Does John 1 rewrite Genesis 1?

[@insightfulcarrier]

Mythvision Podcast brought me here. Great work Sir.

[@elephant_888]

In musical USA, we would call the John intro the REMIX!!

[@annderby6295]

LOOOOOOOOOOLLLLL

[@joykelley8671]

Dr. Monger, please post another video soon. Your work is so interesting and you explain it so well. We’re awaiting your return!

[@perpersson442]

Ha en trevlig helg Hr Monger. Great video again, understand it takes time to produce as you also teach and the semester is almost up but appreciate the work you do. Regards from south Sweden

[@reggie2337]

You're a 'Bible-monger' worth listening to (sorry about the bad pun). Thank you for sharing your insight and scholarship, I am grateful to you, Dr Kip, Dr Josh & Megan, Derek, Derreck and Neal. Long live your channel ❤

[@InquisitiveBible]

It's frankly astonishing how much Philo's language, rooted in Middle Platonism, anticipates Christian conceptions of Christ a few decades later.

[@Passgier57]

I like you're video a lot, thanks. keep going. The direct comparison with Philo helps.

[@BrianGay57]

Fascinating! Even after leaving the faith, I had some confusion over seemingly fulfilled prophecy. I later learned that the most amazing of the “prophetic” hits were actually written after the event they “supposedly” prophesied.

[@shmataboro8634]

Brian G, it's so much easier to get the details right that way.

[@BrianGay57]

@varalder freyr Proof? Proof is a math thing.

[@kmiller5808]

Brian G. That's interesting, what you are claiming is that you learned that some amazing prophecies were phony. Which prophecies, and how did you verify the date of writing in order to falsify them? Did you really learn or are you repeating someone else's claim that they "know"? I'm sincerely interested. Thx

[@dmichael100]

I discovered the same thing, Brian after seminary and leaving the faith.

[@colinc892]

@@kmiller5808 I think Jesus' prediction of the world ending soon after his time is a good one. "This generation shall not pass away..." so on and so forth in Matthew 24. Ezekiel is also a good one, predicting Nebuchadnezzar destroying Tyre in ch 27 and Egypt in ch 29.

[@elfipet]

Love your show - thank you for sharing yr wisdom and knowledge in an accessable way. Good luck with your new show.

[@joykelley8671]

Yet another great informative video. Thank you so much for sharing your knowledge.

[@lourdeseblanco3083]

So very curious! Thank you so much.

[@Bruno-ho5jl]

New subscriber. I am not religious but has always been curious about Judeo-Christian ethics. Thanks.

[@mcgie2002]

Thank you. Real in depth ‘gnosis’ ;) Glad to see this channel growing.

[@harrispinkham]

Completely new info for me! Thanks

[@ryanfristik5683]

Can u please post more videos u r great.

[@Larry30102]

Love your Vids! Great channel.Keep’em coming!

[@scienceexplains302]

John 1:1 reflects the Septaguint more than the surviving Hebrew text, “In the beginning of Elohim’s creation,” or something close to that

[@ajtlim]

🐦🐦the word.. Appreciate you sharing your knowledge about the truth about our religion

[@lissam8988]

I hope you continue thank you so much

[@DramaAndPages]

As always, thank you for your videos

[@erichwebb8312]

Thanks for the share ...... ✝︎

[@michaelwilson1312]

Dr. Monger you have to do more of these. I appreciate your teaching method. How could we know that Philo came before the Gospel of John. Is that provable?

[@QuestionThingsUseLogic]

Philo of Alexandria and Appolyon of Tyana, Josephus, Hero of Alexandria and more were all the same person using aliases and pseudonyms. He was Arrius Piso: main author of the NT.

[@MatthewCaunsfield]

Another great entry to this series

[@ryanfristik5683]

Also can u debate some apologists. U are so soft spoken I think u would be received well

[@celsus7979]

Great video again!

[@midbamarail]

Thank you

[@achildofthelight4725]

In the beginning points to many chapters in the book of Genesis. Jesus is the lamb, Isaacs replacement, replacing the image of Abraham killing an innocent man. Jesus (father figure) is then crucified by the children of Abraham. Before Abraham was your father, I am his sacrifice. Logos (word of God) is anything made manifested by God through the logos from the mind of man. Its the bridge/Gap between the two minds. GOD 👉🏼LOGOS👈🏼 MAN ××We are the creator××

[@danielpaulson8838]

Same templates. Different analogous verbiage. One teaching told in a thousand different ways. It does retell creation. But people think creation means the universe. Through intense analysis it would seem the template is based on the stages of a humans life cycle, so these play out in the psyche and a conversion must be made. Think Fable. Do you read it literally? This is another style. They are puzzles and we lost the keys to access them. I found them.

[@ChrisMusante]

The 'word' is truth... and truth cannot change, nor be broken, and exists in all senses of time - the was, is, and will be and forever more. Care to discuss 1 Corinthians 2:8? It's time to upset the 'apple cart'.

[@ChrisMusante]

Isaiah 45:7.... reconcile that and you can join me in fulfilling Isaiah 52:15. Yes, I am willing to 'share'. Where 2 or more are gathered, energy increases and 'stuff' happens.

[@mmarinete1116]

Muito interessante!!!

[@Larry30102]

I guess I’ve looked at the beginning of John as an early xian creed.

[@victordelarosa4599]

Dense, but interesting

[@crazydumbsick]

people are physical imagination.

[@venuscraig748]

jesus.. it s the alphabet, works like a periodic table.. he used speech which is the product of his breath, the aleph. your product is your offspring. abracadabra.. creation!

[@tsemayekekema2918]

Why does modern anti-trinitarian prejudice failed to see how transparently BI-NITARIAN Philo was in his conception of the Word?? The Word is literally called the NAME of YHWH in Philo's text! How much more explicit could could one possibly declare a belief in a non-unitarian YHWH-asides literally giving YHWH's NAME to to another persona??

[@tylerdavis520]

Is Philo the source of all truth?

[@tsemayekekema2918]

@@tylerdavis520 I was merely insisting that Philo was at least bi-nitarian-& not Unitarian-very much unlike modern Jews

[@tylerdavis520]

@@tsemayekekema2918 Philo was a syncretist who didn’t even take the Torah literally, so I don’t think he’s necessarily a good example of Jewish beliefs. Supposedly he didn’t have a great grasp of Hebrew, and he mainly read from the Greek Septuagint.

[@tsemayekekema2918]

@@tylerdavis520 He believed in avoiding pork & keeping the Sabbath & avoiding pork-that makes him a proper Jew. Much of what is misrepresented as "syncretism" is merely acceptance of what was considered "objective science" at the time. For instance, a modern Jew can believe that the world isn't flat-that doesn't mean syncretism at all. Many of our ideas of what a "non-syncretistic Jew" ought to think are merely artificial modern ideas. There didn't exist any pre-modern version of Judaism - for instance - which didn't accept the existence of other gods asides YHWH; "NON-SYNCRETISTIC" Judaism merely insisted that YHWH was the SUPREME Creator of the other gods. Monotheism is a post-Enlightenment invention that was used to justify anti-supernatural prejudices that supported modern Deism & conveniently denied the reality of magic carried out in connexion with created lower-deities (& the miracles executed by the Supreme Deity (YHWH)). Philo abstained from all active-worship of created-deities-& that was the essence of being a "NON-syncretistic" Jew. Many definitions of syncretism are really just nonconformity to rules that were made up in our modern era-they do not reflect the standards of any real -premodern "monotheistic" humans. Greek Philosophy was simply the science of Philo's time. What made one truly Jewish was the radical-insistence on the Creator-status & supremacy of Israel's God over the universe. Philo's "heavy" dependence on Greek philosophy was by no means syncretic. The idea of the existence of multiple YHWHs-has no precedent in any pagan philosophy, contrary to oft-repeated assertions within & outside serious-scholarship

[@tsemayekekema2918]

Unitarianism was never a mainstream idea in pre-Exilic & Second Temple Judaism - it only gained traction in the Rabbinic period as a reaction again Christianity's radical identification of the "Deputy YHWHs"-Wisdom/Word/NAME/Shekinah/Glory/Khavod-with the man who was Jesus.

[@rursus8354]

Platonism for sure: John 1 makes Jesus the Demiurge. The real problem for Christianity is John 8:44, which is systematically maltranslated to _"for you are the children of your father the devil, and you love to do the evil things he does."_ while the real Greek translates to _"you are from the father of the devil, and you love to do the evil things he does."_ The father of the Devil is YHWH according to the Christians, and the father of the Devil is YHWH, a false and evil god, the Demiurge, according the Gnostics. Parts of John is written by Gnostics.

[@tsemayekekema2918]

Why does the father of the devil have to be YHWH?? Throw aside your medieval assumptions and realize that word the devil can refer to ANY kind of enemy deity, not neccesarily the so-called supreme leader of ALL "evil" spirits. The devil in that context can mean any of the prominent sons of Zeus or some other Greek/Roman deity who was believed to have sons. The father of the devil in this context can be literally any Greco-Roman deity who had sons; there's absolutely no basis for the assumption that it has to refer to YHWH-only Gnostic interpreters imagined such a thing. Jesus is presented here as polemically likening the Temple Authorities to some polytheistic father-deity-without taking polemic simile with any form of literalness, as the Temple authorities didn't actually engage in polytheism. Saying someone is "like Hitler" doesn't imply any real relationship with Hitler; being like the "father of some enemy ("devil"-which literally just means opponent/enemy in Greek)"-doesn't literally mean connecting any Jews to any "devil/enemy" polytheistic-deity; it was merely an insult by Jesus which was never meant literally. There is no reason to assume the "devil's / an-enemy's (bivalent Greek meaning)" father has to refer to YHWH - as opposed to any other pagan deity that was known to have gods as children

[@rogerweir1772]

Genesis is totally prophetic for 1st century events...

[@ETERNALCYCLES]

The author of John 1 seems influenced by philo's logos .