Know More News - Adam Green - The SHOCKING Truth About the Hebrew Scriptures | Know More News w/ Adam Green feat. Gnostic Informant

All Episodes

Previous Next

Jan. 30, 2025 - Know More News - Adam Green

01:36:49

The SHOCKING Truth About the Hebrew Scriptures | Know More News w/ Adam Green feat. Gnostic Informant

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	George Orwell famously wrote in his book 1984, Who Controls the Past Controls the Future, and Who Controls the Present Controls the Past.
	The three Abrahamic religions, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, all share a history, a version of the past found in the Hebrew scriptures.
	And joining me today, January 29th, 2025, got a huge guest from over on YouTube.
	He has been interviewing all the top scholars.
	He has been dropping all the top documentaries, and he has been exposing the fictional origins and fabricated Hebrew scriptures.
	And we're going to go, he's going to share with us a great deep dive into why the Torah, the Old Testament, the Tanakh is basically fake.
	Neil, Gnostic Informant, what's up, man?
	Thanks for being here again.
	Man, I'm excited for this.
	The last one was a good time.
	We talked about Christmas stuff.
	But this is a way better.
	This is a way more important topic, I think.
	Yep, yeah.
	Well, that was Christmas time, though, but this is really your fourth.
	You've been specializing in that too, the pagan parallels and the Christmas pre-holidays before Christianity, but this is the big one, your favorite topic, your obsessive topic, basically, at the moment.
	So if you're just like meeting somebody for the first time and you're trying to explain the Torah is fake, what's like your first go-to thing?
	Okay, good question.
	Because we presuppose, most people actually, I shouldn't say we all, but we most people presuppose that Israel was this place where people practiced Judaism for like centuries.
	Some people even say all the way back to the Bronze Age, by the time of Moses, he laid down the Torah.
	And this little region of the world that we call Judea, the southern kingdom, and Israel, the northern kingdom, was always, they were just, they were Jewish.
	They're Jews.
	So they're Jewish.
	But then you actually look at the actual history of the sources, the primary text, the archaeology, and you find out what they say about themselves is actually shocking.
	And I'll just kind of, I'm going to sort of jump around a little bit, but I want to go to like the smoking gun just off the bat.
	I just want to like hit us with the first thing, the first thing that destroys it.
	So when Israel was conquered by the Assyrians in the sixth century BCE, this would be after the time of the prophets.
	This would be after Moses, obviously.
	This is after David and Solomon.
	The Old Testament is almost complete at that point in time.
	The only books that you don't have yet is like Zechariah and Nehemiah, Daniel, and some other stuff that comes in post-Babylon stuff.
	So there's a few texts that aren't written yet, according to the tradition.
	So what happens at that time is a lot of like thousands, millions, I think, Jews, they flee Jerusalem and Israel and they go into Egypt because they don't want to get taken to Babylon.
	This happens.
	And they set up a colony, an Elephantine Island, which is all the way to the southern border of Egypt, all the way down near like Sudan.
	Very far down.
	But they get there.
	So between 597 and 586, roughly a decade, they're traveling there and setting up their own.
	They set up a temple of Yahweh there.
	And they call themselves Yahudai, Jews.
	They call themselves Jews.
	They're not just random people that I'm just associating with Jews.
	They called it there.
	We are Jews from Jerusalem.
	Okay.
	So what does that tell us then?
	Now we have a time capsule from 597 to 586-ish, all the way down until they get freed basically by Cyrus, which technically is a historical true event.
	Cyrus did technically let the Jews go back to Israel.
	Anyways, long story short, for almost two centuries, over a century and a half, 175 years, give or take, they are living in Elephantine, and they are writing texts on papyri with Aramaic.
	They are writing letters to other cities, like Jerusalem is one of these cities that they write to.
	And they tell us a lot about themselves.
	So now, here's the question.
	You would expect, well, as I mentioned, this is long after Moses, long after David, long after Isaiah and most of the prophets.
	Long after when we're told they existed.
	Right.
	By this point in time period, they're Jews.
	We would expect to find Psalms, Proverbs, maybe some verses of the Torah, maybe some variants.
	Maybe there's some different versions of the Torah.
	Maybe there's a different story about Moses that we never heard of yet.
	Maybe they have a whole different story about Abraham.
	Maybe they have a different flood myth that we haven't found.
	But guess what we actually find through that whole 200-year period?
	Zero.
	Shocked archaeologist.
	This has been so this for some reason recently excavated in the last hundred years or so.
	But are they just now like translating all of it and realizing like, hey, this is all Torah here?
	A lot of this stuff is cutting edge.
	They're still translating text.
	People are still working on this stuff.
	They're still looking.
	They're still digging spots out.
	So are the scholars that you've been interviewing, are they like the first to actually publish stuff?
	They are the first to publish.
	So you have Gad Barnea, you have Yanatin Adler.
	Russell Gemurkin isn't like an archaeologist.
	He's never been there or anything.
	Gad Barnett has been there.
	He went there himself and he's worked on.
	But Russell Gemurkin has been, he's noticed this for decades.
	He's been writing peer-reviewed books, publishing them through peer-review.
	He's doing the peer-review process, not just some random guy writing in his basement.
	He's been writing on this for decades now.
	It's saying, this is a red flag.
	I don't think Judaism is as old as we think it is.
	Was he writing on the Elephantine documents or was he just like looking at the Torah and seeing that he believed it was 270 BC in Alexandria that it was written?
	Yeah, well, he's doing a couple of things.
	He's looking at him.
	He talks about Elephantine a lot, but he also, but it's not just Elephantine.
	I want people to realize this.
	Elephantine is a big deal because it's a perfect time capsule.
	Like, we don't have any, we can't, like, there's no question of when these texts are written.
	It's either between 597 or 410.
	That's when they get out.
	That's when around 410, 400 is when they get out of Elephantine and go back to Jerusalem for good.
	And they stop living there.
	But anyways, the Elephantine, the only reason why I bring up Elephantine by itself before I even talk about Judea or Babylon is because it's a perfect time capsule.
	There's no question.
	None of these texts can be before or after.
	So we have like a, it's the perfect like test study.
	Like you can't, there's nothing you can do to say like, oh, they wouldn't have known or they would have not.
	No, they came from Jerusalem after the sixth century BCE, long after the supposed religion should have should have took root.
	By the way, Josiah, the Bible even says Josiah made reforms.
	Josiah's reforms happened before Elephantine.
	That means Josiah, Josiah's reforms.
	How did that happen?
	No one even knows about the Torah, but he's making reforms saying you can't worship Asherah or Baal or put up poles anymore.
	Why is he telling people this?
	They don't even know what the Torah is.
	So Elephantine, there's not a single text.
	We have thousands of papyri.
	We have inscriptions on rock.
	We have all sorts of like pottery they found with inscriptions on it.
	It adds up to the thousands, thousands, not hundreds, thousands.
	And there's not one mention of Abraham, not one mention of Moses, not one mention of Noah, not one mention of even David isn't getting mentioned, or Solomon's not mentioned.
	What is being mentioned?
	So they worship Yahweh, but it's not, it's not monotheistic.
	Yahweh is sort of like they had Hansho with other gods underneath them.
	They're polytheists like everyone else at the time.
	Sort of like Zeus is the head Hansho and all the other gods.
	Their Yahweh is like the Greek Zeus at that point in time.
	The whole monotheistic thing, that's way later.
	That comes after Zoroastrians and Platonists sort of changed the game a little bit.
	Plato comes along and says, no, there's a one.
	He calls it the one who's the perfect and good and all-knowing and the creator, the demiurge.
	Zoroaster had a similar idea, but he was, his is more dualistic.
	There's Anger Manu and Hora Manza.
	Anyways, in Elephantine, what you find there is nothing to do with Judaism.
	There's no Torah.
	There's no laws.
	They're eating pork.
	So they're eating.
	We have sources about them making pork and eating pork.
	They're actually not doing circumcision.
	Only the Egyptians are doing circumcision.
	The Jews aren't.
	Isn't that weird?
	You were thinking it's the other way around.
	They're not doing circumcision.
	There's no Sabbath laws, nothing like that.
	And when are these texts dated to?
	597 to 410, roughly.
	So there's no Judaism, basically.
	No Judaism.
	There's no mention of the Torah.
	There's no mention of Moses.
	There's no mention of, I already mentioned Abraham.
	They don't talk about any of the prophets.
	There's no Psalms.
	There's no Proverbs.
	There's nothing.
	Zero.
	They thought they found a Passover letter.
	Now, let's talk about that real quick.
	They found a letter that they thought mentioned the Passover.
	For a while, this was published as like the, oh, we found one thing.
	We found the Passover.
	It's mentioned.
	But here's the thing about that one.
	Even if that one does mention the Passover, that one's dated to 410.
	And guess what's being, guess what they're talking about?
	As if it's the first time they've ever heard of it.
	They're getting a letter from Jerusalem telling them to practice some sort of Pesach.
	Now, Gad Barnea came along and said, we don't even know if this could have been a different kind of Pesach because there was a, this is during the Persian period, and the Persians had their own, had their own festival during this week, which was very similar to the Passover.
	They even have like a sacrifice of a, they have a sacrifice.
	They have a Betsin table with an egg on it, and they eat flatbread just like the Passover does.
	So he thinks it comes from the Persians, but here's the thing.
	That letter.
	Did it say unleavened bread?
	So they had unleavened bread, but it wasn't connected.
	Okay, just this letter is this letter doesn't even say anything about bread.
	This letter tells them to drink some sort of sacred beverage during the Pesach, and it's teaching them about the Pesach for the first time.
	They don't even know what this is.
	So this is like a smoking gun in 410 BC.
	They're just learning about Passover.
	So they don't have the Exodus Passover story.
	That's what I'm saying.
	It's not from the Exodus.
	And that's another thing, the Exodus.
	That's a huge claim.
	Millions of people leaving a country.
	That's easily going to be found in the archaeology, in the primary source records.
	There's not a mention at all.
	And any of the Egyptians got better records than anybody.
	The Egyptians wrote their records on their walls.
	You could go into a temple and there's hieroglyphics on the wall telling you exactly how the temple was built, by who, what year.
	Their record keeping was amazing.
	There's nothing about an Exodus.
	There's nothing about Moses.
	There's nothing about Jews or Hebrews.
	It's only there's only a Hyksos people.
	They're Semitic.
	We can say that.
	But they were rulers.
	They weren't slaves.
	They were rulers that were deposed.
	And this happens 200 years before the so-called Exodus.
	200 years is a long time.
	That's like from now between us and the American Revolution almost.
	You know what I mean?
	That's like, that's not the same thing.
	But anyways, I wanted to go back to the Elephantine thing because that's shocking that there's no, there's no evidence of Judaism in that time period at all.
	They don't even know about it.
	Even if they were, even if they were apostates, even if they're apostles.
	Dog okay?
	Is your dog attacking you?
	Show that dog.
	You got the cutest dog ever, can you?
	It kind of looks like a Boston Terrier.
	Yeah.
	But anyway, so it's not just Elephantine, though.
	This is because this has raised questions, but what else do we have?
	Elephantine doesn't have any mentions of the Torah.
	And then people start thinking about it.
	Wait a minute.
	The Meshastele mentions David.
	That's not the Torah.
	David, remember, David comes in Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles.
	David's not mentioned in Exodus or the Torah.
	The Torah is the first five books of Moses.
	It's Genesis, Exodus, Deuteronomy, and Numbers and Leviticus.
	There's no David in there.
	So it's like, wait a minute.
	Okay, so we have David being mentioned, the Meshasteli.
	That dates to 800 BCE.
	Now he's not, that's not in the Torah.
	Okay, so that's one thing.
	Then it's like, oh, wait a minute.
	None of the inscriptions at all.
	None of the inscriptions at all mention anyone from the Torah.
	There's no mention of Moses, Abraham, Noah, or anyone from the anyone from the first five books of Moses in any single inscription before the Hellenistic period before around 300 BC.
	So there's nothing that's ever been found in archaeology.
	Nothing.
	That talks about any of the Torah until Hellenistic age.
	So 300 BC.
	I don't mean like I disagree with these findings.
	There is zero.
	Zilch, nothing.
	Hard data, zero.
	And there is mentions of the kings, like Hezekiah is mentioned, David's mentioned, House of David's on the Meshesteli.
	There's mentions of, so the kingdom of Israel is a real place.
	I'm not saying, didn't they find some type of stone or something that said David on it as well?
	House of David, yeah.
	Meshes.
	It's real old.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	800 BC-ish.
	But it was nowhere as big as they claim.
	It was nothing that they claim.
	That's another thing.
	Israel Fincostines, an archaeologist from Haifa University.
	He's dug up.
	He's been digging up ancient sites for the last 30, 40 years.
	And he says, they're really, this kingdom of Israel that we thought of, that thought we thought was grand and big, is really just a backwater.
	It was like a little tiny satrap of whoever the ruling class was.
	They were just like a little trading post.
	And he says they didn't even have writing until after the ninth, around 800 BC, when we find the Meshostel.
	That's when they start writing for the first time.
	They were illiterate before that.
	So they're not like a player in the game of like between the Assyrians and the Hittites and the Egyptians.
	They're nothing.
	They're not like, they're just like some little backwater that's like getting tossed around like a volleyball.
	But yeah, so we have archaeology from Babylon where they lived in Babylon.
	They lived in Jerusalem.
	They lived in the northern kingdom of Samaria and Jezreel.
	And as well as Elephantine.
	And if you took all of the archaeological data, all the papyri scrolls, all the physical things we could touch with our hand and say, what part, how much of this even has knowledge of the Torah?
	Zero.
	And the first person in record to ever mention Moses or Abraham is a Greek named Hecataeus of Abdera.
	He's the first person to, and we lost his original text, but we have them in fragments.
	Josephus quotes them.
	And when Josephus quotes them, he says he's writing and like he's telling the reader, there's a reason why you haven't heard of these people yet, because their laws are so holy that they stayed hidden until the time was right or something.
	And you're just, and you can look at that and go, wait, this sounds like, it sounds like it's all being made up around this time.
	So Gemurkin is one of these people who said the Torah, the original Hebrew Bible, was probably written a decade or so before the translation of the Septuagint, the Greek Hebrew Bible.
	So it's like you don't have a long time in between when the Hebrew Bible's written down, probably around 300-ish or completed, I should say.
	They probably had sources that they're using that are older.
	But when they're writing the text that we know today as the Old Testament, that's a product that's finished around 300-ish BC.
	And then so the honesty.
	I believe it was that it was packaged together in Alexandria also.
	Yeah.
	That's what Gemerkin thinks.
	That's what Gabbarnea thinks.
	That's what a lot of people.
	I saw your interview with Gad Barnea.
	Because where else would you have all this information to write a text like this?
	Yeah, he says that the Library of Alexandria is like what triggered the creation of the Torah and then the Septuagint.
	Because that's the only place possible where you're going to have sources in Aramaic from the Persians.
	Because the Persians, before the Greeks had control of Egypt, the Persians were controlling Egypt.
	So they had control of all the libraries.
	There's probably tons of Aramaic, Babylonian, Assyrian, Hebrew text laying around in this library.
	So when you look at the look at Genesis, Bruce Loudoun is, he died a couple years ago.
	He was this scholar who wrote about Greek mythology influencing the Old Testament, not just the New Testament.
	He talks about, there's a, he pointed out to me that there's a, um, there's a story in the, in, in Homer.
	It's, it's one of the Homeric texts.
	Um, it's about, it's, it's about the daughter of King Agamemnon, Iphigenia.
	And so King Agamemnon is told by the prophet Carisius that he has to sacrifice to find the omen, to get the omen, to know if he should sack Troy or not.
	It's just the way the text is written.
	So he gets told, he gets told by the prophet that Zeus says that in order for you to get the good green light to go sack Troy, you have to sacrifice your only daughter, Iphigenia.
	So what does he do?
	He takes his only daughter, Iphigenia.
	He takes her up on a mountain.
	She goes willingly.
	What does that remind you of?
	She goes willingly to her sacrifice.
	He ties her up on a pyre and is about to slice her throat.
	And then all of a sudden, a messenger, which is Angelos, angel, a messenger of the goddess Artemis shows up and stops him.
	And then in a blink of an eye, Iphigenia is transported to the temple of Artemis.
	And she becomes, and then, so then what happens?
	Artemis replaces the sacrifice with a deer.
	What does that remind you of?
	Esau, or I'm sorry, Jacob's sacrifice, binding of Jacob.
	Jacob and Isaac.
	Isaac.
	It's the same story.
	It's the same story, except instead of a ram getting replaced with the, it's a, it's a deer.
	But the reason why it's because Artemis' sacred animal is a deer.
	So it's more, it's more specific to Artemis.
	Whereas in the Jews are taking this story and they're rewriting it for their audience.
	You also have other examples of that.
	Noah's Ark story.
	You find tons of stories, not just the Babylonian Anuma Elish or the epic of Yilgamesh, but also Berossus and Manetho have their own versions of this flood story where there's a prophet who is told by God to build a boat and take his family and animals on there.
	And then right at the last, after 40 days or however long, some of the stories vary on the time period, he lets off a dove and a raven.
	Very specific.
	That's not just like some, that's not like some thing that, oh, there's different flood stories and they're all different.
	No, it's very specific.
	He lets off a dove and a raven, and then he knows that it's time to land.
	That happens in other stories that Hebrew Bible is borrowing from.
	So we know that they're using sources to put together this text.
	But here's another crazy part that adds a whole other layer.
	It throws a whole wrench in this whole thing.
	Jonathan Adler recently published a book called The Origins of Judaism.
	And he found that in the archaeological record and the source materials that we have, there is zero evidence.
	This is what he says.
	There is zero evidence of any king or rule of judges in Israel that is enforcing the Torah until the Maccabean period In the 160s BC.
	So that means the Torah, we think of Jerusalem and Israel as this place where they were law-abiding, Torah-observant people for all the way back until Moses, right?
	We think of them as like the pagans are over here in Greece and Italy and Egypt.
	And then the Jews are over there and they're separated from everybody.
	And they practice the Torah over there.
	So even before Moses with Abraham, they were circumcising.
	Like that's kind of like the first Jews.
	And there's also no evidence of Abraham too, the papers.
	Another thing, Genesis has stories about Abraham winning wars in Syria, winning major wars over cities and land that he wins.
	And he becomes like he wins these territories through war.
	Now, that's a claim.
	When you say there's a war that happened, you can find that.
	Every single war that's been written about in history has been found in the archaeology.
	And if it hasn't been found, it's a myth.
	It's a myth.
	Even Troy has been found.
	We know the Trojan War even happened.
	There is no sources, no archaeology, zero, nothing about Abraham doing any of these things for 175 years, it says in the text.
	He lived for 175 years fighting wars in Syria and Lebanon and Aram or where the Armenians are.
	He was fighting wars in those regions, and there's zero evidence for this.
	There's not a single text, not a single inscription, nothing in the archaeology that indicates that this actually happened.
	Nothing.
	There's no mentions of the Babylonians that mention Abraham.
	There's no Assyrian records of Abraham.
	There's no Hittite records of Abraham.
	There's no Mitanni records of Abraham.
	Nobody knows who Abraham is.
	The Egyptians don't mention Abraham.
	He goes to Egypt in the story.
	They don't mention him.
	It's not a real person.
	It's made up.
	His name means father of nations.
	That should tell.
	It's a fable.
	And that's another thing.
	The characters' names in the Old Testament, they all have some, their names all signify what they're doing in the story.
	That's the number one sign of a fable.
	And so, to go back to Jansen Adler, what he was saying was before the Maccabean period, they were not circumcising still, all the way up until 1600 BC.
	They were eating pork still.
	We have evidence of them having, we found like pork and the remains of archaeological digs and pottery and stuff.
	They're eating pork.
	Porks next to Yamakas.
	Right.
	No, no Yamakas, though.
	I know.
	No synagogue.
	I'm glad you mentioned that.
	There's no synagogues in the archaeological record until after 175.
	The oldest synagogue is like 175 BC.
	There's no synagogues before the second century BC.
	Zero.
	Not one.
	And so what is he's conclusion was, and let me just share my screen real quick.
	I want to show one thing.
	So actually, I want to show two things.
	So here's, this is a famous coin that was minted in Athens.
	It's Athena.
	It's Athena on the left and her famous owl with the olive branch.
	Those are pagan symbols of Athena.
	Well, it's interesting that, let me stop this for a second and share one more.
	We found in the archaeology of Jerusalem from the same century.
	Look what they're doing.
	They are minting coins with the same owl with Athena's head on it in Jerusalem.
	That destroys the first and three commandments, having no graven images or no other gods.
	They're minting images, graven images on coins.
	They're touching everyone's.
	There's gods in Jerusalem.
	In Jerusalem.
	And there's also a coin with Zeus on it.
	They have Zeus on it.
	Isn't the Jews doing that?
	Or was that like the Greeks were there also?
	This is before the Hellenistic period.
	This is the 5th century BCE.
	Okay.
	So this is a perfect time period.
	They are freed by the Persians.
	This is after Cyrus and before Alexander.
	So we're in that juicy range where they have their land back.
	They can do whatever they want.
	This is 450 BC.
	They're in control.
	This is the time of Zechariah.
	This is when Zechariah was writing, 450 BC.
	And they're minting coins.
	They're minting coins with pagan gods on them.
	There's no Judaism yet.
	Judaism does not exist.
	Hold on, though, but couldn't some Greeks just be dropped some coins or something in that area?
	They're in Aramaic.
	They're Hebrew.
	Okay.
	So the Greek coins have Greek on it.
	Those coins are minted.
	And we have thousands of them.
	So it wasn't just a couple that we found.
	Gotcha.
	Thousands of these have been found.
	Thousands.
	And they're minted in Jerusalem with Hebrew on them.
	Hebrew writing.
	And some of them have names.
	Some of them have names of the high priest on them.
	Okay.
	So there's high priests in Jerusalem that are minting coins with pagan gods on them, which means they're not.
	So they have a priesthood.
	They have a kingdom.
	Israel's real.
	But their religion was not what we think of it as today.
	Let me see if I can find the one that has the high priest on it.
	But yeah.
	So in Eleventine, they don't have anything of the Torah.
	That means no Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, no Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, no Noah, no Moses in the Exodus.
	None of that.
	And let's get real, guys.
	If Christianity is not real, if Exodus isn't real, can we agree on that?
	And if Exodus were real and the 10 plagues really happened and nobody in Egypt wrote about it, if that were true, and this is speaking to the Christians and the believers out there, if Exodus were true, all of Egypt would have converted and worshipped the God of Israel and it would have been written about somewhere, but it's written about nowhere because it's completely made up only around 300-275 BC.
	Right.
	Like who can argue with that?
	Like there is no proof.
	If Exodus were real, all these crazy plagues, everybody in Egypt would have worshipped the God of the Hebrews if that were true.
	And it didn't happen.
	Not only did that not happen, but nothing's written about it.
	Obviously made up and fake.
	The whole foundation is fake.
	And then it makes you go.
	So I've heard people say this before.
	I've heard like, I think I've heard Jim Bob say this, and I heard Andrew Wilson say this.
	And he's asked, why do you think your religion is true and the other ones aren't?
	And they say something like, because we have an apostolic succession.
	And like, I personally can pick holes in the apostolic succession.
	I think there's some, it's a little more, it's not as black and white as you think as far as going back to Jesus himself to like the time of Constantine, for example, the Council of Nicaea.
	Let's grant it.
	It could be a Peter.
	There was a Peter that probably Christian Rome.
	Let me say what you're about to say because I agree with you.
	I even think there probably might be some truth to it, though.
	Like there might be, there is some sort of a jagged line that goes back.
	Let's say, let's just grant that it's true.
	Let's grant that there is from the time of Peter All the way down to the Council of Nicaea, you have a straight line of teachers and students.
	You see, they made those up.
	If they had gaps, they'd make them up, or they could have.
	I don't know.
	I wouldn't say they're all fabricated because we know Christianity existed.
	Right, but my point is this, though.
	My point is this.
	Even if I granted that, let's say there's a straight line from Peter, from Jesus to Peter, all the way to the Council of Nicaea.
	What is Jesus fulfilling?
	A fake prophecy from a fake religion that has no proof that it even was even practiced until 160 BC.
	And there's no Abraham or Noah or Moses or anyone.
	Who cares?
	It's all made by Daniel with bigger forgery, too.
	Some guy got pinned to a cross, and everybody was going crazy over it.
	And we're what?
	That's what you think?
	Apostolic succession?
	To what?
	To nowhere.
	It was the first apostles that invented him, James and Peter.
	And Paul, that's who I would say.
	Because nobody really thinks that there wasn't a Peter or a Cephas.
	Cephas or Cephas?
	I've heard both.
	Cephas.
	I've heard both.
	It means rock in Aramaic.
	Cephas is what I usually say.
	But I've also heard Cephas.
	Kephas, yeah.
	Petrus.
	Oh, yeah, so Petros means rock in Greek.
	That's why Peter.
	You know, in the total theeshu, the secret life of Jesus, the Jewish secret life of Jesus, they say that Simon Kepha Peter was a double agent that took Messianic Judaism out of Judaism and like paganized it and like took it to Rome with Paul.
	Yeah, that's what they say.
	Right.
	But no, what's interesting about that is the Old Testament is doing the same thing the New Testament is doing.
	It's taking pagan ideas, it's taking regular, normal, local religious stuff, and it's sort of personalizing it for a new audience, which is Jerusalem.
	So it's probably written sometime.
	There's probably sources that go back to 5th, 6th century BC.
	I'm not doubting that.
	But by the time it gets to the 3rd century BCE, when there's a whole population of Jews living in Alexandria that are in connection with Jerusalem, now you have the opportunity to put together a real actual text that's going to last when it has philosophical, it's philosophically informed.
	You got the history text, you got chronicles, you got you now.
	That's why I think it gets finalized and puts together as the text that we have today.
	And it's written around the third century BCE, but it's not, it doesn't take root, as it said, it doesn't become like the official religion until like 160 BC.
	So we're only 160 years before Jesus when there's a thing called Judaism that exists.
	Like right before the Dead Sea Scrolls and Daniel, basically.
	That's what I'm, and that's funny because the Dead Sea Scrolls, the oldest one, the oldest text in the Dead Sea Scrolls, dates to that period.
	Yeah.
	150 BC.
	Yeah.
	And that's it.
	There's nothing that goes beyond that in the Dead Sea Scrolls.
	Zero.
	There's no Dead Sea Scroll that dates to 500 BC.
	Yeah.
	Can you expand on?
	I think it's Gemerk and he talks about how it's Plato's Noble Lie and Library of Alexandria and the origin story.
	Yeah, Plato had this idea that the children were being taught erroneously in his time.
	They were growing up learning Homer and Hasiod and other Orpheus stuff like that.
	And he thought that the way the youth were being brought up and educated was producing a state that was not ideal in his opinion.
	This is by the way, if anyone wants to know that this is in Republic, particularly book two, book two and three.
	Book one's more about what is justice.
	And they kind of have an argument over that.
	Anyways, book two, we start getting into religious matters.
	And then he introduces this idea of a noble lie.
	And that is the idea that it's sometimes good to lie to people for a greater cause.
	And he stands, he says that there should be a priesthood, an ordained priesthood, overseers who control the text, control the poetry and the myths that are taught to the children.
	And the reason why they need to lie is because the past needs to be changed and rewritten in order to sort of mold the future, if that makes sense.
	He lays this all out in Republic.
	I'm not like paraphrasing it to where I want it to be.
	You can read it for yourself.
	This is what he says.
	And he says that the morals of people would be better off if they believed in a God who is perfect rather than flawed.
	So they talk about why is Zeus whining?
	Why is Zeus getting upset?
	Why is Zeus doing that?
	Why is Zeus doing this?
	God should be all-powerful and perfect.
	And there should be no doubting of what is of his intentions.
	Heroes like Achilles?
	Why is Achilles crying in Hades?
	Our heroes should not be crying in Hades.
	They should be in heaven.
	They should be in paradise.
	Nothing phases them.
	Yeah.
	So he's, and they come up with the idea.
	And then Plato even says, our people, our Athenians, should have their own place where they go when they die.
	A separate place, not like Hades, where everyone else goes.
	All the other bad people should go to Hades, but we should have a designated place for our people.
	It's almost like he's formulating the idea of heaven and hell.
	So, and then, yeah, so Plato, you can see it.
	And so, this is what I think.
	Me and Gemerkin both think that in Alexandria, by the third century BCE, Platonism was the dominant force in philosophy and theology.
	And so, when they're putting together the Torah, it was informed by Platonist, by Platonist ideals.
	It was very Philo was Hellenized Judaism.
	They were doing that before Philo, Philo of Alexandria in the same place.
	Yeah.
	Oh, and they're all his family.
	Was his family there at that time?
	Do you know?
	Philo?
	Philo's family, yeah.
	He was in Alexandria.
	I know, but he was first century, though.
	Were they there 200 years before his same family?
	Or that's a good question.
	His teacher was there.
	His teacher, Aristobulus, was there all the way in the 200, all the way back to like second century BC.
	So, anyway, regardless, we see the Hellenization of Judaism happening in that area.
	We see not only we see it happening, but we see we have sources from like Artaponus and Hecateus of Abdera that are saying that, and there's other, there's another Jewish Aristobulus, Philo's teacher, Aristotelus, was talking about how Moses was actually like a rewriting of this character named Museus.
	And you can look it up for yourself if you're watching this.
	Musaeus M-U-S-A-E-U-S of Athens.
	There's a big Wikipedia page on him.
	There's this guy.
	He was a prophet, a seer, a polymath, A philosopher, an oracle giver.
	He was just like Moses, lawgiver, all those things.
	And he was like, so there are people who, people in Alexandria, who actually thought, there's like five different sources that say this, not just one or two.
	I could probably find five primary sources in between 300 and 100 BC that think that Moses was a rewrite of Musaeus of Athens, who was the teacher.
	Museus?
	M-U-S-A-E-U-S of Athens.
	And this guy was the student of Orpheus.
	Orpheus is the first person in any source to be called theologian.
	They use the word theos logos, means God's word, God's mouthpiece.
	So we think a theologian today is like someone who writes about religion.
	The word theologian was applied to somebody who was a mouthpiece of God.
	Yeah, Mousaeus of Athens.
	Yeah.
	Go to his Wikipedia page.
	Go to all.
	Okay.
	Just want to show people what it says about him.
	Just off the front, off the watch what it says.
	Legendary polymath, philosopher, historian, prophet, seer, priest, poet, musician.
	And like, think about it.
	Moses and the Levites, they're all a bunch of musicians and poets and priests and philosophers.
	So it's sort of like you could see how someone would think this.
	And look, oracular responses.
	What is Moses doing?
	He's going up on the mountain and he's coming back with oracular responses.
	An oracle is someone that translates God for the people, who hears the word of God and translates it for everybody.
	That's what this guy was doing.
	So anyways, he was the student of Orpheus.
	Orpheus is the first person to be called number one, Theos Logos, Theologian, a wordpiece of God.
	And he's also the first person to be given the title of a relevator, an apocalypter.
	The word apocalypse in Greek means revelation.
	Orpheus was literally called the revealing one, the apocalypse in Greek.
	So the idea of apocalyptic literature, we think that's Jewish text, right?
	That's Orphic.
	That's Orphic.
	And if you read Plato, Plato was a huge, he was initiated into the Orphic mysteries himself.
	So all this stuff lines up with the Musais thing.
	The idea of them, of Judaism sort of being a sort of offshoot of Orphism for Jewish, for the Hebrews, for the Hebrew-speaking world.
	It's also very heavily influenced by Zoroastrian thought, too.
	But here's the thing: Plato himself was in contact with Zoroastrian Magi.
	So I don't even think you can separate Platonism from the Magus crowd, from the Zoroastrians.
	They all sort of believe in the same philosophical worldview.
	They just have a different way of telling it, different languages.
	You know what I mean?
	So they have like, Judaism's basically a syncretic mix of Greek religion, Canaanite, Zoroastrian, and Egyptian, right?
	I know you've covered some of the things that is right where they sit.
	They sit right at the crossroads of their, you know, to the east of them is Babylon.
	To the south of them is Egypt, south, southwest.
	Southwest of them is Egypt.
	To the north, you have Anatolia.
	And then the sea is right next to them.
	The Mediterranean world.
	The Greeks are living in Cyprus.
	Cyprus is right there.
	They're trading with the Greeks.
	So the idea that they wouldn't be copying the Greeks, they're living so far away from them.
	No, the Greeks were in Cyprus.
	The Greeks lived in Cyprus.
	Cyprus is right there.
	It's the closest island to Phoenicia or Israel.
	It's right there.
	They're trading with the Greeks.
	They're trading with the Hittites.
	They're trading with the Egyptians.
	They're in that world.
	They're not siphoned off.
	There's no force field around Judea.
	They're still part of the Mesopotamian Mediterranean world, like everyone else.
	So they're going to be adopting ideas from them.
	You know what I mean?
	Wasn't there some interesting Greek connections with the Old Testament as well, like with the Greek God, the name of the Greek god?
	Oh, yeah.
	So Yahoo.
	If you look at the oldest physical manuscripts of the Dead Sea Scrolls in Greek, not Hebrew or Aramaic, because believe it or not, in the Dead Sea Scrolls, it wasn't just Hebrew manuscripts.
	It was Greek and Aramaic too.
	The Greek ones, the Greek Septuagint that we have today, which is the Old Testament in Greek, uses the word Kurios for God, Lord.
	Kurios means the Lord.
	That's why everyone says the Lord, the Lord, the Lord, the Lord.
	They don't say Yahweh.
	You don't walk into a Christian church.
	They don't talk about Yahweh.
	They're talking about the Lord.
	Why is that?
	Because a decision was made by the Catholic Church in the fourth century, maybe the third century sometime, before the fourth century, though, to replace the original tetragrammaton, which is Yahweh, with the word Kurios and uniform.
	Keep the uniform Kyrios from the Old Testament to the New Testament so that they can connect the two books as one.
	Because the original Greek manuscripts had the word Yaho, Iota Alpha Omicron, or Omega, I'm sorry.
	Iota Alpha Omega.
	So it's IAO in English.
	I-A-O.
	Yahoo.
	But what's funny about the word Ya'o is there's another, there's a Greek god with that name.
	Dionysus has a name, has that, has that, Dionysus has many names, Bacchus, Dionysus, Liberpater, Sebasius.
	He has all these Zagreus is called Zagreus.
	He's got all these different names, right?
	One of them is Ya'o.
	And Carl Karenia even points out that the name Yahoo was found in an inscription in Crete during the Mycenaean period.
	And I think another one in Pylos, too, in Sparta.
	So this name for Dionysus, Ya'o, is actually pretty old.
	But it's also, it's also, it's also known to later antiquity writers like Macrobius, Plutarch, who else?
	Diodorus of Sicily mentions this name as well.
	Anyways, this was one of the names of Dionysus, Yahoo.
	So Plutarch was like, Plutarch's living in the end of the first century, early second century.
	He's going, what is this God that these Jews worship?
	And he's like, I think it's Dionysus.
	And they're like, it's a symposium.
	And his friends are like, what?
	What are you talking about?
	He's like, well, think about it.
	The name Yahoo, that's Dionysus' name.
	Adonis is Adon.
	I don't know.
	He's like, there might be some sort of connection between Adonis and Dionysus going on.
	He's like, but I don't think that necessarily they copied it.
	He said, I think it's just they're both coming from the same ancestral form of this God going back farther, which is, I think, is true.
	And then he points out, he even points out that the religious festival called the Sukkot, Sukkot, which is a Jewish festival that takes place in the fall equinox week.
	So, the first full moon after the fall equinox.
	Just like the Passover happens, first full moon after the spring equinox.
	Well, the Jews have another festival called the Sukkot, first full moon after the fall equinox, and it's for a week, one week long, seven days.
	And during this festival, they carry date palms and fruits, fruits.
	Bachis is a fruit god, right?
	So, so, guess what else?
	Guess what the Greeks were doing at this time period?
	Same exact week of the year, first full moon after the fall equinox, for three days, not a week.
	This one's a little bit different, just being honest here.
	For three days, the Greeks carry palm branches and fruits into the temple.
	It's called Thesmophoria.
	And guess what?
	The word thesmophoria means in Greek.
	It means lawgiver, lawbringer.
	Thesmophoria, law bringer, law prophesy.
	They had the date palms in Palm Sunday in Jesus' triumphal entry as well.
	They said Hosanna prophecy and then the date palms as well, which was some and Dionysus is also depicted riding on a donkey into Athens.
	Go to the Met Museum, they have tons of them, tons of vases with Dionysus riding on an ass into Athens with people carrying date branches behind them.
	So, but check this out too.
	Dionysus is not just a wine god, he's a god of swelling of the fruits.
	So, the thesmophoria, the fact that they're bringing these fruits in the temple is very Dionysian.
	But then there's another layer that happens here: lawbringer, right?
	Thesmophoria means lawbringer.
	Well, if you look at the Sukkot festival, there it is.
	That's a Greek, that's a Roman or Greek one, I think.
	But yeah, that's one of them.
	You also find them on coins, too.
	But anyways, so thesmophoria, law-bringing, right?
	This is what's what Plutarch was bringing up.
	And he says, uh, he says, um, oh, that's that's what I meant to say.
	The Sukkot festival.
	If you actually look at what they're commemorating, they're commemorating the wandering in the desert for 40 years and Moses bringing the laws, lawbringer.
	It's a thesmophoria.
	It's literally a thesmophoria.
	It's commemorating the lawbringing.
	But not only that, real quick, go back to the Greek side again.
	What are they commemorating?
	They're commemorating Demeter, the goddess Demeter, wandering around the wilderness, trying to find her daughter Persephone, and then bringing the laws to the Eleusinians.
	Yeah, is there anything about a tent?
	Because I know in Sukkot, they build tents that they built while they were.
	They built the tents because that's what the Israelites did in the desert.
	I don't know if thesmophoria has anything about tents.
	Not a parallel with the tents, no?
	I haven't found anything like that yet.
	If you found that, that'd be game over.
	It's game over.
	Sukkot is a seven-day holiday where they sacrifice 70 bulls also.
	Yes.
	Oh, that's another thing.
	The Assyrians had the Kisu festival, Kisu festival, same week as the last two that we mentioned.
	Right at this fall equinox, full moon.
	Everyone had lunar calendars back then.
	Julius Caesar was the first person to come along and say, screw lunar calendar.
	Let's do solar.
	And then everyone followed solar after that.
	It was only the Egyptians before Caesar that were different.
	Then now before that, everyone was lunar calendar.
	So this is the same week of the year.
	That's why I bring that up.
	The Assyrians had a Kisu festival where they slaughtered 70 bulls during the same exact week as the Sukkot sacrifices 70 bulls.
	Sorry, I missed it.
	Who's doing the 70 bulls?
	The Assyrians were doing this.
	Really?
	So they copied that tradition too.
	And that was a tradition that kept going on all the way through to the Persians.
	So there's evidence that the Persians were keeping this tradition around even after they conquered the Assyrians.
	So that means the Jews would have known about this during the Persian period.
	Totally, totally.
	Well, their other holiday, Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, where they have the two goats, that's a ritual from the Middle East as well.
	It's not original to them.
	Right.
	You've heard of that, right?
	Yeah.
	Not only that, you also have the which one?
	Who was it?
	I think it was the Egyptian.
	No, it was the Assyrians again.
	The Assyrians also have a spring equinox festival where they sacrifice one lamb every day.
	Not one lamb for the whole festival like the Jews did.
	The Passover lamb was sacrificed.
	The Assyrians had a whole seven-day week festival for spring where one lamb was sacrificed every single day.
	And then this is another weird thing that I noticed.
	The Romans did this.
	The Romans sacrificed a white lamb on the Ives of March every year.
	So the full moon of the year, the full moon of the spring equinox, they sacrificed a white lamb the same as the Jews did and the same as the Assyrian.
	This must have been a universal thing.
	Well, yeah, I've seen rabbis explain that the reason in the Exodus story that they sacrificed a lamb, the Passover lamb, so the angel of death passes over the Hebrews' homes, was because the Egyptians worshiped the lamb.
	So they were sacrificing their god.
	Yes.
	The lamb would be the god Ammon.
	So this is actually funny you mentioned this because Diodorus talks about the god Amo.
	He's a ram.
	He's a ram god.
	And his son is Bacchus, who's also an image of a ram.
	But a baby ram is a lamb.
	So Dionysus was actually kind of like a lamb of God.
	It didn't actually explicitly say that.
	But if you put two and two together, you're like, wait a minute.
	That's how they would have perceived it.
	Because the sacrificing the lamb was for was for the god in derision of the god Amon.
	You brought this up, though.
	This is huge.
	The Exodus story.
	We talk about how it's fake.
	Another reason why I know it's fake is because there's all these conflicting versions of it.
	The one we have in the Bible is not the only version we have.
	There are other sources of the Exodus that happen in different time periods.
	Number one, big red flag.
	Pharaoh.
	They never mentioned Pharaoh's name.
	Just generic Pharaoh.
	Did you know?
	Did you know how many times a primary source that mentions Pharaoh ever left his name out?
	Yeah, never.
	None.
	Every time we find a source that mentions something that happened with a Pharaoh, the Pharaoh's name is mentioned.
	Right.
	They don't just go, Pharaoh said this.
	No mention of Joseph rising to rule because of his names in Egypt.
	There's no Joseph, no Joseph in any Egyptian records at all.
	No 12 tribes.
	No 12 tribes.
	Yep.
	Nothing.
	There never was a 12-tribe allotment of land.
	There's no sources that say this land here is the land of Benjamin or this land here.
	That all happens after the it was probably only in Israel and a Judah at one point.
	That was probably there was Judah in Israel.
	Yeah.
	And then after the Maccabee period, they start to try the 12-tribe thing.
	They start to allot like fake little areas.
	This is after the one, this is in 100 BC.
	This is way later.
	Anyways, back to the Exodus thing.
	No mention of Joseph in any sources from the Egyptians.
	He was the second most powerful person in the Egyptian kingdom, according to the Bible.
	You would think you easily find that.
	There's all these texts about viziers.
	Viziers are usually the right-hand man to the Pharaoh.
	We know who all the viziers are from 2000 BC until like 400 BC.
	There's a list of every single number two guy.
	None of them are Joseph.
	None of them.
	Anyways, another thing on top of that.
	Oh, by the way, Solomon.
	I'm going to take a little detour and go back to the Axis for a second.
	Solomon.
	The claims about Solomon is he had all these wives and he's in control of all these lands and he had all these riches.
	Right?
	That's a big claim that you should be able to find in the archaeology.
	You can't find it.
	Nobody even knows who Solomon is.
	Not a single source outside of the Hebrew Bible mentions Solomon once.
	He doesn't even exist.
	No one knows who he is.
	The richest man in the world, he was supposed to be the richest man in the world who had all these kings.
	And the wisest.
	Yeah, the wisest.
	He had all these kingdoms under his helm.
	None of them mentioned him.
	They don't have no idea who he is.
	And then the queen of Sheba, he's kind of sort of a side chick or whatever.
	There's no, they don't mention who she is.
	This is like the Pharaoh thing.
	Because there is a kingdom called Sheba down in modern-day Yemen, Saudi Arabia region, right where the Red Sea is, or yeah, Red Sea.
	There is a kingdom of Sheba down there.
	And it's the dates line up pretty well, right around 1000 BC around there.
	Okay.
	But there's no.
	The queen of Sheba, that's not, that's a title.
	The Bible never says who she is.
	So we have, it's just a gen, it's like Pharaoh.
	It's just a generic name for a generic person representing a kingdom.
	So there is no queen of Sheba.
	She doesn't exist.
	It's not a real person in history.
	They try to, then, then in like Esther, you get real characters, but which is queen, I'm sorry, King Xerxes.
	But Esther is not a real person.
	Her name means Ishtar.
	Her name comes from Ishtar.
	And her associate, Marduk, Mardecai, Ishtar, and Marduk.
	So, okay, so they're playing games.
	You can see they're playing games with pagan sources and they're Judaizing it.
	But let's go back to the Exodus real quick.
	Yeah.
	So there's no mention of we don't know who the Pharaoh is.
	Number two, if we take the genealogies of the Bible, Jesus, all the way back to Moses, it gives us a clear genealogy.
	You could do the math.
	You could find out what year people died.
	You could find out what year they were born.
	And you can get yourself from Jesus back to Moses.
	And you're going to end up roughly around the 13th century BC, 13th century BC.
	That's when Moses would have lived.
	Did you know that at that time, Canaan was part of Israel?
	Or I'm sorry, Canaan was part of Egypt.
	That was their land.
	They owned Canaan.
	You can't escape to Canaan because you'd be escaping into Egypt.
	You're still in Egypt.
	So it's impossible for an exodus to happen that time because to leave Egypt, you would have to go all the way to the land of the Hittites.
	You have to go all the way to Syria where the Hittites were ruling.
	They didn't go all the way to Syria.
	They were in the Sinai desert.
	The Sinai desert was part of Egypt.
	They were ruling that land.
	And guess what else happens?
	After that, Ramses, Ramses, goes into Canaan and wins battles and takes over shit.
	He doesn't lose.
	He doesn't let anyone get away.
	He wins.
	So that's all nonsense.
	And the people say, well, it's the Hicksaw's expulsion.
	The Hicksaus expulsion happens centuries before that, centuries before that.
	And there's no Exodus.
	They just get, they were in power.
	They were the ruling pharaohs.
	And they get taken out of power.
	That's it.
	There's no Exodus.
	Now, one more thing I want to mention about the Exodus.
	There's conflicting stories about Moses.
	We have sources from ancient Greek sources about Moses that say that he lived during the reign of Pharaoh Bacharus.
	Let me share my screen real quick.
	You got to see this.
	See this?
	Yeah.
	This is how you know the Exodus didn't happen.
	Okay.
	This guy's name is Baccharis in Greek.
	Bachorus.
	Bocorus.
	All right.
	He ruled from 725 to 720 BCE.
	Now, check this out.
	So, do you see this?
	Tacitus, who's citing, by the way, he's citing an older Greek source, Hecateus.
	This is in three different sources that we could find.
	He says that Moses was living during the reign of this Bacharis.
	That's the 700s BC.
	Wait, what?
	That means that Moses lived after David?
	What?
	So this is the original story about Moses was that he lived in Egypt during the reign of Pharaoh Baccharis, who kicked them out of the desert.
	This is what he says.
	Let me just read this real quick.
	He says, which most writers agree.
	Notice how he says most writers.
	That means in Tacitus' time, there was multiple sources about this.
	This is what the status quo of the day was.
	Agree, that stating that once a disease, which horribly disfigured the body, broke out over Egypt, King Bacharis, seeking a remedy, consulted the oracle of Amon.
	You mentioned Amon.
	That's why I remember this.
	The god Amon, the ram god, the lamb-ram god, was bidden to cleanse his realm and to convey into some foreign land this race detested by the gods.
	The people who had been collected after a diligent search, finding themselves left in a desert, sat now.
	This makes more sense because back in this period, the Sinai region wasn't part of Egypt.
	They could have escaped and they would have been out of Egypt in this time period.
	And not only that, Moses is only one of a few people that get kicked out.
	It's not millions of people.
	It's like a few hundred people that got rounded up and kicked out.
	And they were Hebrews too.
	And then it says.
	It's not millions, by the way.
	It's 600,000.
	Oh, okay.
	Okay.
	This is they agreed and in utter ignorance began to advance at random.
	Nothing, however, distressed them as much as the scarcity of water.
	Now, watch what happens here.
	They had sunk ready to perish in all directions over the plain when a herd of wild asses Was seen to retire from their pasture to a rock shaded by trees.
	Moses followed them and guided by the appearance of a grassy spot, discovered an abundant spring of water.
	This furnished relief.
	After a continuous journey for six days, on the seventh day, they possessed themselves a country from which they expelled the inhabitants.
	So this is it, you get the seventh day of rest coming from this story.
	And it's, and it's in 700 BC, not 1300 BC.
	So, like, wait, which one is true?
	Probably none of them, probably none of them.
	Yeah.
	They're probably both made up.
	That's how you know it's story is not true when you have multiple variations that are completely like, okay, if you had variations that both happened in the same time period, let's say you had one version of the story that happened during Pharaoh Ramses, and it was like, oh, this one says 600,000.
	That one says 500,000.
	That's the same story.
	But when you have two different stories, one of them is seven, they're 700 years apart from each other, and they have completely different accounts of what happened.
	These aren't made up stories.
	They are not real stories.
	This is not real history.
	Jesus is dated to different times as well.
	In the tradition in other words, some weird sources about Jesus living in like 1200 BC or something like that.
	Right.
	Right.
	But one more thing I want to talk about.
	Joseph, something else about Joseph in Egypt or Joseph in the Talmud.
	What is that connection?
	Joseph in the Talmud.
	Because in the Talmud, they're writing about this god Serapis, which is Osiris.
	The word Serapis is a compound of Osiris and the Apis bull.
	The Apis bull is like this calf, this lunar solar calf that's tied to Osiris.
	And they would bury this calf and they would mourn over it.
	And there was like some Osiris resurrection ritual.
	The god Serapis is a Hellenistic version where they combine the Apis bull with Osiris and he becomes Serapis.
	Interesting, interestingly enough, I'm going to put that aside for a second.
	Remember what I said there in the Old Testament, Joseph is sold by his brothers, is basically killed.
	Like he's basically like dead.
	He's put into a dungeon that represents Hades.
	It's like a representation of someone dying.
	He gets put into Hades.
	Then he prophesies the future.
	And the imagery that's given is bread and water and bread and grapes and wine.
	So he does this prophecy where he tells one person that he's going to die, another person that he's going to get out.
	But he uses the imagery of wine and bread, like a Eucharist.
	Those are two images that are sacred to Osiris.
	Drinking the wine and eating the cakes is what will initiate you into the cult of Osiris, where you become part of the eternal ones.
	Just like the Eucharist in Christianity, by the way.
	Anyways, this happens to Osiris.
	He gets sold by his brothers.
	He gets cast into Egypt into a dungeon.
	And then he rises back out of the dungeon and becomes the most powerful person in Egypt next to Pharaoh.
	The story of Osiris is very similar, where he gets basically killed by his brother Set.
	The brother Set, brother.
	Brother kills him.
	Like Judah.
	Yeah, Judas.
	Judas.
	Yeah, Judah basically does the same thing.
	And Judas betrays Jesus.
	Same thing.
	Set kills Osiris.
	He goes into the underworld and then comes back.
	Yeah, then rises back up triumphantly.
	So you can see there's like some euhemerization happening with Joe.
	Those people even point out Yosef, that's how you say his name in Hebrew.
	Yosef is similar to Yo Cyrus, Yosiris.
	Some people pronounce it that way, I guess.
	Or Husiris.
	What that?
	Is that how you say it?
	People said that in Greek.
	Anyway.
	What did the Talmud said again?
	It said, that's what I was getting to.
	The Talmud says it's the other way around.
	Serapis is copying Joseph.
	The Egyptians, they made a god after our Joseph.
	They don't realize they incriminate themselves by doing this.
	Because they're admitting that the parallels are real and legit.
	Right.
	Well, they do the same thing with Jesus, comparing Jesus to Dionysus, like early church fathers.
	And they do this with Plato, too.
	They go, Plato was borrowing from Moses.
	Moses, yeah.
	Even though Plato never mentions Moses, Plato doesn't even mention Israel.
	Plato doesn't even know what Israel is.
	Yeah, he's not copying Moses.
	Like I said, Israel is a backwater.
	Guess who?
	Guess who?
	I mean, Israel.
	These bad apologetics end up disproving them even more.
	They age really bad.
	Yeah.
	Herodotus never mentions Israel once.
	Herodotus does a whole lance.
	He has a whole survey of every single kingdom from Spain.
	No, no, no.
	Beyond Spain, the Azore Islands.
	He talks about the Atlanteans and all this, like, you know, whatever.
	He goes all the way off the islands past Spain, and he talks about kingdoms all the way to India to Afghanistan and India.
	And he writes about the Scythians.
	He writes about the Hyperboreans, the German people, the Celts, the Africans, the Carthaginians, the Egyptians, the Phoenicians, the Babylonians, the Medes, the Persians.
	Everybody gets named.
	Every single person is mentioned by Cyrus by Herodotus.
	Except for Israel?
	What?
	Because Israel was a backwater.
	It was nothing.
	They were not even a player on the map at all.
	So the reason why I brought that up is because what was I saying right before that shit?
	Oh, Plato.
	Plato never mentioned Moses or Jewish scripture or anything related to that.
	But when the Talmud Jews are saying that Plato is copying Moses, what they're really admitting is how much Moses and the Torah is borrowing from Plato.
	Right.
	So whenever they do this, it's hilarious to me.
	Yeah, it's kind of like a diabolical mimicry, right?
	When they say that all the pagans were copying the Jesus story so that we would think that they weren't real.
	They're just confessing to the fact that they came first.
	Justin Martyr, Arnobius, who else?
	A couple other couple other early Christian church fathers.
	They said that the mysteries of Mithras was the devil impersonating our Eucharist.
	Because the Eucharist was a common initiate.
	I already mentioned Osiris, had his own version of the Eucharist.
	But the Mithras.
	Yeah, the idea of taking a bite of bread and drinking wine to be initiated, getting anointed on your head.
	That's like everyone was doing that.
	That's just how you do initiations.
	But the Christians had to be, they had to be the ones that invented it.
	No, they're copying us.
	It's like, no, you copied everyone else.
	Yeah, their bad copes and apologetics really came back to haunt Him.
	Right.
	When they say that, like, if Justin Martyr never said that, we might not have even known that there was a Eucharist in Mithraism because we don't have a lot of sources that survive about what the Mithraists were doing.
	They were very secretive.
	But Justin Martyr goes, oh, the way the Mithraists do a Eucharist, they're copying us.
	Well, thanks for telling us because now we know that you copied them.
	You know what?
	So this is a theme.
	The Exodus, the Passover celebration, it's mythical.
	And then also Purim, their other holiday, is also a fictional story.
	Nothing in Persia ever wrote about that.
	You're telling me that there's this decree, and then the girl next to the king convinces them to slaughter 70,000 Persians, and there's not one mention of it anywhere.
	Didn't happen.
	And yeah, you're right.
	All of their big festivals are, you can almost see how all of them are sort of adopted.
	Hanaka is the only one that's real, basically.
	Yeah, but even Hanukkah, there's actually a passage about Hanukkah in the Talmud about them comparing it to Saturnalia.
	Because it happens right.
	So Saturnia happens the week before the winter solstice.
	Hanukkah happens the week after winter solstice.
	The Talmud writer puts writes that says this too.
	He goes, ours is a week after.
	This is a week before.
	But if you actually look at what they do in Hanukkah, they play Dreidel and they light up candles.
	That's exactly, they do that Saturnalia.
	Two of the big things they did there was they would roll dice and they lit candles.
	The vigilaria is the last day of Saturnalia.
	Vigil means lighting candles.
	Well, maybe they copied the ritual ceremonial.
	That's what I'm saying.
	But the Maccabean revolts is the Maccabean revolt happening.
	Right.
	Yeah, yeah.
	That's what I was going to say.
	If you look at the Jewish festivals, I don't think the oil lasted for seven days.
	No.
	I didn't mean that.
	It's either a combination of some historical kernel combined with adopting culture around them.
	So Passover, you can see how they're adopting all of these spring equinox renewal vegetation festivals of Passover.
	So it's like a, you know, and then you see, I already mentioned Thesmophoria and Succot Festival.
	They're adopting those fall equinox rites.
	Winter Solstice Festival.
	Think about it.
	All of their major festivals happen during some sort of pagan equinox solstice event.
	Yeah.
	Just like Passover, just like Christianity.
	Passover happens at the spring equinox.
	Succot happens at the spall equinox.
	Summer solstice.
	Which one do they have there?
	They don't have a summer solution.
	That's right.
	They don't have a big summer solstice festival.
	But then the winter solves.
	Yeah, the winter solstice, though, Hanukkah.
	So you can see how they have their major festivals during these critical times of the year where pagans are doing shit.
	They're just doing their own version of it.
	Some people believe that.
	Oh, did you freeze?
	No, I'm good.
	Okay, sorry.
	Some people believe there's a theory going around that the Septuagint Old Testament Hebrew scriptures came before the Hebrew.
	Yeah, it's nonsense.
	There's words in the Hebrew Bible.
	I'm sorry, there's words in the Septuagint Greek Bible that don't exist in any other text besides the Septuagint.
	That's a red flag.
	Because how do you even define what the word is?
	And then you look at the Hebrew Bible and you find out that what they're doing is they were making up words to match the Hebrew.
	Yes, yes.
	I didn't hear the last thing.
	They're making up words.
	They're transliterating.
	So if I say the word Pasak, actually, that's one of the examples.
	The word Pasak.
	I just thought about that, but it's actually one of the examples in the Bible.
	The word Pasach is a Hebrew word for Passover.
	They transliterate it into Greek.
	They don't translate it.
	But anyways, there's words that only exist in Hebrew that get transliterated into the Greek side as a Hebrew word with the Greek alphabet on it.
	There's like dozens of examples of this where you can't, it can only go one way.
	Not only that, they have like some of the Psalms that are written are like written in a way where the certain letters are, it goes A, alphabeta, delta, gamma, in alphabetical order.
	And then the Greek side, they don't have it because they can't translate it that way.
	So it just becomes a mess.
	It becomes a big, you could tell it's translated.
	There are certain texts in the Old Testament that started in Greek.
	second maccabees was a greek story um there's parts of you know it's a rock you Like, oh, right.
	All 70 translators got the same exact thing.
	Yeah, that doesn't seem legit, does it?
	No, but what I think, I think the reason why they made it such a big deal out of it is because at that point in time, when they translated the Bible into Greek, I think they codified the scriptures.
	I think that was the moment when they decided these scriptures need to stay intact this way.
	Because before that, who knows how much changes that could have happened.
	There could have been drastic, like there could be inserting Moses into the text where he's not really there.
	And the reason why I say that is because the prophets barely mention Moses or Abraham or Noah.
	There's only a handful of times where Moses gets mentioned.
	I think most of the prophets don't even mention him.
	Yeah, you read Isaiah, Jeremiah, Zechariah.
	They're not talking about.
	But then you find out that, for example, Isaiah lived 200 years before Cyrus.
	But he mentions Cyrus by name in Isaiah.
	How does that happen?
	And then so a Christian will go, well, God told him.
	So he's just being a prophet.
	He predicted, he predicted a person, a person name?
	Like, most prophecies are like, oh, a kingdom will fall.
	Like, some vague shit.
	Well, Moses wrote down the Torah and he told him, he told Moses about Adam and Eve and Cain and Abel.
	And he told him about his own death, too.
	So he wrote about his own life.
	So we know, so most scholars are like, okay, this part of Isaiah was written later.
	There's three parts of Isaiah.
	There's an original layer.
	There's a middle layer, and there's a way later period.
	And then even all three layers get fixed and change and parts get deleted, parts get added.
	So when you come across Moses.
	Exactly the same in the Dead Sea Scrolls.
	Just kidding.
	Yeah.
	But when you come across Moses being mentioned by one of the prophets and you go, well, Elephantine doesn't know who Moses is.
	So, why should a prophet from 700 BC know who Moses is?
	You kind of have a right to go.
	They probably added that.
	And by the way, couple that with the very, he's only mentioned a few times by the prophets.
	And when you would think, you think the prophets would be all about Moses, all about Abraham, all about that.
	No, they're not.
	They're just, it's a little bit different.
	You got a different story in the prophets.
	So.
	Yeah, like you could do a chat GPT and say, is like Abraham, Moses, Isaac, Jacob, Noah, is any of that ever mentioned or referenced in Isaiah?
	And it says no.
	No.
	Right.
	Yeah, most of the prophets don't have a lot of knowledge about the Torah.
	Which means that Isaiah is actually older than the version of the Torah that we have.
	That's what I was going to say.
	If I had a bet money, I would say that there are parts of Isaiah, there are parts of Ezekiel, there are parts of Jeremiah that are very ancient, maybe even 7th century BC.
	Not most of it, though.
	Most of it probably got added on later in the 4th or 3rd century BCE.
	So you have to remember that.
	We have 10 more minutes before I got to go.
	We got some super chats.
	So let's start getting to these real quick.
	First, my friend, Mr. Dice, for 100.
	Thank you so much.
	So many donos earlier today, and you're still going.
	You're incredible.
	He says, Great conversation.
	I'm about to take my bulldog for a long walk while continue to listen.
	I hope you enjoyed it.
	Hope you realize how fake the Torah is.
	Okay.
	And next we have Dominic Boussim.
	He says, a wealth of information for 25 bucks.
	Thank you guys.
	Thank you, Dominic.
	Siscum says, read John Ma's article re-examining Hanukkah.
	It's highly unlikely the Maccabee, Maccabean revolt or any of the events Hanukkah celebrates ever occurred.
	Interesting.
	Yeah.
	I didn't know.
	I didn't know that was disputed.
	I stand corrected.
	The Maccabean revolt happened, but the Hanukkah thing might have been just some tradition thrown in there.
	It's highly unlikely.
	They're saying the revolt didn't even happen.
	I thought that was like a known thing for sure that the revolt.
	Oh, the Maccabean.
	The Greeks wrote about that, didn't they?
	Yeah, I think we have letters from the Spartans writing to the Maccabees.
	But I don't know.
	I'll look into it.
	I'll look into it.
	I'm pretty sure the Maccabean, I'm pretty sure the Maccabean revolt.
	Yeah, because the Antiochus IV really did try to conquer their shadows.
	Go into the temple.
	He's the Antichrist, basically.
	Right.
	Of Daniel.
	Yeah.
	He's actually the hero, the pagan God that tried to put an end to Judaism.
	He's the hero, the Antichrist.
	Pro-Antichrist, huh?
	Okay.
	Right.
	Let me see here.
	Boleslaw for 15 says, is presuppositionalism inherent to Christianity or Abrahamism in general?
	From what I see, Abrahamists rely a lot on substituting reasoning with making assertions and with circular logic.
	Well, that's true.
	Yeah.
	Presupposition inherent to Christianity or Abrahamism in general.
	They rely on it a lot.
	It's one of their tricks.
	Who?
	Jewish?
	Christians.
	Oh, yeah.
	Well, it's so reason why the precept thing is so nonsense to me.
	You could just say the same thing to you.
	Like, it's never like your own, like, how what are you measuring your, oh, the church?
	Like, the church is where I get my guiding truth from.
	Yeah, all authority comes from.
	Now, all things.
	Yeah, so all things are accounted for now because they're accounted for through the church.
	Well, okay.
	Well, how does the church know?
	Oh, apostolic succession.
	Then you just keep going back and then you end up where we're at, figuring out if the Old Testament is real.
	And then it's over with.
	Then you can pull the tree right out from the roots.
	So pre-sup is just like, cool, you have everything accounted for.
	I can have everything accounted for.
	I can be completely senile.
	And I can think that I could be like hallucinating my own God.
	And this God can tell me everything about the universe.
	And it's all in my head.
	And it's all accounted for.
	I have everything accounted for from my own personal God in my head.
	It's the same thing as what you're doing.
	Having things accounted for doesn't mean it's true.
	Right.
	Okay.
	No, yeah.
	Their whole thing is basically you have to concede that their God is real.
	Otherwise, you can't argue against their God.
	Can you please go and close the door?
	I'm getting interrupted.
	Well, they really emphasize the idea that if you can't figure out everything, and if you're, if you, how do you know you're not a brain and a vet?
	You can't account for everything.
	So how do you know it's true?
	Neither can you.
	It's what you're saying.
	Explain the afterlife.
	Explain creation.
	Explain the universe.
	Otherwise, Jesus is real.
	Like, that is what they try to do.
	You're just pointing out the problem that we all face is that we all could be wrong.
	Period.
	Great.
	We're in the same exact spot still.
	Nothing changed.
	Okay.
	Anatomize deception says Gnostic informant cannot produce a Hebrew Torah that predates the Greek Septuagint.
	If he can do it now, I think this is an Amin guy.
	Well, yeah, that's the funny thing about that is your Septuagint is from 1856.
	So you can't even produce your own Septuagint that predates your own Septuagint.
	So the original Septuagint, as I mentioned before, the oldest Greek manuscripts have Yahoo in it.
	Your Septuagint that you think is the original has Kurios in it.
	It changed.
	It's not the original.
	So just because our Hebrew manuscripts of the Letting Grag Codex, for example, it's 10th century, doesn't mean that's when we date the text to.
	So under that same logic, you couldn't date the Bible past the fourth century because the first church Bible is fourth century.
	So you'd have to say the Bible was written in the fourth century.
	It's nonsense.
	You have to go by the evidence.
	You have to go by textual criticism.
	And the textual criticism says that the Septuagint was translated from the Hebrew.
	If you could produce evidence that it was the other way around, then you'd have something.
	Other than that, you're just LARPing.
	Oh, shoot.
	I'm sorry.
	I missed one for on Over on Rumble.
	It disappeared on me.
	I didn't get to it fast enough.
	Sorry for that.
	Whoever sent that one.
	I appreciate it.
	Heraclitus commented on Twitter earlier.
	Oh, let's see.
	Maybe he's coming in here.
	Let me make sure I got this.
	Heraclitus said he was going to come in.
	Oh, wait.
	He says he has a space.
	He said you were wrong about something.
	So I asked if he wanted to join.
	And he said, yeah.
	Hold on.
	Are you coming?
	You know him, right?
	He had a space the other day about this same topic, how the Torah is fake.
	Oh, cool.
	It's almost easier to prove Christopher is fake just by proving the Torah is fake.
	I know.
	That's what I've been telling people.
	Pull the tree out by the roots.
	Who cares about apostolic succession, which church is the true church?
	Who cares about that shit?
	What are they fulfilling?
	That's what I want to know.
	I want to know if the thing that they're fulfilling is even true to begin with.
	Why should I care that the Roman Empire became Christian?
	Oh my God, the Bible said that everyone will follow the God of the Bible.
	So what?
	That's what every religion was trying.
	Every religion wanted to do that.
	That's just the one that completed it.
	So, you know, under that same logic, Islam is true.
	Any religion that does want to spread to the rest of the world, if a religion didn't have that, it would have been crushed by one that did, basically.
	Not surprising that the religion that dominates the world is one that was like the intent was for the God of Israel to rule the world.
	What gets me about that is under their same logic, they should all be Muslim because Islam conquered Constantinople, the holiest city in the Christendom, Jerusalem, Alexandria, Antioch, Carthage, like all of all of Christendom is gone, except for the Gothic Latin West.
	The heretics, they were heretics.
	Those are the heretics in the beginning.
	Yeah.
	When I've talked to my friend Adam King, he's Jewish, and I tell him about how the Torah is fake.
	He says, What about the cave of the patriarchs in Israel in Hebron?
	That's where Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are buried.
	So who was there by?
	What's that?
	No one knows.
	They're not letting anyone open those graves up.
	Even if they did, how would they know that the bones, if there's any bones left in the grave, are actually Abraham?
	I'm sure they can find out something.
	But it's not Abraham.
	It's not Abraham.
	That's for sure.
	Right.
	Well, the Abraham story is so ridiculous, too.
	His wife is 100 years old and gets pregnant, and then he falls asleep and cuts up some animals, and the torch goes through, and he makes a covenant.
	And this is the foundation of all of the biggest religions in the world that still have incredible impact today.
	That's why I started with the Orwell quote: whoever controls the past controls the present.
	And it's almost whoever controls the present kind of controls the past, too, because they can enforce a past.
	But who controls the past controls the present and then controls the future.
	And our world is based on a false history that the Christians and the Muslims are validating.
	You can show me a single primary source.
	If you could show me a single primary source that mentions the cave of the patriarchs before, I don't know, before the Hellenistic period, then you would have my attention.
	But from what I've seen, from what I've heard, this was built during the Herodian period in the first century BC.
	And it was just sort of like made.
	They probably made it up then.
	They said, hey, they're buried under there when they made it.
	you're right.
	They probably just built it because they're Yeah.
	And so it's not, I'm not surprised that they would do that.
	This is just what they do.
	Yeah.
	All right.
	Well, is there anything important that you wanted to get to or one other, any last thing before we close out that you forgot maybe that's important?
	Just exposing the fake Torah?
	How about the fact that in Christianity, like they're taking all of these scriptures or prophecies like completely out of context?
	And they even say like, oh, the prophets didn't mean what they say.
	That's basically what's right.
	Because the Messiah, the whole Messiah is not supposed to be God himself.
	The anointed one is anointed by God.
	So there's just like, it's like they're raping the text to make it fit.
	The anointed one is God himself.
	He anointed himself and then made himself do all this stuff for himself.
	Yeah.
	It's all nonsense.
	So that, yeah, the idea, they changed the, they create prophecies that aren't even in the Old Testament.
	Like being from Nazareth was not in the Old Testament.
	It could have been in a version that we don't have anymore or a book that's just not in the canon and lost.
	Or it could be about Isaiah 11, right?
	The branch, the Nazarene.
	I'm open to that.
	I'm open to that.
	That's their best guess, although it doesn't seem like it's like a perfect, you know, that's an interesting theory.
	How annoying is it that Paul says, like, it's in the scriptures, you know, raised after three days.
	Like, he never cites what scripture is.
	No, there's nothing in there about three days.
	There is pagan Daniel, there's two, two and a half days, and then there's the three days of Jonah's whale.
	He never specifically cites the scripture, which I think would have been important.
	Right.
	I think he may, I think he formulated it from Jonah, which is coming from Inanna, by the way.
	Inanna dies for three days and three nights.
	That's a pagan goddess.
	It's weird, Paul never mentions Jesus as the son of man, too, because Mark calls him the son of man so many times.
	And it seems like the son of man development would have been what inspired Paul and the first Christians' belief about the Messiah.
	Yeah, it is interesting.
	I wanted to mention something about Noah before we go to.
	Okay.
	Is that if once again, if we're taking this book as his history, because most people think it's a history book, it's not.
	If you take the genealogy that you get in Luke or Matthew, once again, and you configure the math, find out when Noah created an ark, survives a world flood, where everyone is wiped out except for him and eight people or eight people total.
	And all the animals on earth.
	Don't forget all the animals.
	And all the animals on earth, right?
	You would expect to see a population growth starting in Turkey and then spreading all the way until today that would align with what happened in that book.
	You would expect every single nation.
	Oh, I forgot to mention, it's around 2000 BC is when Noah did this.
	That's not that old.
	That's not that long ago.
	2000, the Sumerians are in 3,500 BCE.
	We know the Sumerians were thriving.
	When the Sumerians were thriving, you had Indo-Europeans thriving all the way in the north, the Celts, the Egyptians.
	There was kingdoms everywhere in that time period, thousand years before Noah.
	So what?
	Then here's another thing: animals.
	How do you get all these different species of animals spreading all the way across the world?
	And you would expect to find fossils of animals starting in Turkey and then just sort of spreading out into different regions.
	Like, how did elephants get in South America?
	Like, how did certain, how did certain animals get across the ocean from Turkey?
	I don't think elephants are in South South America.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Yeah, exactly.
	That's what I'm saying.
	Maybe Southern Africa.
	I don't know how southern they are.
	Or how did certain animals get from Africa to South America?
	You would have to find fossils of animals along the path everywhere from where Noah's Ark.
	And not to mention like genetically.
	And I mean, they find bones up in Northern Europe from 10,000, 20,000, you know, tens of thousands of years ago.
	And genetically, everybody around the world through evolution and change is way more.
	We weren't all relatives 2,000 years ago after Noah.
	Right.
	And this is one of these things that I bring up when it's like, if Noah, if Noah didn't actually, because think about how central Noah's, the story about Noah is so central to both Jewish and Christian theology.
	Right.
	If any of these things didn't happen, Christianity is like proven false.
	That's why they named the laws after Noah, Noah Hyde.
	Noah is so important.
	If Noah isn't real, if the story of Noah is fake, Christianity cannot survive.
	Same with Exodus, same with Abraham.
	Just think about it.
	The world was cleansed of its sin.
	Sin is this word that we all know.
	We all think sin is something that exists.
	It's made up.
	But the world is cleansed from sin.
	Noah is the one chosen to start civilization over with.
	If Noah is not real, then what sins did Jesus actually die for?
	What sins was Jesus sacrificing himself for?
	It doesn't make any sense.
	Same goes for Adam and Eve.
	If Adam and Eve isn't real, then what's the point of Jesus and his atonement sacrifice?
	And Paul, some Christians will say, well, we don't believe in that type of atonement.
	Paul clearly shows Jesus as the new Adam.
	Adam brought sin into the world, and one man, Jesus, reconciles it, takes it out.
	Right.
	If none of that stuff is real, if it's all a metaphor, what?
	So Christ is a metaphor then.
	Exactly.
	To be a Christian, you have to believe in so much completely baseless, unfounded nonsense from the Old Testament.
	It's astounding.
	We're confirming a fake history.
	It's astounding that it's taken this long for most of the world to go, well, you got a point.
	Right.
	But the sad part is, it might take another 2,000 years for it to keep going.
	I honestly think because Christianity is designed.
	It's designed to make people want to believe it's true.
	It's the ultimate bargain.
	Your eternal life or else or damnation.
	I might take that wager.
	It's waiting to see all your family members again.
	It's psychologically powerful.
	Right.
	And there's no denying that.
	Totally.
	I got to wrap it up.
	Got to go get the babies ready for bed.
	Powerful show.
	You're doing great work.
	Thank you for sharing and enlightening my audience with all of this fake Torah information.
	Tell everybody where they can find you and about what they can see at your channel.
	Yeah, I got a documentary coming out in the next couple of days.
	I want to get it out by the 30th.
	Is it 30th?
	31st.
	So in the next couple of days, be on the lookout for a long documentary about Roman religion.
	And it basically explains, because the idea that Christianity conquered the Romans is it's a little, I hate to use the word problematic.
	I hate that word, but it is because it's not what you think.
	What you think conquering was is not really conquering.
	Romans were already interested in Eastern religion.
	It was already, there's already a trend going in that direction anyway.
	So Christianity just had the best network of bishops available.
	It didn't conquer it, but like the point of the Messiah and the God of Israel was to conquer the nations in Rome, and it did happen.
	But anyway, everybody wants to see that.
	We did debate that, I don't even know how long, a year ago, maybe on another channel, if Rome was conquered.
	But, oh, shoot, he's saying, how do I join?
	I gave him the link.
	Sorry, dude.
	I got to wrap it up right now, Heraclitus, if you're still watching.
	I sent you the link.
	Do you find out what I was wrong about?
	He didn't specify.
	We'll find out.
	We can circle back to it sometime or I'll ask you.
	But I do have to go right now.
	Appreciate you so much for joining us.
	Everybody go sub over to Gnostic Informant.
	Follow him on Twitter as well.
	He's been more active on Twitter recently.
	One last comment from Dominic Boussimi says one more for five and anatomized deception.
	The hominite says, it is a historical fact that the Septuagint was paid for and created in 250 BCE.
	A Hebrew Torah predating this is not a historical fact.
	The translation myth comes from the letter of Aristotle, which is a pseudopigrapha.
	Yeah.
	Cheers and thanks for the live stream, both of you.
	Thank you and anatomize deception.
	Yeah, you could have a fake letter about a fake translation, and it could still be a translation.
	I agree.
	The letter of Aristius was propaganda to make people think that the Septuagint was special.
	But I still think that all the evidence supports that the Septuagint is not the original text.
	It's a translation.
	And at the end of the day, you're saying that the Hebrew version was only done like a decade before.
	So what's the big deal?
	I don't know if it's people want it to be Greek for some reason.
	I think that's very weird.
	I don't understand what's the point.
	The evidence is on your side to begin with that it's a Hellenistic text.
	That's big.
	Run with that.
	And then you have the support.
	You have the evidence supporting you.
	You don't have to look stupid.
	You have to go this extra route and say the Greek came first.
	Yeah.
	You don't have to support too far that discredits the whole thing.
	Yeah, they're writing stories about Judea, about Israel.
	The people there speak Hebrew and Aramaic.
	So what do you expect?
	Right.
	All right, guys.
	Let us know what you think in the comments below.
	Clip it, share it, like it.
	Appreciate everybody for the support.
	Thank you, Neil, for joining us once again.
	We'll have to do it again in a month or so.
	Maybe, I don't know.
	We'll figure out what we cover in the next one.
	Some Christian stuff, probably.
	And I appreciate you for coming on.
	You're doing great work.
	Mythicism, too.
	Mythicism.
	Yeah, we should do a big mythicism one.
	Yeah, you should.
	Whenever we talk online, that's what I'm always talking about.
	No, but you've been convincing me a lot of stuff on my own side.
	Yeah, we'll do a mythicism video.
	There you go.
	Perfect.
	All right.
	Thanks, everybody.
	Thanks, Neil.
	Take care.

▲