One More Time on the Decree and Time, then, the Wild World of Ammon Hillman

Greetings, welcome to The Dividing Line. My name is James White. Why isn't that working? I don't know. Well, that's all right. We'll leave it that way. Hopefully everything else is working and we are on the air.

I am in, I'll just say the Houston area, which is a really big area so that no one's going to be pulling up behind the RV after the program. If I say I'm in the Houston area, there's lots of RV parks in the Houston area.

And drove through San Antonio this morning. Oh my goodness, let me tell you something real quickly. There are a few things more nerve-wracking than driving. When I'm hooked up, I'm 57 feet long, 13 and a half feet tall, about the size of a semi-tractor trailer, a little bit smaller, not much.

And there is a 15-mile section of construction coming out of San Antonio, coming east. And I'm going to tell you, when you do those two lanes, they're narrowed down, they're not on good, they're rough, and you have cement barriers on each side that are right at the lane.

I mean, you've got almost no space on either side. And semi-trucks are coming through there, and they're speeding. You're supposed to be doing like 55, they're doing 65, they go blowing by you, they're blowing you around, and you've got almost no room.

It's not enjoyable. And there were some super rough sections. I came in here, and there's a window behind me, which is covered at the moment, obviously. And the windows in here have these things you can turn to open them.

And I found one of the knobs laying on some stuff here on the couch. It had been bounced off by how much shaking was going on in that construction zone. It was getting me prepared for Louisiana, I guess.

It wasn't... Texas normally does a little better job than that, but they're not doing a real good job right now out of San Antonio, let's put it that way. It's pretty ugly. So anyways, we got here in one piece.

I just finished doing two hours with Chris Arnzen on Iron Sharpens Iron. And so you might want to catch that if you're interested. And right here at the beginning, I'm going to... Some interesting providence has taken place.

Last evening, Jeff Durbin sent a link and said, check this out. I'm getting... Some people are sending me links to this guy. And I've never seen him before. What do you think about it? A guy named Ammon Hillman called a Greek Bible expert.

We'll look at that. And the title of the one we're going to look at, Dead Sea Scrolls Debunked, Evidence the Bible is a Fairy Tale. Now, look, you can go on YouTube and find everything. There's no... Nobody has to pass any tests.

No one has to present any credentials, any meaningful work. You can put anything you want on the internet, how stupid or silly it does not make any difference. So you can find all sorts of this kind of silliness on YouTube.

I started listening to this thing. Well, we're going to play it. We're going to respond to it. And right at the same time, I already had it queued up to use. I get a message request on Facebook. I normally don't see a lot of those.

I saw this one. And the name caught me. It was could you respond to this guy, Ammon Hillman, and what he says about why Jesus was arrested. And so I sent back a question mark, and I just put the guy's name in and Jesus the rest.

Same thing popped up that that person then sent to me. Wow. That's all I can say is, wow, you might want to stick around. There's going to be some interesting stuff here as we look at that. But before we do that, before we look at the drug crazed insanity that is out there on the internet, I wanted to, again, Twitter comes along and provides something worthwhile to look at.

And I saw that a conversation was taking place and that Turretinfan was involved with it, and Turretinfan was going back and forth with some people. And I encountered this tweet. It wasn't written to me.

It was written to, I think, Turretinfan. You're not listening to what I'm saying. James White believes in Calvinism, which says that God desires and causes everything to happen the way it does, and nobody has free will to do otherwise.

Given that starting point, it makes no sense for him to critique evil. So I assume that there was something that came before this. Yes. OK. Yeah. I had already responded to him. Yes. I had originally talked about Prop 4 in Florida and Prop 139 in Arizona, which are these satanic baby murder measures to put into the constitutions of these states the ability to murder children up to the point of birth, if you think they're going to stop there.

Silly person. And I had said in the original post that I posted actually last night, this is the long-term impact of the God-hating essence of secularism and the indoctrination of the young into the culture of death.

And just like turning the White House into a gay pride flag is a massive extension of the middle finger toward heaven with the collective scream, we hate you, we hate your ways, we love our sin, and you go ahead and do your worst, we don't care.

That was my thing. This fellow, Pel Chin, and his own description is a young Christian country boy, philosopher and historian. Truth matters. Family matters. Christ is king. Om Yisrael Chai. OK. There's some there's an Israeli flag and the Star of David, a few things like that.

Actually, not enough followers that I would normally engage with, but I decided to engage with it anyways. He says, I agree with you, of course, but I do find it funny and odd that you complain about this as a Calvinist.

And I had responded 11 hours ago, which only tells me every thoroughly false understanding of Calvinism. Now, I could have gone on and on and on because I don't know how many hours we've spent on this program.

We did a series on theodicy once that was, I think it was eight hours. Going super in depth in response to a young man that was asking questions about evil and God and the decree of God and the will of man.

And, you know, I don't have a library in the background here, but we could pull out Jonathan Edwards and do all that kind of stuff. And so he responded, I don't think so. I've been watching your content for a while.

It seems pretty clear that you believe God has intentionally decreed everything that happens. And so you complaining about the things God wants to happen, according to your view, makes no sense. And again, other people had jumped in and I was traveling today, so I didn't see any of this type of stuff.

But then I said, you know, when he wrote the James White believes in Calvinism thing, I said, I shall have the 10 ,000th time correct this constant canard at the beginning of the dividing line in about 54 minutes from now.

I said, something tells me you'll be repeating the same things you've been saying over and over with no apparent meaningful distinction. Well, I said, well, if biblical parameters are insufficient, then in defining what a meaningful distinction is, well, then fine.

I believe what I believe, because scripture teaches me to believe what I believe. And I believe all the scripture, believe in Sola Scriptura and Tota Scriptura. And I refuse to take a philosophical position and filter what scripture says through it.

Yes, scripture says that God has decreed whatsoever comes to pass. God says, I do whatever I please in heaven and the earth. And it specifically says amongst men, I frustrate the plans of the peoples, but I established my own plans.

I mean, it's just you know, Psalm 139, it's just over and over again. We've gone through this, as I said, 10 ,000 times before, where God makes this very, very plain and people don't like it. And they rebel against it and they go, well, I can't believe that because that would mean this, that would mean that rather than submitting to God's word.

But then, well, then you don't have any. Why should you be complaining about it? Why should you be complaining about Prop 139? Because it's evil. Well, but God decreed it. That's where you're demonstrating you don't have a clue what the Bible actually says.

You do not have a biblical worldview. You may have a philosophical worldview. You may have all sorts of traditions. I don't know. But as I've said over and over again, one thing you're missing, one important thing that you're missing is that God became man.

God became flesh. And the very God that decreed all things, works all things after the counsel of his will, the beginning and the end, the Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, that God became flesh.

And as man, did he decry evil? Uh, what was his first preaching? Repent. Oh, wait a minute. That's decrying evil. Yeah. Yeah. Did he recognize the evil amongst men? Yes. Did he identify it as evil? Yes.

Did he tell us to avoid that evil? Yes. Did he tell evil people to repent? Yes. So in other words, I'm doing everything Jesus did. Huh? Yeah, I am. Because see, I believe all the scripture, not just parts of scripture.

And so the God-man, who himself is involved in that decree in eternity past, when he enters into human flesh, prophetically speaks the truth and calls people to repentance, calls Herod a fox. Hmm. That sounds like a condemnation of Herod, huh?

Why would he do that? Because God's bigger than your teeny tiny little philosophy. And if your tiny little mind can't understand how God is big enough to form the very fabric of time and places people in that fabric of time and make them to have the same desires as he has for goodness and justice.

And part of the, I think part of the problem here is this guy is, doesn't seem to understand that God's desire for goodness and justice is not the same thing as God's quote unquote desire for evil. Because that's not even a biblical phrase.

God uses it. God creates raw, Isaiah tells us. That's different than what he desires. So it's probably not even allowing that type of, most folks, again, provisionists, people like that, flatten it all down.

I don't care the richness of what biblical revelation is. I'm just going to flatten it all out. So it fits into my teeny tiny little brain and my teeny tiny little philosophical structures. And I don't do that.

So there you go. You can either believe all God says or believe all that man wants you to believe. And that's about all there is to it. So, and again, we've covered that 27 ,000 times before, keeps getting larger each time I say it.

So I want to, I don't want to be until this morning, I never heard of Dr. Ammon Hillman. Never heard of him. And so I watched the one we're going to look at. And then like I said, this afternoon, got this Facebook message, pulled up this other thing, haven't even listened to all of that, but I listened to enough of it to almost get sick.

It is perverted. It is absurd on a level that is beyond imagination. I say that as someone with far more experience with Koine Greek than this man has. I was teaching Koine Greek when he was in diapers.

And this stuff is absurd. I mean, it is out in this other one. And we may look at it. They even had to bleep stuff out of this other one. So I'll see. And I can't get to it till after this weekend. I've got a very, very busy weekend coming up with the debate on Saturday, speaking all day Sunday.

And so, and again, don't have live streaming information to give you yet, but yeah. And then I've got to shoot back across the country to Fort Worth and be at the Fight Lafitte thing. So I'm not sure when I'm going to get to it, but it was just so painfully obvious to me.

I think this guy's on drugs. I mean, he talks about drugs. In fact, let me just read you. Here's what it says from this video. This is in the description of this video that we're going to look at. Dr. Ammon Hillman earned his MS in bacteriology and PhD in classics from the University of Wisconsin, Madison.

Oh, Madison, Wisconsin. What's Madison, Wisconsin known for? Atheism. It's a deep blue spot on the map where he specialized in ancient Greek, not Koine, in ancient Greek and Roman medicine and pharmacy.

So bacteriology and then classics, ancient Greek, Roman medicine and pharmacy. His first book, The Chemical Muse, was published with St. Martin's Press immediately after his dissertation committee forced him to delete all references to recreational drugs from his thesis.

Dr. Hillman was recently investigated by the Vatican for demon possession and portal opening while teaching as a professor of classical languages. I thought I had an interesting bio. Not even close. Okay.

So his dissertation had all sorts of references to recreational drugs. Okay. Yeah. So this is taken from YouTube. It's called Fair Use, guys, just in case you're wondering. We're going to be criticizing what is being said and I haven't checked.

I will try to put the little bitty, bitty thing up here when I switch over. I don't know if it'll work or not, but I'll try. But let's dive into it because this is going to be interesting. So let's see how this works.

These texts that you're reading and that you're.

Translating, are these the original, original, original sources of religion, of Christianity and Catholicism and baptism and all this stuff? Is this like the originals? Yeah, this is the.

Language that held all of those texts. So the New Testament's all written in ancient Greek, right? What you call the Old Testament, and I'm going to shock people with this one, what you call the Old Testament, which people say is written in Hebrew, right?

Which is not a language that I work with. I had to take a little bit of modern Hebrew when I was there.

Just because it was part of the education. But the text that you think is written in Hebrew is not.

It's a Greek text that's written in the third century. It's a Hellenistic text that you call the Torah or the Old Testament. That is not an original Hebrew text. Now, how can I say that? What we have is the Septuagint that I'm talking about.

It's the Greek Old Testament. Do you.

Understand Greek Old Testament? Okay. It's the oldest form that we've got. Okay. The whole big.

Deal about the Dead Sea Scrolls was they said, huh, we finally have some Hebrew because none of it survives, right? Hebrew is only an 8 ,000 word. Ancient Hebrew, 8 ,000 word.

Okay. You are muted. Yeah. Too many buttons to push. Got to find a way around this. Sorry about that. I've got to push this button and that button and that button and that button. Sorry. I don't know where it was, and then the phone rang because I can't see signal at the same time, too.

It throws me off. It really, really does. But I don't know. Maybe I'm just not up to speed enough to do this kind of stuff. Too many things all at once. That's possible. Let me go back. Maybe we'll just cut out that part, I guess, and I'll see if I can pick things up here and make some sense out of it and remember to turn.

See, the problem is I have to turn my microphone off because it feeds back from that, but that's the only way I can hear what he's saying. So I can't comment on what he's saying if I can't hear what he's saying.

And so there's where the problem is. And that's why I've got to mute that, this, this, and so I apologize. So I'll pick up from here and hopefully we can make some sense out of it on the other end. So I apologize for that.

And just because it was part of the education.

But the text that you think is written in Hebrew is not. It's a Greek text that's written in the 3rd century. It's a Hellenistic text that you call the Torah or the Old Testament. That is not an original Hebrew text.

Now, how can I say that? What we have is the Septuagint that I'm talking about. It's the Greek Old Testament. Do you understand Greek Old.

Testament? Okay, muted. That's on. Okay. I don't think the guy who's doing the interviewing has any idea what he's talking about. And watching other stuff, he doesn't have any idea what he's talking about.

But the problem is we're going to discover is, okay, he just said he doesn't know Hebrew. He's not studied Hebrew. And his study is of classical Greek, not Koine Greek. And the problem is what he understands the Septuagint is minimal.

Let's put it that way. That's what's going to cause some of the problems here. Okay. It's the oldest form that we've got.

Okay. Okay. The whole big deal about the Dead Sea Scrolls was they said, ha, we finally have some Hebrew because none of it survives, right? Hebrew is only an 8 ,000 word, ancient Hebrew, 8 ,000 word, unique word count language.

Okay. Which puts it in the realm of something you could expend by the end of your breakfast. 8 ,000 words. Okay.

Okay. The problem with saying that in that way is when we're talking about ancient Hebrew, we only have what was written. And obviously any book, any series of books, whatever, is going to have far less words than the entire language does.

And ancient languages, you don't have as much to describe. You don't have technical terminology for astrophysics or medicine and stuff like that. So yes, Hebrew vocabulary, because it is ancient, is less voluminous than, for example, what you have in Koine Greek or even classical Greek.

Or things like that. Because it goes so far back. It goes so far into history. And really, we're talking about some of the earliest written documents that we have. People think that, well, you know, from the beginning, we've got all the way back.

No. No, that's what's amazing when they find inscriptions. They found that inscription, what, about two years ago, with a portion from the Deuteronomy 28 -29, Curses and Blessings, Mount Ebel. They found that in Proto-Hebrew in an inscription.

That's some of the oldest human writing ever discovered. So a lot of the reason that people get away with things like this guy is that modern people have, that we will project our experience into antiquity.

And we can't do that. You've got to realize, very, very, very, very different situation at that point in time.

It's not a lot. Okay. And the Dead Sea Scrolls were all in Hebrew?

The Dead Sea Scrolls were fragments in Hebrew and fragments in Greek, and everybody assumed, oh.

Um, yes, there are fragments, but there are entire scrolls. The Isaiah Scroll is complete. That wouldn't be described as fragmentary. And the more recent X-ray discovery, we've talked about before, where you had a fossilized scroll, which you could not enroll.

It would just turn into dust. But someone really smart went, why don't we X-ray it? Because the ink will reflect differently than the parchment. And then they digitally unrolled the scroll using X-ray.

It's just so cool. That's so fantastic. And it was a full scroll of Leviticus with the Masoretic Text. So the Hebrew Masoretic Text of Leviticus existed, as did Isaiah, contemporaneously with the translation of the Greek Septuagint.

So the Hebrew is before the Septuagint. And anyone who studied Septuagint textual issues knows that it gives evidence of the translators having access to different manuscript traditions within the Hebrew Masoretic Tradition, what became the Hebrew Masoretic Tradition.

There are variants there. There were other traditions prior to the establishment of the Masoretic. And you can see that from looking at the variants in the Greek Septuagint. So the Greek Septuagint is, in fact, the translation of the Hebrew that existed 300 years before Christ, approximately.

He's going to dispute that, but he doesn't actually know what he's talking about.

This is the original in Hebrew, right? Because now we're following church history. You and I live in a time in the stream, the time stream. We live at a time when we think that there was an original Hebrew text of the Old Testament, but there wasn't.

It doesn't exist, right?

And to show people the Greek, what's the proof? Okay. It doesn't exist. Well, we don't have the original quote-unquote Septuagint. Here's one of the problems. There is no original Septuagint. The Septuagint was translated over time.

The mythology of the origination of it, the 70 or 72 scholars go into their caves, they translate, they come out, all their translations agree word for word. Therefore, it's been done by divine inspiration.

Christians believed that for hundreds of years. The Septuagint was the Bible of the early church. That's not how it happened. It's very clear that the Pentateuch, five books of Moses, were done early on and were done very, very well.

Very, very well. And it's pretty much based upon the same tradition as the Masoretic text, Hebrew Masoretic text, that we have in the Dead Sea Scrolls and then 900 years later in some of the great Hebrew codices that were the earliest Hebrew text we had for a long time, until the Dead Sea Scrolls.

But other portions of the Old Testament are close to being equally good. But then there are portions that are not good at all. Clearly, it was not all done by the same people at the same time. It was done over time.

There are a lot of variations in the Septuagint transmission lines, which if you have the at least some variations noted. But there is now a fairly full critical textual apparatus for the Septuagint as well.

But there is no one single Septuagint. I mean, it sort of becomes codified by the Christians down the road. But it clearly developed over in the second, third, second centuries before Christ. But it is a translation of the Hebrew.

So this idea, well, we don't have a Hebrew original. Well, of course you don't have a quote-unquote original writings we have that are that old. It has to be chiseled in a rock, okay? You're not going to have a papyrus that's going to last that many thousands of years.

It's just not going to happen. This is biological material. And as I've always said when I give my New Testament presentation, which I'll be doing this coming Sunday, in fact, in Mobile, when I show the papyri, I go, now, if any of you are tempted to go, man, those aren't all that great shape, I'm going to look at you and say, what are you going to look like in 1800 years?

And that's true. Biological stuff isn't designed to last that long, unless it's frozen in a glacier or something like that. Not too many glaciers in the Mediterranean. Not at all, in fact. And very few in Egypt or any place else like that, too.

So there you go. The proof is when you read.

The Septuagint, that is the Greek Old Testament, it does not read as a translation.

It reads as an original. It uses Greek idiom. Okay, so now we've got some guy who can't read Hebrew, reads classical Greek, but we're supposed to believe him when he says, oh, it doesn't read like a translation.

It reads like an original. No, I've translated lots of the Septuagint. It reads as a translation. So who are you going to believe? All of Christian scholarship, up to the guy who's really into drugs, as we will find out.

Or there's your choice. And man, it seems today, we live in a day where hands been withdrawn and everybody's like, wow, I think that makes better sense. That's it. Okay, if you say so.

Like a fingerprint on language, and it's got great fingerprints.

How do you discern the difference, whether it be.

An original or a translation? Oh, you can tell. It's easy to tell,.

Because colloquialisms don't translate. Okay, it's easy to tell. Look at all the discussions of, well, we had the discussion with the one brother who has decided that, I guess, the entire New Testament was actually originally written in Hebrew and then translated into Greek.

And scholarship does discuss these things in the sense that the only version of Matthew that there's any historical evidence of was written in Greek. So the question is, how does that relate to Aramaic?

How does that relate to Hebrew, depending on which one you would think would be being spoken and all the rest of that kind of stuff. Why do you have in, especially, that's in John 2, but especially in the Synoptic Gospels, the transliteration of terms.

We want to continue to use the right place names. Or he said to her, which interpreted means, well, so you're dealing with a situation in the ancient world where in Israel at that time, you had different languages being spoken.

You had Hebrew in the synagogue, Aramaic, you have arguments about exactly how that worked and what the balance was, things like that. You had Greek because Alexander the Great had taken over pretty much the entire world.

And then you had some Latin, even though even the Roman soldiers were still speaking Greek. And so if you're a fisherman, you might go, well, he's going to be illiterate, but you better know what that Roman soldier is saying to you.

You might need to have some idea. And if you're doing stuff in economics and trading and trade and all that, you might know more about those other languages than people might expect that you know. But this guy is just throwing up dust.

He's just giving us, well, it's easy to sell. No, that's not true. My reading of the Greek Septuagint shows me that, and again, it'll depend on where you are in the Septuagint, that the translator or translators, and they wouldn't all be the same ones, were dealing with different traditions of Hebrew manuscripts, and they're doing the best they can to render the Hebrew into a...

Some of them, especially in this altar, some of the weirdest translations say to me and to many others that the translators... I don't know how much to go into here. If you're familiar with Philo's attempts to communicate Jewish beliefs in a Greek philosophical world, then you would know that there are elements of the Hebrew Old Testament revelation that are somewhat embarrassing to the Greek world.

And so a lot of times I'll look at the that seems like they're trying to clean it up a little bit. Maybe there's a little bit of embarrassment at the bluntness of what the Hebrew said. So again, he can't do that.

He can't read Hebrew. And the Greek that he's reading is different than Koine anyways, and so he can't see that kind of stuff. And I was looking at that other video that you may look at later. I'm not even certain.

Again, I guess he's got a lot of stuff out there. I'd never heard it before. Nobody had asked me about it. The lexical sources that he was using were not modern and were not up to date. So we'll see if that follows through too.

But anyway.

Right. And so it's like tagging it. So you're testing this language to see what its age is. So you tag it with certain things. And one of them is colloquialisms. The other one is technical vocabulary.

You cannot translate from a higher technical degree to an excuse me. You can't translate from a median technical degree to a high technical degree. OK, you can go down the slope. You can take something that's not technical.

Right. And make it more technical. Right. You can force that. You can't drift upstream. Right. Right. Right. So if the original the original is going to have the highest degree.

Of technicality. Yes. So. OK. In a general sense, you know, if you've if you've got a non-technical language, you translate into technical languages. OK, fine. But making application here. For example, if you know anything about Hebrew, you know, call and nifal and pl and pual and hythpail and hofal and hefeel, the various verbal forms in the Hebrew language.

If you've ever looked up terms and one of the really frustrating things is when you will you look up a term and it can have two possible meanings. And it's hefeel form will be completely different than its call form.

And this is one of the reasons you get some really interesting differences in Old Testament translations. I can tell you some fun stories about that, but we'll skip it for now. The most of the better elements of the Septuagint translation.

They're trying to take that into consideration as much as they can, though they might have struggled a little bit. You know, at least we our current Hebrew lexicons and, you know, Brown, Dr. Briggs is old now, but a polar bomb gardener, stuff like that.

We've got a lot of there's been a lot of stuff discovered over the past 70 years that has greatly increased the lexical database from which to draw, especially given the fact that languages like Hebrew in Israel, you have other nations speaking Semitic languages, and it's a small part of the world.

So they're constantly bumping into each other. And so there are loan words. Um, it's interesting, you know, Arabic comes along much later, but it's a Semitic language. And when I studied Arabic, I basically just limped along using my Hebrew grammar and fit the Arabic terms in because there was a lot of correlation.

There was a lot of connection, even at times in vocabulary. So Hebrew would borrow terms from Ugaritic and Akkadian and stuff like that. And you could, especially when dealing with flora and fauna, sometimes, you know, the King James translators say, there are some things we just don't even know what it's referring to.

Well, we know now because we now have ancient documents or inscriptions and things like that in those other languages in Ugaritic or something like that. Oh, look, that's the same term. That must be what it's referring to.

So it's been a lot of advancement in that area as well. But the point is, the Septuagint does give evidence of struggling with those issues as a translation. And, you know, he doesn't seem to know anything about that or, you know, I don't.

Know. The Dead Sea Scrolls were not the highest degree of technical writing. They were lower. They were lower than the Greek, what was the word, the book you're talking about?

They're Hebrew back translations because of the time, the Dead Sea Scrolls. They're Hebrew back translations. So they took the Greek. Of what specifically? They took the Greek and they said, how do we translate this into Greek?

Okay. That's why you lose all the technical terms.

I think he misspoke there. I think what he meant to say, how do you translate this into Hebrew? Because his claim is that the Greek is first. And what this means, of course, is that the entire Old Testament, from his perspective, was written 200 years for Christ.

There's no prophecy. There's no Isaiah. Everything we're finding that is more ancient than that of Hebrew fiction, he doesn't seem to understand any of that. Doesn't seem to know anything about the evil inscription that was recently found, Davidic inscriptions.

He doesn't seem to know about any of that stuff and is just ignoring it because none of that can exist. If what you're literally telling us is that the Septuagint is the original form of the Tanakh and the Hebrew came out, because that's what you say, it's back translation, came afterwards, then you can't have anything pre-existing 250.

Anything pre-existing 250. And we do. Not a lot, which you wouldn't expect to have a lot. Again, antiquity, but we do. And so, yeah, not only that, this means that all the stuff where we find civilizations that have been completely lost, cities that never existed, and then they find it.

All this kind of stuff where the Old Testament has been shown over and over again to be a historical text. All that's just fiction. It's gone. You just have to ignore all of it. Which, again, he's going to start getting into the drug stuff here.

And when you're on drugs, you can't ignore all of it. You don't have to worry about any of it. It's real cool that.

Way. They didn't have them in their language. And what I'm asking is what... God, that's crazy. This is the first podcast I can remember where lightning has been this crazy, this loud. So the Dead Sea Scrolls came from where?

What were the sources of the Dead Sea Scrolls?

So those caves in Qumran, they've dated these things to probably... I've heard as early as 1st BC, but all the way up to 2nd, I don't know, Domini. So somewhere in that range, somebody is taking the Greek text that we know is already established, because people are quoting it.

We know, for example, they had the Book of Enoch in Greek, because people are quoting it in Greek. So that's how you can track your library. Where's your library at the time? That's how you track it, by the way.

Have you read the Book of Enoch? Yeah. I read the Giza fragments of it. I can say that much.

What do you think about all these people talking about Anunnaki aliens flying around.

And building pyramids back in the day? Okay. So this is where it starts getting.

Really weird. And I think, when I listen to this, there is an off-color word coming up, but I'm not exactly sure where it is. And so I apologize if I don't get to it, if I don't stop it in time. But this is where all of a sudden...

See, this other guy, I guess it's Danny Jones, he doesn't care about what this guy's saying. He certainly doesn't have any way of evaluating it or asking any serious questions, because he doesn't know anything about it.

Okay. So he wants to go off into space aliens and all the rest of this stuff. What's weird is, this guy's willing to... I'm not going to say it's stupid, but he is going to start pushing things toward his stuff, which is the role of chemistry.

Pharmakeia, a term that he would know very well, from which we get pharmacy. Sorcery, magic, drugs. Yes, that's always been a part of human experience. And so that's where they're going to try to go that direction.

But in the process, the whole idea is, the whole Bible is worthless. It has no value. It's historically a joke. It has no meaning. That's basically what it ends up saying. I think it's silly.

You do? Damn it. You know how many podcasts we've done with people who claim that they're.

Experts on the Anunnaki? Yeah. It seems to be a big area, but they were drug users, bro. What can you expect? That's what they taught in the Giza text. It says they taught the women the art of.

Drugs. So these weren't aliens. They were just drug users. They were just drug addicts. They were giants, bro. They were giants? Yeah. Yeah. Like real giants? Gigantas. Steve, are you crunching?

Oh, you can hear that? Oh my God. No, I liked it. I liked it. This is the ASMR podcast.