration, which John the Baptist and previous prophets would have been full of. You could say, in modern parlance, that it was the guiding consciousness that would see to it that God's will prevailed in the early (still entirely Jewish) Nazarene church.
. Jesus was living at a time when many Jews of different sects (including the Pharisees and Essenes, but not the Sadducees) believed that God's Kingdom was an immanent historical event that would put an end to the corrupt age full of all kinds of evils and hardships people had faced, from the Roman occupation, to inequality, to death and disease. It was a dualistic paradigm that may go back to the Zoroastrians during the Babylonian and Persian periods, that surely had an influence on inter-testamental Jewish thought.
The kingdom was essentially a restored Earth in which righteousness would prevail, and we would be given new bodies free from sickness and death..but only those who had shown themselves worthy of entrance would be given it; the rest would experience not life but eternal nonexistence - what is called the 'second death'. They would not be resurrected.
When Jesus says that whoever is least in the kingdom is greater than John, this has nothing to do with righteousness, or judging John not worthy of entrance. If that were the case (and John is the greatest person who ever lived) of course no one else would be in the kingdom. The greatness would be that of the restored form that the all of the resurrected righteous would have, John included.
Jesus was trying to inspire hope in how great things would soon be for those enduring the present hardships of the world. Following John, Jesus set out to prepare people for the kingdom. In order for them to enter heaven (which was not a celestial destination but an transformed Earth) heaven had to first enter them....hence the kingdom of heaven being within.
" Khalaf " in Arabic means the substitute , the heir or the descendant.
Always wondered what "Caliphate" referred/alluded to, in place of some word that would directly translate to "kingdom."
I have read the book; it was more sensible than some of these preachers, but it was unscientific. Right through the book, the author condemned John's Gospel as worthless -- until the last chapter, where John is the only Evangelist who supports him, and suddenly becomes the "fair-haired boy!" I am still wondering how an Unbeliever became the Head of a theological college.
Can someone please reply to this with the name of the book on the gospel of Thomas by April
I'm not sure what you are asking.
There are two gospels attributed to Thomas. The one is an obvious forgery that describes his early childhood. And in it he actually kills someone he didn't like.
The other is called the Gospel According to Thomas and is made up entirely of the sayings and teachings of Christ. And it is in this one that he names James to be the one to head the Church in Jerusalem.
Interesting lecture so I ordered the book.
Virgin, that time-period, mean's unzzwed not untouched.
Nazoreans: Keepers Of The Original Way
If Joseph had any living children when he died, levirate marriage would not have applied; in fact, Mary would have been forbidden to marry Joseph’s brother.
Galatians 1:19 - Adelphos -- ETYMOLOGY: from Delphus, from the womb -- DEFINITION: BROTHER. James was from the same womb as Jesus, at least according to the author of Galatians.
Mary had a sister called Mary? That would be stupid even in ancient times.
A Mary was a derogatory term the Romans used against them.
Really?
think of it as....the universal term 'brother' used to address men within the same tribe or close knit group. just as is women addressing each other as sister.
it is also common then and a bit still today in families of high status. e.g. - William,1st son usually William son of william/William junior/Jr., William II,then William III, William IIII. Then we have people like George Forman who named all of his children George. there are traditions where females/mothers do the same with female offspring. Most of this went on before surnames were inveted. it wS also common,still is a little,to name a child after a close relative had died before the birth of a new baby. another factor that gets deep...using names that a rabbi determines by means of kabbalah numerology names that fit the life/birth path according to time and date of birth. it's complex stuff until you study and know how it works. then it is silly easy and logical. numbers don't lie. adopted aliases also not uncommon...while Roman's were sussing out ' trouble makers'. kind of like how a lot of people hiding behind their computer screens today. there is an ancient saying...you always know who your mother is. it was treated as gospel in order to legally protect children of a marriage. it is still in law today in a lot of countries. should a husband go to war,for example,for 4 years,and come home to a baby of his wife that is a year old. it was taken forgranted wife hade been raped. husband would raise child as his own and it just wasn't talked about,just understood. OK. I'll hush up now. 😊
There were two brothers that went to my high school that were both named kendrick.
Also mary of clopas is not said to be mary's sister in the Bible, only in the apocryphal infancy gospel of Matthew written in the 7th century.
There is another apocryphal gospel, Phillip that says she is his sister: "...His sister and his mother and his companion were each a Mary...."
Where is the rest of the video?
??
Galatians 1:18 Paul stayed with Peter for 15 days in that time he he said he only saw James the Lord's brother.
Im not sure where you're getting that Paul never went Peter.
Thank you…
Jesus accended to heaven and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. If you want to understand the Bible you should read it or listen to a audio version of it if you can't read and ask Jesus to help you understand it.
For the record and just so we know, dynasties and royal families will perish.
Jesus was the One that showed us that the kingdom to come is the kingdom that matters.
Earthly education and all it contains are temporary .
I’m not Catholic, yet he brought children into the marriage, he was Holy..but a very righteous man. I love Joseph as a man.
There is ,in later roman writings documentation that jesus family descendants,were still alive living in galillee,about 60 years on from the crucifixion they are questioned and released being poor farmers but later on they are again called and executed by the roman emperor ,so it was dangerous to be associated with Jesus's family and no doubt his family would have gone into hiding,rather than face death.
Or did they go to Spain. James was tricked into returning to Jerusalem and was murdered by the high priest.
Anyone got the handout to share?
This is all very interesting. I'm beginning to put this together; it seems there are multiple sources that state Thomas, was "didymos," (twin) to the Lord. So apparently Jesus had a twin brother. I'm pulling this directly from Professor Hugh Montomery's book, The God-Kings of Outremer. He is citing the Abdius Manuscript, as well as Nag Hamadi books, i.e., The Gospel of Thomas. If the Gospel of Thomas can be trusted ("Thomas wrote it down"), it means Jesus' twin could write, which means they probably both received some education in their early years.
I’ve never heard of that theory before.
Matthew 13:55
55 "Isn't this the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother's name Mary, and aren't his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas?
Joseph did not die young. The false narrative - Mary as virgin; Jesus as God - required virginity and getting rid of Joseph and Jesus’ siblings. They even renamed Joseph as Joseph of Arimithea. Jesus was put in his father’s tomb.
Yeah this dude was overcomplicating things when there are other texts giving evidence that they're all Joseph's children
Awesome analysis! So how is it that after 2,000 years we haven't convened a group of scholars to straighten out the Holy Writ?
If the Bible was written with God's finger, interfering with the received text is not allowed.
@@douglaidlaw740 There are many multiple different "Bible" cannons. Not to mention the "editions" of each one which slightly twist the meaning of certain things as the publishers see fit.
One word; one place; the reason it was obfuscated to begin with; Rome.
@@douglaidlaw740I would agree with that if you were only speaking of the TaNaKh...
Would the Apostles mention the re marriage of Mary if she did?
This man is like the Columbo of Christianity. . I would like some other opinions on this theory to speak up. Scholars not theologians. Theologians always back the church of Rome over the Jerusalem church on faith. Luke Acts is a cleaner theology than the slightly later ones of the four primary gospels that split up the early Church. Scholarship has less bias in my opinion. Even today it is not clear that Christianity has a unity, a consensus on doctrine. Even within say Baptist followers it is not uncommon for ministers to call each other out. Televangelists seem to be the biggest targets but authors, famous people except Trump oddly enough, tend to mix it up. Some of this war rages even here on CZcams which I love to see!
This is super interesting to me. It seems as though the earliest Christian’s shied away from the concepts of succession that we are all familiar with. And, instead transferred succession in a manner that looked much more like the manner in which the Saudi Crown traveled-laterally from the eldest brother to the next and then the next. Only at the expiration of the youngest brothers reign, would the throne or chair pass to the next generation in the accession of the son of the eldest brother. The throne would then pass through all of his sons-brother to brother-until they all expired.
What’s interesting here is that this method is consistent with the geography and culture of the area at the time.
Interestingly enough, this method of succession provides a different type of continuity. It ensures that eligibly favored elders, most of whom walked with Christ to be at the top of the heap-so to speak-of eligibility.
The method of succession that is being described is quite consistent with the tradition and manner of inheritance of that time.
The western/European tradition of male primogeniture is precisely that! A European rendition of succession.
This all checks out quite neatly. And while not perfect, it is the most concise, historically consistent and well dissected theory that I’ve seen as of yet.
As a Roman Catholic, it disputes and disrupts a great deal of what I believed prior. But facts are stubborn things. And I have to acknowledge the facts as they are uncovered.
The interesting thing though… despite the challenges to what I believed prior, my faith in the core principles of Christianity remain unshaken.
James Tabor piqued my interest during his contributions to a documentary that chronicled the discovery of what I now beleive to be the tomb of the family of a Jesus Christ.
If you haven’t seen it, please watch it. The likeliness that this is in fact the tomb of the family of Christ is beyond possible. In fact, statistically speaking, it is thousands of time more likely to be the tomb than it is unlikely. And they explain the math to you in the simplest of terms. It’s virtually impossible that the tomb discovered was not the tomb of Christ’s family…
The work these guys are doing is remarkable.
A good hypothesis will be that Jesus after is resurrection (and/or nde), continued courageously his mission until his death, and that he, his children and his family were well protected by the apostles and near disciples. He has probably seen his son and great son as successors on his throne.
Extraordinary
I have researched religion and spirituality for decades. It has always been a passion and watching this lecture adds to my research and I thank Dr. Tabor. I just recently found out through a separate genealogy researcher I am a descendant of the Davidian branch. On my maternal side we have many ancestors in the French Royal family among others royal members. While some of my family are not particularly spiritual beyond the traditional church attendance, I was actually raised in the Anabaptist branch. It would appear you continue to assemble the truth all though out your life. It never really concludes unless you choose to give up.
Just bought 2 of his books today.
I have no way to prove it, no way to know for sure, but, as far as I know, one way or another, this is my family.
Ive seen agatha traslated into English as "just," so that first makes me wonder about whether James is just or good. Abd second, heaven and earth came into being for Adam and Eve in their first state as having a conversational relationship relationship with God. The whole point of the way is a return to that relationship.
The La Sagrada Familia in Barcelona, is the church related to the history of the Jesus family? I know family is different from a dynasty. But the name of the church is very unique.
Revelation 14:12
King James Version
12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.
During his time on earth, Jesus would have asked to state or write the year he was born.
What would be his responce?
While I respect James Tabor and believe he is doing valuable work when it comes to the study and teachings on the DSS and non-canonical writings, I feel compelled to argue against at least one point he makes in the video. And as well, share some information that he has not considered.
Regarding John the Baptist. Christ said what he did about him because John was the Righteous Teacher that the Essenes were waiting for him. So he was indeed more than a prophet.
Regarding James. It is true that we find in the Gospel According to Thomas that Christ named his half brother to be the head of the Church in Jerusalem. And this is important. But what Mr. Tabor failed neglected to mention is that all 3 are said to be priests. And this is very important. Because the DSS state the Yahad would be established by way of 3 priests and 12 laymen.
This then is why Christ chose 12 laymen to be his inner circle. Then what we see is that all 3 priests come from the same family.
For John the Baptist was the 1st priest that was the voice in the wilderness who ushered in the Messiah.
Christ was the 2nd priest and the high priest in the order of Melchezedek. And James was the 3rd priest that was the head of the Church after Christ went to be with his Father in Heaven.
Regarding the brothers and sisters of Christ. The Protevangelion (Gospel of James) tells us Joseph was an old many with children. And as a widower married Marry. So I will go with this very clear teaching from a writing that I consider to be inspired.
Additionally, the prophecy of 3 priests and 12 laymen establishing the Yahad described in the DSS is based on a prophecy and vision described in the Book of the words of Gad the seer. For in that prophecy/vision we see Yahweh placing a crown on the head of a lamb, who we know today to be the Christ, and Son of God. That crown is then described as being made up of 3 shepherds that were connected by 12 chains made of gold and coated in silver.
The 12 chains are clearly the 12 laymen chosen by the lamb to be his apostles. And the 3 shepherds are the 3 priests described in the Essene prophecy. And we now know the 3 shepherds/priests come from the same family (John the Baptist, Yahshua, and James the half/step brother of Christ).
It doesn't really matter. Xtianity is pure pagan idolatry created by the Romans. There is no eyewitness testimony of Jesus and no documents by Jesus either. There is 0 evidence of his existence or the whole scenario written in the xtian writings.
GOD Bless the Child
Why does Jesus say to Peter that he will be the rock that he builds his tempel on and suddenly he's not mentioned at all?
❤️🙏
If they were looking for a descendant of David to keep the throne line going, they're wating their time. Jesus is alive and well.
The brothers in Acts 1:14 could be a reference to brothers in the sense of being disciples. To be sure, Luke talks about a hundred brothers in the very next line of scripture.
yeah i agree
this is why many scholars discredit tabor. he sometimes glosses over things that should be noted, like your example
I’m no expert, but Luke went to a great deal of effort to downplay James, and only mentioned him when it was necessary. It’s so hard to know exactly what is meant - but honestly, “hundreds of brothers” does indeed signify a brotherhood or group - a specific meaning. And yet he says “brother” right before? Why list both descriptions if he means only “brotherhood”? I think he’s talking about Jesus’ brother, and also a brotherhood of like minded individuals. I’m babbling, I know, and I’m being as clear as mud, but I’m trying to understand.
I just reread Acts 1:14, and Luke is definitely talking about Jesus’s actual brothers. He lists the disciples, then Mary, Jesus’s mother and then says Jesus’s brothers also - Jesus’s family. In the next verse he’s talking about speaking to a group of “brothers and sisters,” or a congregation. I think it’s very clear.
@@krbailess you can’t prove it’s his brothers. I can’t prove it’s not his brothers. And that’s why it’s still so mysterious and intriguing two thousand years later!
Very interesting, never heard of Hegesippus before
Barnabas is much more important to the written New Testament than is commonly known, but it there for all to see.
Why is he much more important?
@@gilroyopinion because of his influence on and involvement in the lives of Mark and Saul (Paul), and indirectly Luke.
It's interesting that Mary, the mother of Jesus and Elizabeth, the mother of John the Baptist, were both artificially impregnated. And that Jesus, by his own admission looked up to John as his teacher. The Knights Templer were persecuted for praying to John instead of Jesus.
Does this say anything about Jesus sisters and where did they ever go?
🕊I ALSO LAYED IN BED AND HEARD A FLUTE BEING PLAYED DOWN THE HALL.
🕊ALSO LAYED IN BED TO SLEEP AND I HAD MY EYEBALLS PINNED LIKE TO THE CEILING. AS I COULD NOT CLOSE MY EYES.
✝️🌹🕊GOD BLESS ALL
Fascinating, amazing, never been done before
“Mary” Was a title for a priestess
No, it was the name for a human sacrifice. Meriah.
"mary" means _to rebel_
Nonsense. All of the Marys in antiquity couldn't have been priestesses.
The earlier it is forgotten the better