Yo that’s kinda crazy cool connection

No, they were going to kill him for blasphemy, because he had declared himself to be the Messiah. But... Think of the events leading up to the crucifixion. Pilate proposed that Jesus should be released as was the custom at the festival. The Jewish leaders instead insisted that Pilate release Barabbas. Barabbas was a "rebel" who had had a following, probably also claimed to be the messiah, and had committed murder. Additionally, Barabbas was the man's surname which means "son of the father". AND his first name was most likely Jesus, since the question asked by Pilate is - who should I release? Barabbas? Or Jesus who is called Christ?- if they had completely different names why not just say Barabbas or Jesus? But both being named Jesus, Pilate had to differentiate. Barabbas' name being Jesus was probably edited out after the gospel was written. Anyway, Christ is the goat sacrificed for our sins, Barabbas is the scapegoat which was released.

I see the parallel to the scapegoat with Barbabas being released… but the scapegoat had the sins of the people pronounced upon his head… I for this reason have always associated Satan with the goat as he deceived us and the sins atoned for by our Savior were then suffered by Him while also the goat (Satan) was cast out for causing the sin to occur.. Did Barabas have the sins of the people pronounced upon his head as did the scapegoat?

@nestanford if you consider that “Barabas” means “son of the father” you can look at the person Barabas as symbolically representing all of the children of the Father (humanity). In that way, yes, “Barabas” has the sins of the people.

Also I read somewhere (a Jewish website going into the what’s and why’s of Yom Kippur maybe…? I forget) that part of the reason the goat was cast off the cliff (this, of course, was also with the understanding that it was TO Azazel, and not AS, in what I read), was because they didn’t want this goat, laden with all the peoples’ sin, to come wandering back into town and redefiling them. Casting it off the cliff was kinda the insurance policy.

Just in time for Xirtus.

Bro they gotta have you on sometime

@DJButlerRockBand I feel like you’d enjoy the Mormon Yeshiva guy’s videos, if you haven’t already come across them. He’s a Jewish convert with some really cool insights into the text (his voice has a soporific effect though, even at 2x speed).

@@gingersnaps215 Funny you should say that. I had a two hour long phone conversation with Rob last night. Super interesting.

BOM is just pulp fiction!

I said this during the live feed. You’re right! We did read Leviticus, all the spicy stuff was skipped though. 😮

@@dcarts5616 I am glad to learn that we sometimes read Leviticus. I don't follow the Sunday School curriculum closely, and the last couple times I've looked, Leviticus wasn't on there.

I'm not Dave, but I would start with Temple Theology by Margaret Barker, followed up with her book the Hidden Tradition of the Kingdom of Heaven, and then Temple Mysticism. Specifically for the Feminine Divine (she covers Feminine Divine in those other 3 books by the way) check out the Mother of the Lord, and her newest book The Great Lady, although I have yet to read this new one, I have to imagine it's the connection of Mary, and Eve, and Divine Feminine, but maybe you can read it before me. The other suggestion would be Dave's books. His 2, soon to be 3 books (very excited for the new one) cover and connect most of all of these concepts. Fantastically I might add.

@@MichaelGMoney thank you so much! That is super helpful!

Some people like "Paradigms Regained: A Survey of Margaret Barker's Scholarship and Its Significance for Mormon Studies" by Kevin Christensen from 2001, which can be found in the archive at Book of Mormon Central. Also "The Deuteronomist Dechristianizing of the Old Testament" also by Christensen, 2004 also archived in various places, such as Scholars Archive and Book of Mormon Central. And the more recent Interpreter essaysm "Twenty Years after Paradigms Regained" Parts 1 and 2, tracking Barker's reception in the wider world, as well as amongst LDS scholars since the mid 1990s, to the present. They provide a great many sources for LDS and other scholars using her work, including Val Larsen, Jack Welch, Neal Rappleye, Steve Ricks, the Givensm Daniel Peterson, Zina Nibley Peterson, Alyson Von Feldt, and many more. And I would also recommend reading Barker's talk on the Book of Mormon from the 2005 Joseph Smith Conference, "Joseph Smith and Pre-exilic Religion" which is available at BYU Studies and the Scholars Archive. Barker's website has many important papers for free, and she has a few dozen videos on KZfaq. She gives her take on the LDS temple in the 2020 video produced the the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, Temples through Time, on KZfaq. Highly recommended. She is the first to speak after a modern apostle, and last before he closes.

@@riahbird I am Dave, and that's a good place to start. We're thinking we might do a Stick of Joseph Book Club kind of thing later this year, where Mike and I and whoever co-hosts with us read a series of important works of relevant scholarship and discuss them on the podcast. Say, one every two weeks. Here's my draft initial list for that project: Barker, Margaret. The Older Testament. Cross, Frank Moore. Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic. Dever, William. What Did the Biblical Writers Know & When Did They Know It? Eaton, John. Kingship and the Psalms. Frankfort, Henri. Kingship and the Gods. Haran, Menachem. Temples and Temple Service in Ancient Israel. Himmelfarb, Martha. Ascent to Heaven in Jewish & Christian Apocalypses. Johnson, Aubrey. Sacral Kingship in Ancient Israel. Mowinckel, Sigmund. The Psalms in Israel’s Worship. Patai, Raphael. The Hebrew Goddess. Segal, Alan. Two Powers in Heaven. Seiach, Eugene. A Great Mystery: The Secret of the Jerusalem Temple. Smith, Mark S. The Origins of Biblical Monotheism. De Vaux, Roland. Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions. Walton, John H. The Lost World of Genesis One. Weinfeld, Moshe. Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School.

@@DJButlerRockBand You are AMAZING, thank you SO much! I have your first book on all this, and I started into it and loved it and decided I wanted more background, so I ordered The Older Testament but then got a little bogged down so I decided to read Temple Theology by Margaret Barker first to try and get the ‘for dummies’ overview before digging back in. I’ve since listened to your discussions on every KZfaq channel I can find and started trying to learn Biblical Hebrew. I can’t get enough. It just makes so much sense-suddenly so many parts of the Bible that have seemed cloudy and unintelligible are becoming clear using the Book of Mormon as a lense, and like you said in one podcast, I’ve moved past authenticity-that becomes obvious in my mind-and on to meaning. Also, it’s incredible to realize that we actually do know a lot about Heavenly Mother. The part about the cart dragging in Isaiah-I was weeping in the car realizing that everything that was done to Jesus Christ was done symbolically to Her first. Thank you again for everything you are sharing. It’s transformative. Book club would be awesome! Can’t wait! But with or without it I am going to start chipping away at this list. Ok, I’ll stop fangirling now. Best wishes and thanks again!

Include the gender requirements for each one too. I can’t help but feel there is significance in the specified sex (especially the red heifer whose ashes were used to purify those who are made unclean by contact with death; i.e. the priests sacrificing animals every day, among others). Why female animals for certain sacrifices? (I mean the heifer could be obviously correlated to the Virgin, since a heifer is a cow that has never given birth or nursed a calf, but only “obviously” to a point...) Why is sex specified for certain sacrifices? Or maybe more correctly: why did certain sacrificial rites require a specific sex?

Maybe… if he’d actually read the records… I think he mostly enjoyed his position of status and wealth!

@@gingersnaps215 well, that's how he's portrayed in the cartoons, but if he didn't think much of what was on the brass plates, why was he so affronted that Nephi and his brothers wanted them? He must have known they were the unadulterated version of the scriptures (which included more clear information about Christ) and letting them out would expose the Deuteronomists who were altering the text of the scrolls (to remove Christ and to blind the people). And after all, he was out at night with the leaders (aka Deuteronomists) of the people, so it's hard to believe he was ignorant of what was going on.

@@srands2811 Perhaps. He was also probably a firstborn son of the Joseph line, otherwise he probably wouldn’t have had the records or been hobnobbing with the leaders at all. But that’s a lot to guess about his motives and character (also, I’ve never seen the cartoons. I was basing my assessment of his character off of a surface-level reading of the narrative).

😂😂😂😂

Was the canon “closed”? As far as I’m aware, they didn’t officially declare that revelations had ceased until centuries after Christ. Also just go look at Psalms 82. And compare translations; the NIV editions write all plural appearances of *gods* as “gods.” And we know Jesus quoted that psalm when they accused him of blasphemy! (“Is it not written in your law that ‘ye are gods?’” Or whatever the exact wording is.). Psalms are the hymns from the First Temple period (possibly re-ordered, and possibly used to be a liturgy). Things to consider.

Another fun fact: Pslam 118 has different wording in Jewish Bibles (which rely on translations from the masoretic/medieval Hebrew rather than the earlier, BC Greek Septuagint that was used for Christian bibles). The verse that says “pierced” says “like a lion” in the Jewish version. Difference of the stroke of a pen between the two words (vav/ו versus yod/י) and WHAT a difference it makes!! (First time I read it in my KJV Bible I was like, “…how can they not see Christ in this…?!” And then I learned about the masoretic Hebrew).

​@@gingersnaps215Actually, Protestant Bibles use the Masoretic Text, not the Septuagint. Only Orthodox Christian, Roman Catholic, Oriental Christians use the Septuagint. Granted this is the majority of Christendom. But the KJV and its later editions definitely use the Masoretic Text and not the Septuagint.

D&C 110: 3-4 clearly identifies Jesus as Jehovah by name as does the entire Book of Mormon 3 His eyes were as a flame of fire; the hair of his head was white like the pure snow; his countenance shone above the brightness of the sun; and his voice was as the sound of the rushing of great waters, even the voice of Jehovah, saying: 4 I am the first and the last; I am he who liveth, I am he who was slain; I am your advocate with the Father. Jehovah being our advocate with the father means Jesus is Jehovah

Should be available May 1, but there’s a link to add your name to the list (I know there’s def one on a Stick of Joseph video, dunno if the links on Ward Radio work. I’ve seen conflicting things and haven’t tried myself).

In my mind, that is reconcilable when you realize that the Great and Abominable Church is not one entity. It's any group who purposely alter it. Nephi may also be erring when he says this, and he was writing around the same time as the Deuteronomists

@@nathantibbitts6415 It's not Nephi speaking in 1 Nephi 13. It's the Angel of the Lord.

😂 I think he’d resume his hellfire approach to “saving” us 😂

He is such a grifter.

Lol, the alternate universe active and faithful rfm

It lost its wings not legs they are winged snakes

I agree but the symbolism is that “upon your belly shalt thou go” which puts him in a state in which he never will stand in the presence of the Father ever again.

Yes that’s true but there is rabbinical commentary that it had hands and feet as well as wings before the cursing

I thought the northern kingdom was looked down upon as being “contaminated” by gentiles, and not the southern kingdom..? For sure that’s why they dislike Samaritans.

@@gingersnaps215 Southern kingdom twice sacked just before king Cyrus, and was also replaced with foreign blood as well, just before and after King Cyrus conquered Babylon and installed his own state religion for the new Judeans. The exception to all the repatriation and expulsion is the Galilean nationality. When the Lord was born they were the only Israelite and Judahite bloodstock left in all of Samaria for hundreds of years. So from their perspective, all Jerusalemites, Judeans and Samarians were non Israelite foreign blood, with the Edomite blood Herodians as their unfortunate occupying rulers. Jesus Himself many many times is explicit and implicit about their foreign and non Israelite blood. The Greek is much more clear about this than our butchered English.

Try reading the Bible a little more. Especially the part he mentions in Leviticus. You could also read about this in any credible commentary on the Bible. He isn't wrong and there should be more explanation coming in the next video. The point of the goat and scapegoat is this... Think of the events leading up to the crucifixion. Pilate proposed that Jesus should be released as was the custom at the festival. The Jewish leaders instead insisted that Pilate release Barabbas. Barabbas was a "rebel" who had had a following, probably also claimed to be the messiah, and had committed murder. Additionally, Barabbas was the man's surname which means "son of the father". AND his first name was most likely Jesus, since the question asked by Pilate is - who should I release? Barabbas? Or Jesus who is called Christ?- if they had completely different names why not just say Barabbas or Jesus? But both being named Jesus, Pilate had to differentiate. Barabbas' name being Jesus was probably edited out after the gospel was written. Anyway, Christ is the goat sacrificed for our sins, Barabbas is the scapegoat which was released.

We know Jesus is the incarnation of Jehovah, but prophecies about Jesus are paltry and essentially invisible in the OT

Haven’t watched the video yet so I’m just guessing. But based on the title, I’m willing to bet that they’re making the claim that more explicitly Christian doctrines pertaining to the coming messiah may have been removed from ancient Judaism during the Josiah reforms. Not that Christ has been removed entirely from the Old Testament (because we don’t believe that to be the case) Edit: Ah yes. They’re speaking about biblical archeology and the deuteronomists.

Just so you know this conversation is not typical “mormon” doctrine either. This conversation is a deep doctrine conversation these guys have admitted they are speculating a little with this stuff. Not saying it’s wrong but it is a deep discussion, if you want to understand mormon doctrine this episode is not the one for you. In terms of math classes this one is advanced partial differential equations part 2, and you might be looking for algebra 1

This sums up every comment made by 99% of detractors: "I don't know what your beliefs actually are and I've also not watched this video, and I have no idea what you're talking about, but you're wrong because holy Trinity, sola scriptura, amen."

Of course jesus is in the old testament. What's that got to do with the man made false doctrine addition to scripture called the trinity?

Dan knows his ancient languages, there is no doubt. But I find that he is a bit full of himself and far too often he obfuscates the meaning of scripture under the guise of his superior scholarship. He ends up intentionally leading people away from some truth because of his personal politics and beliefs.

@@DGHamblin tell me you don't understand the difference between Data and Dogma without telling me...