Uploaded December 2024 | Updated September 2026, 2 weeks ago
I explore the connection between theology, humanity, history and culture. I do this in the hopes of creating meaningful dialogue with others. I am creating dialogues with Jordan Peterson, Joe Rogan, Russel Brand and other powerful voices in culture.
Join this channel to support the work:
youtube.com/channel/UCEY1vGNBPsC3dCatZyK3Jkw/join
Remember to keep comments respectful.
I would love for you to catch all the upcoming videos.
🔔 Subscribe youtube.com/@UCEY1vGNBPsC3dCatZyK3Jkw
Here are excerpts from the article, “Was Jesus a Jew? Was Aristotle a Greek-American? Translating "Ioudaios," By Bruce J. Malina
“Most historians, professional and non-professional, play fast and loose with the term "Jew." They find Jews all over the ancient Mediterranean world as well as in the modern world…the historical question is: Is it historically accurate to find Jews in the Old and New Testaments of the Bible? Is it a fair assessment of the past? Or is it simply ethnocentric anachronism, like calling Cicero an Italian-American, or Seneca a Spanish-American, or Plato and Aristotle Greek Americans? After all there are Italian, Spanish and Greek immigrants in the U.S., now citizens, so their ancestors must have been the same as they are? Since there are Jews today, their alleged ancestors must have been the same as they are…It is common knowledge that Christianity is different from the religion of the Old Testament, but some are still unaware that Judaism (sometimes referred to as Rabbinic Judaism, as opposed to the religion or the Judaism practiced during biblical times) is a different religion from that of the Hebrew Bible….Perhaps it should be emphasized that the problem with translation is due to the significance of the word "Jew" in contemporary usage. To put "Jews" in the first century is simply anachronistic and, for modern Jews, ethnocentric. Yet there may be reason for confusion since the term "Ioudaios" was made to bear double freight in the first century…In John 8:31 there are Judeans who initially believe in Jesus, but after the conversation deteriorates they decide Jesus is not really one of them…The inscription over the cross (19:19) has in it a wonderful irony that would have rankled Jesus’ Judean opponents: it spells out Jesus’ identification as "Jesus of Nazareth." That is, Jesus, a Galilean, is being designated "King of the Judeans."
I explore the connection between theology, humanity, history and culture. I do this in the hopes of creating meaningful dialogue with others. I am creating dialogues with Jordan Peterson, Joe Rogan, Russel Brand and other powerful voices in culture.
Join this channel to support the work:
youtube.com/channel/UCEY1vGNBPsC3dCatZyK3Jkw/join
Remember to keep comments respectful.
I would love for you to catch all the upcoming videos.
🔔 Subscribe youtube.com/@UCEY1vGNBPsC3dCatZyK3Jkw
Here are excerpts from the article, “Was Jesus a Jew? Was Aristotle a Greek-American? Translating "Ioudaios," By Bruce J. Malina
“Most historians, professional and non-professional, play fast and loose with the term "Jew." They find Jews all over the ancient Mediterranean world as well as in the modern world…the historical question is: Is it historically accurate to find Jews in the Old and New Testaments of the Bible? Is it a fair assessment of the past? Or is it simply ethnocentric anachronism, like calling Cicero an Italian-American, or Seneca a Spanish-American, or Plato and Aristotle Greek Americans? After all there are Italian, Spanish and Greek immigrants in the U.S., now citizens, so their ancestors must have been the same as they are? Since there are Jews today, their alleged ancestors must have been the same as they are…It is common knowledge that Christianity is different from the religion of the Old Testament, but some are still unaware that Judaism (sometimes referred to as Rabbinic Judaism, as opposed to the religion or the Judaism practiced during biblical times) is a different religion from that of the Hebrew Bible….Perhaps it should be emphasized that the problem with translation is due to the significance of the word "Jew" in contemporary usage. To put "Jews" in the first century is simply anachronistic and, for modern Jews, ethnocentric. Yet there may be reason for confusion since the term "Ioudaios" was made to bear double freight in the first century…In John 8:31 there are Judeans who initially believe in Jesus, but after the conversation deteriorates they decide Jesus is not really one of them…The inscription over the cross (19:19) has in it a wonderful irony that would have rankled Jesus’ Judean opponents: it spells out Jesus’ identification as "Jesus of Nazareth." That is, Jesus, a Galilean, is being designated "King of the Judeans."
