Episode #207: A Critique of the Documentary Hypothesis W/Joshua Erickson

0:30 Listening to the Mormon Renegade podcast. Josh back at it again, man. Yeah, it's been a long time coming for this one. It has, it has been talking about this one for a while because look, I'll be honest, I haven't completely made up my mind on this topic yet, right. So I'm really looking forward to these to these episodes that we're that I'm going to do on this because I feel like I'm gonna be learning with everybody else. So I'm super stoked. You're here. Thanks for tackling this. This is a, this is a meaty subject, the the bit of reading I have done on it.

1:13 It's it, it's meaty, right? It's not something that you're just gonna Breeze through and like a half hour and come up with a conclusion, I think and the implications of this are huge. Yeah. Yeah, I think my I think that's fair that it's, you know, it is quite a meaty thing and also, yeah, you're right. They're like the implications are Serious or can be serious. so yeah, I'm going to talk about the documentary hypothesis and also, I'm going to give kind of an overview of what the documentary hypothesis is, and kind of some of the concerns that I see with it. And then go into a little more depth on a part of the documentary hypothesis, which is called the deuteronomist hypothesis.

2:02 But that's just kind of a subset of the documentary hypothesis. So now you've heard of you've done a little research, you said so right? What is the, what is the documentary hypothesis? The. So again, you know, Yeah, I'm I'm probably gonna get this wrong, but as far as I can tell the documentary hypothesis makes the, the argument that there's essentially two things happening, especially within the Old Testament, right? And it has to do with the northern and the southern kingdoms and, um, that there's some propaganda play at times and some of the accounts that we read in Scripture. kind of more of a Priestly class versus a I don't even know what kind of class you'd call it. Right?

2:53 But you know how sacrifices are offered up? Are they offered up inside and outside the temple? Like there, there seems to be like It competing. Narrative, I shouldn't say narratives even because even the narratives kind of line up, but kind of competing voices if you will in the Old Testament, if I got any of that wrong or that's too simple. Please correct. No, that's pretty good. Yeah, it's a, it is a scholarly Dogma. I'll say like it is it is, it is the leading. Scholarly opinion. As far as how the scriptures were put together, especially when we're talking about the Torah, the, or the pentateuch, the five books of Moses, that's kind of where this began.

3:42 Although similar kind of analysis have been done to the rest of the scripture as well. The rest of the Bible at least, but yeah, it's basically saying that the five books and I have to be a little disclaimer here because there are actually A great many varieties of the documentary hypothesis. But what I'm just the part that I'm going to kind of stick to is kind of the scholarly consensus, I guess. So just realize that people who believe the documentary hypothesis might have different, even Scholars might have different variations on the things I'm going to say and I can't I can't really say all of the variations, but the consensus is that The five books of Moses were not written by Moses, but rather it's a composite work, as you said from like competing, factions of ancient Israelites.

4:50 For or more, sometimes there's six or eight or ten different competing, factions, and different different authors different literary Traditions that all eventually get stitched together and definitely, not at the time of Moses. But usually they say it was like the Torah did not come together until after the Babylonian captivity. Okay, so so do they make the content? The contention that up until The Babylonian captivity, it was all oral tradition, right? Yes, oral tradition and competing oral traditions. So I mean this this Theory this hypothesis I should say it is it is kind of a naturalistic theory of how the scripture has evolved and how it has developed.

5:44 In its again, in its scholarly form, it it denies the Divine or revelatory. Authorship of any of this again. There is no Moses who wrote these things. Moses is not the author of anything Moses is the one that all these are pinned on, all these ideas and stories are pinned on him, in order to give them Creedence and, you know, Authority. So not even though, even though the documentary hypothesis is atheistic like it's just naturalistic, that doesn't mean everyone who believes in it or atheist necessarily. But it is the kind of thing that, you know, agnostics and atheists.

6:25 Do subscribe to this Theory. As the as the source for the scriptures, obviously is very appealing in that way. so, You mentioned that the different source and I'll just briefly go through these, but it started, you know, back in the 1700s, there's a fellow named awestruck Jean ostrac. He's the guy on the left there. he was actually a physician, and he noticed that Sometimes the scriptures would use the the term Jehovah or Lord. And sometimes they would use. L or Elohim or some form of that name or God, right?

7:07 That's the English translation. And so, His his hypothesis, which was later kind of expanded by. Ikon who's the other guy shown there was that there was these two sources, J and E. And You know, and they were they had different names for God and in fact, in fact, the theory is that they were different gods. And that back in Israel's early days that they were polytheistic just like all the nations surrounding them and there's competing gods and eventually they got together for. Whatever the reason might be and decided to. Kind of smush the stories together. So, The.

7:55 Theory eventually gets picked up by this guy. Whose name is Julius bellhaus wellhausen. He's German Lutheran and he writes this book. Prologue. Gomez to the history of ancient Israel is like the prologue to the history of ancient Israel, and he really kind of puts the whole hypothesis together. there had been some other people who'd worked on this as well, but he is the one who really kind of comes up with this model here. So there's the J Source, the Jehovah source, and the Elohim source, and they get combined. And then at some point, there's another Priestly source and their kind of not as interested in the stories, but they're the priests are interested in, of course, sacrifices and the temple and things like that and then later there's a d source which is the deuteronomist which we'll talk about more later and actually they all get put together by an R source which is the redactor who kind of is the editor who is compiling all these things?

8:58 So wellhausen. His his kind of summary by the way, this is. So this is what Before we move on there, what if you're right with it? The folks who referred to God as Jehovah. Were they the North or the southern south Kingdom? I believe they were the northern all though. Although I don't know, that's actually not. That's kind of. As far as I've. Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's it. I'm pretty sure that's North.

9:39 Okay. Um, we have to look that up though. okay, this is this is kind of the breakdown of the books in the pentateuch the Torah and who the authors, who, who some people think that the authors are so, there's the The five sources there. That was Priestly, the deuteronomist, which basically has all the book of Deuteronomy, and then a redactor that kind of puts things together. Now, there are other versions like I said that, get much more complicated. This is not even this year, is not even the most complicated, but a lot of people think there's more than one deuteronomist author and um, and that And yeah, a lot of these things are broken down kind of quite far more than one redactor as well.

10:34 So here's another chart that I found, you know, this just from Wikipedia but this has Jep D1 D2, two different, red actors. And then some other things here in my just kind of, you know, when I first saw that graph, I felt like I should get my phone and scan that and see what it comes up as so You know, that's interesting. And are there any graphs that kind of show like You according to the theory, right? And yeah. Is there is there is there like graphs that show? Hey chapter 7 of Genesis through verses from here to here are being ascribed to Yeah, Jay.

11:18 Yeah. There's definitely there's only books, the the proponents of the documentary hypothesis. Can't really agree on those details. But there definitely are people who have put forward their their guesses about things they're hypotheses. Got you? Okay. Yep. And so you can, you can play it right down from. I mean, they're they have their scalpel and they're cutting like Cutting verses into pieces and chopping up. Chopping them up. Word by word to see to kind of guess where every word came from. so, Wellhausen, you know, his, he has idea.

12:01 Basically. Is that there was there was no law in ancient Israel. no, written law that the Torah was And this is, this is a lot of where the, the anti-Semitism comes from right. I mean, he's Lutheran. I don't know if you're familiar with the views that Martin Luther had towards the Jews. But they were it was not good. It's yeah, it's embarrassing. Actually. For Lutheran's probably. But anyway, he says there was no no written law. No Torah, that all was oral tradition. That was passed down and that Deuteronomy was the very first thing that was written.

12:44 And that was kind of started as I said during during the Babylonian exile, when the prophetic tradition had died out, so they just, you know, no, more profits were coming. And so they wrote these things down, Deuteronomy was the very first thing. then well, velhas and says, Ezekiel and his successors, they were responsible for the codification and systemization and also Ezra for the the Priestly code. Okay, so that's the P source. And that. This RIT having a written law. That is basically what made the Jews. Okay, that's what made Jews separate from Israel from ancient Israel.

13:34 Is that the Jews have this Torah which again, if you if you know anything about Martin Luther? Like he's not really a fan of Right. so it's really, yeah, it's kind of an anti at least in In Valles case, kind of an anti Jewish. Thing and an anti-law thing. Like we don't, we, you know, we are Christians, we're free from the law and the law wasn't really ever a thing. Anyway, that was just a bunch of like conspiring Jews who got together and wrote that and kind of pawned that off on the world as a as a thing. Interesting. You know, you said something else. That was interesting.

14:15 I want to make sure I understood that correctly, you're saying so the the documentary hypothesis proposes that there was no written Horror until the Babylonian captivity, because the prophetic tradition had died out. Yeah, until until then, or after Now, I will say that there are there are again, differences of opinion here. This is, this is well housing's opinion though. And he is the, he's the chief proponent kind of every all the other. Versions of the documentary. Hypothesis have been versions of Ohio housing's. So, there are, there are Versions, that believe that it, that some parts of it were that you did predate. The, the Babylonian captivity But for the most part, it's right there around. Around that time when the Torah actually comes into existence. So and can I ask a couple questions about Julius here? Because he's going to I I think I think some of his opinions May bear out some weight here so when he says it nothing was written down.

15:20 Does he does he make the oh, I guess the arguing does he lay down and argument that like Moses wasn't a historical figure. I don't, you know, I don't know if I have not, I have not read. This is, this is actually, it's originally written in German. There are translations in English. So I haven't read all of his stuff I have read. Some other books on it. This is the this is kind of the modern classic. And if you can read that, who wrote the Bible, the Bible, Richard Elliott Friedman. this is, But Friedman definitely doesn't believe in that Moses. Existed Friedman's a Jew even So that's kind of a wild thing to contemplate.

16:10 But yeah I think that most academic people anyway who are researching this and writing about it. I would say that most of them are agnostic at least on the existence of Moses. I think that's that's the usual thing and that show and that shows in the, in their hypotheses. Yeah. If you're honest about evaluating this. So, so, those those Scholars who are religious, right? And it's more specifically, Mormon slash LDS authors do. They just say, well, he was on to something, but he got this part about Moses wrong, right? Or something of that, that magnitude, how do they make that fit, right?

16:51 Um, you to be honest. I don't know how they make that, okay, it doesn't seem to be compatible if you take things to their logical conclusions. I do think there is. I mean, I'm going to be a little bit blunt here, but I think it is a I think belief, in this is a is a social Contagion. Similar to other crazy ideas that we see in our society. that don't really make sense if you take them to their conclusion but they are out there anyway and there's a large body of people pushing for it, and so it's kind of Invoke, you know, it's the scholarly thing. It's the intelligent thing.

17:36 It's the if you know, you kind of you're in the in the In Crowd, you know you know some Some secrets about how things are put together and and that's kind of exciting, you know? To. Yeah, because I was just thinking off the top of my head, it would be awfully hard to be. Like if you accepted the full thing, right? And look I'm leaving a lot of room here for nuance because I I do think this is one of those areas that that you would have to have a lot of nuance on if you were going to be a believer. So this is this is not a generalization but my thought is that if you were trying to be a believer in the restoration that no Moses thing is going to be hard because who comes to the current wind Temple to restore some keys for Joseph.

18:23 It's Moses Wright. Who, who is it on, on the mountain of transfiguration at Jesus's? Transfiguration, I believe Moses was one right? And so it does have yeah I could see I could see where it could be problematic. If you embrace the full thing without any new ones at all. Yeah. And so how do individual people do it? Like they would have to answer I guess for themselves. Okay. But you know the funny thing the funny thing is, is that Is that I would bet you that. If there are believers who decide that they're going to have a nuanced thing about it, that they would be ridiculed by the folks that are pushing this, by the scholars that came up with this. Um, so anyway, that's up to each person to decide but, you know, the so I'm going to kind of go through some of the the motivations for like why?

19:20 Why was? Why is this a thing? Like what are the evidence is, because There are evidences for the documentary hypothesis. There are kind of reasons why these things have been investigated and put forward as hypotheses in the first place. And so you know, I I don't want to say that it's without Merit. I just think that it's not the best theory. I do think that it falls apart if you examine it closely, but that doesn't mean that it's not without evidence. So so one of them and this is how we began is the, is the idea that there's more than one name used to refer to God. And in fact, there's more than just Elohim and Jehovah, right? There's actually a whole bunch of extra titles put on that. There's God Almighty and you know, Lord of hosts and, you know, I there's probably I know people have made Tables of this thing, you know, there's 50 or 60 different kind of titles giving to giving to God, man of war, and man of Holiness. And on and on, um, Now, the question, the question is, though.

20:33 Because this is, this is the deuteronomist. Supposition here, is that the fact that there is more than one name used to represent the god of Israel. Necessarily means that there's more than one author because if there was a single author and if it was Moses then you know therefore there would only be one name every used for God. Now you tell me what you think about that idea. Do you think that holds water that would be the only name you would use for God if it was one author. Yeah. It's like I'll just ask you a question. Like do you do you have one and only one name that by which you refer to your wife?

21:14 oh, You don't there you must be a multiple personalities, I don't know. Like it's it's no I'm just using but it's seems strange to and unnatural actually to kind of hold to that idea. As as a necessary condition. Okay? When it's just so obvious. So easily demonstrated that like, what a normal thing that is, To refer. I mean we just do it in our regular life. We refer to People by different names, A lot of that depending on the context. Whether yeah a co-worker or a mother, or a wife, or a sister, or a daughter Etc, right? Right.

22:01 And the other thing is too, is that this is all. So not a strange thing when we look at other documents in the near East, look at other tablets and inscriptions, and You know, the the gods of other nations are all. So, like in the same document referred to by multiple names, it is a normal thing to do and it's a normal thing for us to do in our everyday life. And so to, I think we are kind of straining at Nats here, like making things into evidence that aren't the don't really imply anything one way or the other. That's what I'm going to say. Gotcha, gotcha.

22:41 Okay, no. I make sense that's that's an interesting way of looking at two. I was just sitting here thinking about, you know, sometimes it's It's you know either Amber or Tanya or its hun or babe or something like that, right? Um, even with my kids, right? Sometimes it's not. Hey come here Jacob? It's come here son, right? So yeah I mean I see where you're going there. Yeah, so and you know, feel free to push back on any of this but the the other is not only God too. It's the other names in the scripture as well. You know, Mount Sinai is also called Mount Horeb. And right, even Abram is called Abraham, and now you and and, you know, Jacob is called Israel. And you might have a theological reason for accepting that. Those are the same person and and that there's like, meaning to that.

23:40 But the documentary hypothesis don't to them, that is because there's stories about these people. And sometimes those are not even the same people necessarily Stories about these people. And it's they just have different names because they're, you know, different groups of people are talking about them and then they get smushed together. And so we have to come up with a fake story about how they like why they have two names or something like that. Right, so here's here's an example. This is a, this is from an article in torah.com tour magazine by Dr. Zima Yura.

24:22 The it's called Jacob is renamed Israel twice. And why does the J? Why does the name Jacob remain? So, this is just a little excerpt from it, so you can kind of understand what the documentary hypothesis say about, why? We have Jacob and Israel in the scriptures. all right, graphic considerations e. Okay sorry that was the town e so that's the the E Source e is unique among the penta to cool sources. Having been composed in the northern kingdom. Oh, there you go. He's the northern kingdom. Which was called Israel. J in contrast was composed in the southern Kingdom of Judah. As was p and most of the Bible for E Jacob slash Israel is the most important patriarch.

25:14 But for Jay Abraham the patriarch of the South was the most important ancestor. In e. Abraham sacrifices. His son, Isaac. when the latter was a child ending, the line of Abraham In. So, Jacob in E is not related to Abraham. but, The J Source resurrects Isaac, and makes him Jacob's father. Thus making Abraham, the progenitor of Jacob Abraham is depicted much more positively by Jay than Jacob is and given precedent by being his ancestors. When the E document was brought to Southern Israel, IE Judah by scribes fleeing the North. After the Assyrian Conquest Judean authors sought to make ease account of Israel's Origins more relevant to their readers and thus added Judah and Judean themes everywhere. They could this process began with j. The First Southern supplementary, but since all ladder sources were Southern this pattern, persisted among other authors as well.

26:23 In the case of Jacob versus Israel. Perhaps J wished to de-emphasize the significance of this third patriarch. After whom the entire nation, Israel was named There you go. That's so yeah. According to this guy Abraham and Jacob are not actually even related. That was just a literary thing that describes did to kind of gain power. You know, by harmonizing the story is from these two different groups. Oh, okay. so, That's a big leap though, right? I mean that again, the implications of that huge, the leaps are huge actually because there's all these hypothesized sources and they come up with conjectures about what their motives might have been, but there's zero manuscript evidence of any of this.

27:20 Like we find all these ancient fragments of manuscripts and things. The Dead Sea Scrolls, and Not commodity librarian, things things buried in every every place that we find everything. There's we've never found a j like a j document. Or an email. We always interesting. We always we always find. The whole thing. So, All of the. All of the physical evidence that the manuscript evidence like like none of it. None of it supports the documentary bosses. Documentary hypothesis is literally like the evidence is literary in nature. Like it's it's picking apart the text and trying to come up because of, you know, different names of places and people and God and assigning those two different authors because because different names implies that they're written by different authors obviously. And what?

28:19 Let me ask this. Yeah. Is there something to be said? Well and well, I guess we wouldn't really know, right? Because that's that's my other that that kind of answers itself. My question was going to be, well, do we find any old old documents that seem to, you know? Hey, this whole book refers to God as e and this other whole book refers to it as J. But you were just saying that, they they don't see that in the history. Correct. Yeah. That is That is the case. Now there are other there are other inconsistencies too I'll say or apparent inconsistency.

29:01 So one is Moses and my formatting is a little messed up there and apologize for that. All right. Um one is the that Moses's death occurs like at the end of the book of Deuteronomy and then there's like stuff written afterwards. And so Moses clearly couldn't have written that, you know, unless he was writing prophetically or something which just seems a little odd. So, you know, I'll grant that like I don't even though I even though I don't think the documentary hypothesis, Um, is co is coherent or useful. Certainly not for me, coming from a faithful perspective. I'm still not like so.

29:45 I'm not so Baptist fundamentalist Baptist to say that Moses wrote every single word in Deuteronomy. Like I don't have a problem with Joshua finishing up the last couple of, you know, the last paragraph or whatever to finish out the book. So there are things like that. Let's see. There are references, sometimes in the Torah that say to this day, you know, this group of people is here to this day even though You know, this is like seems like it was written after the, the people crossed into the Jordan River into the promised land.

30:27 And so, again, like I don't have a problem. In fact, I think this is likely that that the, that scribes Copying this over the years updated, some things and and added in those phrases saying that like, yes, this this was, this was something that was happening back then. And those stones remain there to this day, or these people remain there to this direction. Another one is the the third person reference system Moses. So Moses, Moses like the Torah is written in the third person. Moses refers to himself as Moses. Or the author, I should say refers to Moses as Moses, but there's actually other books in the scripture. That.

31:14 Are. It's actually funny, there's actually inconsistencies in the documentary hypothesis approach. So, the Book of Jonah, for example, is also written in the third person. And so those pushing the documentary offices say, oh, this is evidence that the Book of Jonah wasn't actually written by a guy named Jonah. There is no Jonah. This is just a story written by someone else but then you have things like the Book of Daniel that's written in first person and the documentary. Hypothesis also do not believe that Daniel was written by Daniel. They believe it was written much much later. Part of that because there's prophecy and prophecies can't cannot be written. And this is, this is actually part of the reason why the documentary Apostles exists as well. Why they say that things were so late is because there are prophecies in the In the Torah and, you know, for we're going on a naturalistic. um, Explanation.

32:05 Then, you can't have prophecy written until after the things have occurred. and I understand it's a way of I understand that, if someone You know, I think that's definitely like a valid and rational point of view and so, you know, so I understand that but but they'll say Daniel was written in the first person but we know that it wasn't written by Daniel. So whoever wrote the Book of Daniel, they were writing in the first person to try to try to trick us into thinking that it was Danny Bhatt and so that's how we can know that it wasn't Daniel. So the, you know, whether it was in first person or third person doesn't actually really matter to the documentary hypothesis. Like, it's not, it's not a factor. And even, you know, in Modern Times, books, books are written by people in the first person.

32:54 And in the third person, even Scholars Scholars riding about the documentary officers refer to themselves sometimes in the third person. Just because they're, you know, they're being, they're impartial observers of the the event, right? So, so, this is really, again, it's kind of like the with the, with the different name for God, like, Does this necessarily imply? That there's a different author. The answer is. No, it does not imply that at all. Like it is it is something interesting to note, but there's so many counterexamples and the hypothesis just don't care. They'll take a book that's written in third person and claim that it wasn't the author, you know?

33:36 That wasn't the You know, the original author was not the person written about or the other way around too. If it's in first person that's evidence the other way that it wasn't written by that person so it doesn't matter. So they're basically just going by literary style and then drawing their conclusions, only based on literary style, not necessarily And yes. Well, and this is. This is part of it, though. Okay. So what the documentary hypothesis will say is, well, it is true that This, like, third person thing is weird. And these, like, more than one name for God and more than one name for these places. And people and These other anomalies which I'm gonna. I'm gonna name a couple of them, I don't know if you can see the whole You probably can't see that. See the whole picture, but I can see enough it looks like Barry there.

34:36 Yeah, you know, he's giving me a medal of honor to himself. It's just because there's that in Numbers chapter 12, verse 3, it says there's Moses like writing that Moses was the most Meek of all men. So anyway, Yeah, so yeah. Of course, then we have then we have Genesis happening before. Moses are. How could Moses even that? and you know, from a full perspective, there's maybe a couple answers that you could give one, is that it was all just, you know, Revelatory, but I think Mormonism, if you're more Mormon, actually has a very nice mechanism for this and that is that we believe Adam kept records and handed them down all the way to Abraham. Like, we believe in Abraham, it says Abraham that the records that were passed started with Adam came into his hands. And so, then those right in passed down and Moses would have those.

35:29 And then Moses is basically Mormon for the Book of Genesis. He's just, you know, compiling and probably abridging Genesis and I don't see any problems with that. That's not an issue for me at all, but A nor is it an issue for Mormonism? So, okay, now here's another one that happens that they point to is doublets. So these are things that get said twice. Okay. Are you feel like you're seeing double their A little bit a little bit. Yeah. Or to look at. Yeah, yeah. Look away lady.

36:11 Yeah, let's just say it's no wonder the poor lady still single. Yeah that's all. Oh, I like that pun there. so, for example, Sarah Abraham's wife, she gets taken by a king. How many times? Twice right twice. Yeah. And so, so since these stories are so similar, then that must mean we're probably means that these are actually different authors who had different Traditions about this and eventually they got mushed together and they just decided to keep In instead of just deciding or merging them into one story, they just decided to keep both. um, So there another big one is Genesis chapter 1 and Genesis chapter 2.

37:06 Let's see if I have. Yeah. So Genesis chapter 1 and 2 is a If you've, if you've ever read that, you maybe you've noticed that the creation kind of repeats, right? It's doubled but there's inconsistencies right? The stories are different and so that is evidence. So called evidence that these were actually written by. Different groups of people who must them together now, actually, the whole different names for God. that that actually comes up partly from this, the beginning of Genesis here, because You know, in Genesis 1. It's God, God everywhere.

37:58 And then in Genesis 2, it starts God and the Lord, and the Lord God. Okay. And so And so, you know, the, the concealed, again, it's like a combination, there's different names. Plus there's like contradictions in the story. So this must mean that, you know, Moses wasn't the author. Moses wouldn't have done that Moses, if it was a single author, he wouldn't have written. This contradictory thing, we can't understand. Therefore these are separate sources that got mushed together. Now, one of the, one of the logical problems, this is a logic problem. That documentary hypothesis have is.

38:39 If they believe it is illogical for. The single author to put together, what seems to be contradictory. Like for a single author to write a contradictory document. Then why is it okay for the redactor to put together a contradictory document? Right. You know? Right. So they actually don't solve any problems and actually, but by by positing this as a hypothesis, it doesn't actually Do anything just moves the goalposts to a different person? Who's not the author. That way we can, we can still have a logical conclusion that there's someone who is okay with inconsistency, but we don't have to have Revelation, you know, it should just be naturalistically put together. so now, if you're if you're a so, here's just I think it's like 14 or 1500 creation of Adam and Eve.

39:45 Now, I actually have had members of the church. I've talked to about this and, you know, these getting exposed to the documentary. Hypothesis ideas made them just totally reject Genesis, like they say, I just don't believe Genesis because because of the contradictory creation accounts like that, can't be a single author. and I just and and yet this person I talked to they they had a or they claimed to have a strong Like spiritual witness. They were they were sure about Joseph Smith as a prophet but they didn't trust any of the old scriptures. And I should say the older, the older description, got the less, they they trusted them and maybe there's a little bit of logic to that but the old stuff is is the foundation for the new stuff and not really the other way around is if you ask me.

40:38 So, Now. Oh, shoot. Up, let's see if I have. so I don't, I don't have My. I just have a regular Bible but I don't have my LDS one. So actually, hold on. Just a second. Okay. Some people have like guns hidden all over their house. I just got like scriptures hidden in different places, grab it at a moment's notice. Okay. I need a triple two because I'm actually compare Genesis to the book of Moses here.

41:23 Okay. Okay. Now I'm going to ask you, you know, as you're a Mormon, Mormon, you're Mormon Renegade! Do you have an answer for the contradictory? Genesis 1 versus Genesis 2. You know. I'll be honest with you, these are my thoughts and my thoughts alone. Um, I've heard it said before that, one could be the cause we know the that things were created spiritually before they were created physically. And so I've often wondered if that's not the reason that there's a dual account in there.

42:05 Yeah, that is exactly it and that is what Joseph Smith says. And so The crazy thing. This is crazy to me is and I'm going to get into this later but there are So many. Latter-Day, Saint YouTube channels, you know that have had like many many episodes about this. And they, they bring this up. As. Evidence for believing in the documentary hypothesis and the multiple authorship of the Torah. And I've never heard any one of them who are, like faithful ldsp people say, ah, but Joseph Smith like fix this understanding for us. So this is actually not a contradiction, there's only an apparent contradiction.

42:49 Nobody says that we just bring up the this naturalistic explanation and then run with it. Into directions that are ants against the restoration, you know, again, Joe's, you know, which is fine if you're not a Believer, but I just think it's crazy for believers to to follow down that road. So all right, so Genesis chapter 2 Genesis chapter 1, let me back up. Genesis chapter 1 has the You know, the seven, the seven days of creation and things are in this order. you know, there's the the sea in the sky and the land is separated and the sun, moon and stars are put in and, you know, and then animals and then humans are put on The Earth, beasts and humans.

43:42 And then you go to chapter 2, and it basically says, it says there's like plants and then And then man and then there was a garden. put and then and then man is put into the garden and so it's a, you know, it's it's kind of in a different order. So but this is what this is what it says. This is the connecting. This is the connection right here. Genesis chapter 2 verse I'm going to read four and five. Let me get my scripture can here. Let's see here. can you see that on me or on the Oh, let's see. Oh, there we go.

44:33 I'm still looking at the picture here that you have the garden scene. I don't know if this is gonna work. I'm not gonna bother with that. Okay. Okay. I'm sorry for the delay here. Okay. These are the generations. These are the generations of the heavens and the earth. When they were created in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens and every plant of the field before. It was in the Earth, every herb of the field before it grew for the Lord, God had not caused it to rain upon the Earth. And there was not a man to till the ground Okay. now in Moses chapter 3, those verses are expanded just a little bit and it's says this Uh, Now Behold I say unto you that these are the generations of the Heaven and Earth when they were created in the day that I the Lord God made the Heaven and the Earth and every plant of the field before it was in the earth and every herb of the field before it grew for. I the Lord God created all things of which I have spoken spiritually before they were naturally upon the face of the Earth.

45:44 For, I the Lord. God had not caused it to rain upon the face of the Earth. And I the Lord God had created all the children of men and not yet a man until the ground for in heaven created by them. And there was not yet flesh upon the Earth, neither in the water, neither in the air. So, that's beautiful, that's beautiful. And so there's, there's Much Ado made about this this doublet. And other doublets like Sarah being taken by a king twice as though that necessary as though that necessarily implies that there were multiple authors that got smushed together. I don't think it's the best or even the I do think that very often the documentary had hypotheses.

46:29 A take. What seems to be something that's fairly simple to understand and make it difficult to understand? So, Interesting. So, here's another one. This is this is not doublets but these are contradictions. So I'm going to read, so this has to do with Moses and zipporah. You've seen The Prince of Egypt Oh yeah. Yep, it was one of my kids. Favorite movies growing up. I think we wore out at least two VHS tapes of that bad boy. Yeah, that's me. And I just blew a bunch of Millennials. Mine go Google. What VHS? Magnetic storage.

47:13 It's right, right? Power of magnets, okay. So, Exodus chapter 4 verse? 20 says, And Moses took his wife and his sons and set them upon an ass, and he returned to the land of Egypt. And Moses took the rod of God in his hand, okay? So Moses takes Zapora and his sons to Egypt. Well, you go to Exodus chapter 18 though. A verse 20. Sorry, 18 verse 2. And it says, then Jethro.

48:05 Moses's, father-in-law took Zapora and her two sons. Okay and came with his sons and his wife unto Moses in the wilderness. So they were in the wilderness, right? They had left Egypt and then Jethro brings Aurora and his son's two, Moses like just right after they had left Egypt. So this is a contradiction, right? Because Earlier in Exodus, it said Moses took them to Egypt with him. And then later, it says Jethro is bringing them. And so, but the thing is that The second half of verse 2, which I didn't read. Says then Jeffrey Moses, his father-in-law took support, Moses wife after he had sent her back. And her two sons.

48:59 And her two sons and brought them to Moses. Okay? So like the text just clearly says, At least clear to me I'm not wise enough I'm not I'm not a scholar biblical scholar but says Moses took them sent them back and then you know because things were getting spicy probably in Egypt with all the plagues and stuff and dangerous business and then after they after they leave, then Jethro brings them back. Like, I don't understand the difficulty there, but what the, the documentary hypothesis will say is no, no, that's definitely a contradiction. But the little part there about that, Moses sent them away.

49:42 That's like, something that was added later by another author. The redactor to try to harmonize the other accounts. and so, there's actually a lot of things that the documentary hypothesis say are, Contradictions, but they are actually made into contradictions in order to support the hypothesis. Is that? No, that makes sense. So I I see what's going on. Yeah. Cuz cuz the context is there, right? He sends him back. And then Jethro. Was like, no, you're we're all going back to with Moses, right? We're going back to Egypt. Um, and and that was my first thought too. Was well, I wouldn't want my wife and kids there, right? Especially if you know these plagues you're going to ramp up, To include some pretty nasty things down the road. You wouldn't want your wife and kid exposed to that, right? Yeah.

50:40 Necessarily I can think of that, right? At the same time You know, we know that that Jethro is probably in some sort of senior role to Moses write being the guy who most likely gave Moses the priesthood Mormon. Dave, what's that? You're such a Mormon. Well yeah, I know my bad. My my bad. Um, yeah, no. I see what you're saying there. They, they kind of make problems. So they can supply the answer, there is what you're, what you're kind of getting at. Yeah and to me, you've heard of Occam's razor. Yep the simplest answer is usually the correct answer. Yes.

51:22 But in this case and in many of these cases, the simplest answer is The simplest answer is that this was written by Moses. That he was a real person and and it was written with, you know, by divine inspiration. But as a scholarly academic person. That is actually a more complicated hypothesis because it involves God, like we need, we need to have a naturalistic explanation that does not invoke the supernatural. Gotcha. Um, otherwise, you know, you don't, you don't get tenure and stuff like that, you know? Correct. The important stuff? Well, yeah, and that is important. So, it's hard.

52:06 It's hard to be a gender study Professor. If you're constantly worried about your job, I'm just saying. Alright? So yeah, I mean, hey, So so another so this brings me to the next you know motivation and that is that is naturalism. It is to have a naturalistic explanation. You know, this is just the the first paragraph from the Wikipedia article about it and I think it sums it up, nicely the Torah or pentateuch gets collectively. The first five books of the Bible Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers and Deuteronomy. According to tradition, they were dictated by God to Moses, but when modern critical scholarship, began to be applied to the Bible, it was discovered that the pentateuch was not the unified text. One would expect from a single author because of all these things.

52:52 We have already said, like, there's contradictions and there's doublets, right? There's anomalies and different names for people in places, Okay? So, Is not the unified text that you would expect from a single author as a result. The Mosaic authorship of the Torah has been largely rejected by Leading Scholars by the 17th century with many modern Scholars viewing, it as a product of a long evolutionary process. So, there you go. I will say there's one one final. Motivation for this and this is a religious Marxism. So and this is this was touched upon by Val housing and it certainly is in Vogue among Of those who are espoused. Marxist ideologies that the Bible is actually just the result of class struggles between privileged and oppressed classes.

53:49 And that is so fascinating that you bring that up right now. I was just in. Plymouth, Massachusetts here just last week. And I was talking to a gentleman. Who is a devout Evangelical? and one of the things he had said, was that, A lot of the churches and you could see the signs as you walked around, right? That used code words like we fight for justice, we have for Equity, those sorts of things. Those are kind of tells, right? That? Hey, that's creeping into your theology.

54:31 Now does does Vilhelm ever, ever give a nod like by name to Mark, sissom know, he proceeds marks. Okay, so no but the, you know, but it's the but the idea is there and has been, you know, picked up this is yeah, this is the religious prong of Marxism. Right? So I know they're sort of thing. Yeah. And there are people. No doubt a good people. You know, who have, who believe? the documentary hypothesis, or at least in part who are not marxists, you know, but it's it's kind of those, one of those things, like, it's like Like bad fruit.

55:23 Yeah. Like I'm just gonna eat a little bit of the forbidden fruit, you know. Right. And just gonna nibble on the Forbidden tree and not gulp it down wholeheartedly, like I am afraid, you're going to get the same results. Right. Yeah. so, Okay. Oh he's peeking out there. Oh yes. Yes. That's him saying. He bought my book yet. That's right. I threw this together. Just today. This slide show and I did not get to obviously didn't get, oh, it's good for like anything yet but there's Richard Elliott Friedman, the man himself peeking out from the book.

56:04 He wrote it. Now it's funny that you mentioned all these kind of progressive churches. Like this is the this is the dog. This is the doctrine of progressive Christianity. This is what they espoused and Progressive Judaism as well. So I'm actually going to read and Richard Elliot with his book here, which was written in the 80s. I want to say, let me just get my copy here. Yeah, 1987 is when it came out. So before before this, but this, this book came out. This kind of was a, a more academic. Phenomenon.

56:45 It was kind of contained, so to speak. To the universities all though, I'm sure that it had started to bleed into the seminaries. but this book kind of put it out for public consumption and really Accelerated, the the rate of kind of acceptance of these ideas? Yeah. So This is a, this is another book. Called who really wrote the Bible. So it's kind of a response here but you know, they start off with this. Chapter one is called the new secular Bible. And they have a little bit of History. It's pretty interesting on the Jewish holiday of Passover. In 2001, the rabbi of Sinai Temple in Los Angeles, David wolpe, David sermon. He told his congregants that The Exodus from Egypt that they were commemorating.

57:35 Most likely, never occurred at least not in the way described by the Bible. One can only imagine the unease experienced by Rabbi Wolf's congregants at this revelation, No Jewish holiday requires greater physical preparation and exertion getting rid of all products with any kind of leavening, substituting special, holiday dishes and utensils for regular tableware thoroughly, cleaning, one's home, cars, and other properties appointing an agent to sell once bread and leavened products Etc. And this all this effort and why? Because some ancient Wise Guys sitting in a smoke-filled cave made up some stories and had the hookah to embellish them with a not insignificant number of mandated religious rituals. Couldn't Rabbi wolf have made this announcement before. All the holiday work began.

58:25 Just two years later, diagonally across the country. At Saint, Paul's Church in Concord New Hampshire local. Episcopal church leaders, chose Reverend V. Gene, Robinson to be the first openly gay Bishop. Whatever personal warmth one may feel for homosexual friends and or acquaintances most people's vision of a bishop or any clergyman for that matter would tend to exclude non-state a non-game man as a religious role model. these two little vignettes The Exodus denying Rabbi and the Leviticus denying priest may seem unrelated, but both point to a society, whose core religious values are up for grabs Even though both incidents promote provoked, a loud outcry from religious traditionalists.

59:07 Yet years later, both men still have their jobs and arguably, arguably have greater influence and bigger platforms. So anyway goes on to say how how have we gotten here and really it's because the Bible has lost its Authority and a lot of it has to do with these ideas, put forward by the documentary hypothesis. And this book by this man Richard Elliott who kind of put it out there and really accelerated the acceptance of these ideas. So I think the fruit is bad and you know, I am reminded of moroni's words, you know because again you can say I'll just have a nibble of this. But I says touch not the evil gift, you know, just put away. I think the restoration has better answers for the questions that the documentary hypothesis.

1:00:01 And those Rays. So, so, you know, that's that's so interesting because there there's a push now within all over religion to have like a I don't know like Ace. They call it a social, whatever. Right. So you'd be a social Catholic or you'd be a social Mormon, or a social Baptist, which is this idea that, okay, none of the stories in the Bible are necessarily true, but they teach good stories and so it's good to go. Listen to it now. Look, maybe just, it's just because I'm lazy. But like, if the stuff isn't true, I got no time for it, right?

1:00:47 There's, there's other things that I could do that are far less taxing than seeing on a podcast talking about the documentary hypothesis, right? So this thing about well it's not really true but it teaches a good story. Well, I can watch Old Yeller and get that right. Yeah, it has to be true or realistically. It's got no value to me. Yeah, yeah, I would say so. so, the next You know, person or kind of responsible for the introduction of these ideas and kind of Richard Freedman, he's kind of responsible for the introduction to the world. But among Mormons, this is the woman right here.

1:01:28 Margaret Barker, I'm sure you've heard of her. Yep, she's a fairly thought about the temple, right? Yeah. Yeah. She's fairly prolific author. This is just like a collection of her books here, and she's gained a lot of popularity among Mormons Mormons of all varieties. Actually, and I should say Mormons of the Brigham, might variety, really? Anyone any branch of Mormonism that holds onto some idea of heavenly mother? Okay. so and this is the reason why she is very popular because she does, she talks about heavenly mother and so that's obviously very appealing to Mormons and the other I think the reason why Margaret Barker is so, Alluring to Latter-day Saints is because she just talks freely about how corrupt the Bible is. He just accepts this class struggle idea that we've talked about and how the that there was, you know, Wicked people in charge who won out and they had certain ideas about how things should be and they suppress.

1:02:49 Some ideas and one of those is the the mother in heaven idea. And so there's kind of some resonance with Latter-Day Saints because you know, we have in our 8th Article of Faith that we believe the Bible as far as it is translated correctly. And so here's, here's this Christian woman, she's a Methodist, Methodist minister But she's she's preaching these things. So that's kind of unusual. And we also write, as far as translated correctly, we all know have this notion in the Book of Mormon that plane quote plain and precious things are going to be removed from the Bible, like this is one of the Prophecies of the Book of Mormon. And so people are looking at Margaret Barker as maybe filling in those plain and precious things that the Book of Mormon says that the Bible is going to lose. Now, I do think that people who have latched on to Margaret marker and the documentary.

1:03:49 Hypothesis have actually gone way way too far in that direction. And I think gone to a point that Joseph and Brigham and John would never have gone. Like right, you know, Joseph loved the Bible. Okay? And you know I love the Bible too. So it actually kind of hurts when I hear people. Like really denigrating it and I actually have a bunch of video clips. I'm going to show later on but this is from the elders. Journal. Is that right?

1:04:30 Let's see. Where is it? See, yes, the elders. General So this kind of just questions and answers, but Joseph said, this is a paraphrase, but you know, he one time wrote, this is in the times and Seasons says, of the Bible, those who read it most will love it best. So here you go. The first question here. Do you believe the Bible Joseph's answer if we do? We are the only people under Heaven that does for there are none other religious sects of the day that do Question two. Wherein do you differ from other sex answer? Because we believe the Bible and all other sex profess to believe their interpretations of the Bible and their creeds. So pretty spicy take their that's usually thrown that's usually thrown the other direction these days. Right?

1:05:20 Christians accuse us of Putting the Bible down and not believing it as as much as they do. But Joseph was saying, no, we believe the Bible more than the other Christians do but Sadly. I think that kind of modern critique of Mormonism. From Christians is have some truth to it that we kind of do. Denigrate to the Bible in many ways and it's sad to me. So the first time that I Probably remember and this is an interesting little side piece here too. The first time, I remember hearing about the documentary Apostles, just was from Denver Snuffer. and this, this is definitely the idea that he pushes And those who, you know, follow his lead or, you know, believe in his inspiration.

1:06:10 They they believe this too for the most part, you know. And it's it's a It actually fits in with a lot of their other narratives about the Restoration in a very kind of beautiful way, and that is that, you know, they believe. Joseph restored some things, but then after Joseph's death There Was, You Know, Wicked people who took control of things and edited and corrupted things to the point where it's like corrupted, you know, Really beyond beyond being able to trust the documents and things that came out because of the, the wicked priest that followed on later.

1:06:51 And so, you know, these documentary hypothesis and deuteronomist ideas are really popular among Denver Snuffer, followers, for that reason. Okay. Let's see. Okay so In the LG. Yeah, let me push back here just a little bit on this, please, because there is baked into Mormonism through. Joseph's own own story. Right? That the Bible isn't 100% trustworthy, right? Yes. Well, we I have to be.

1:07:33 You have to be Yes, yes and no continue and then I'll respond. well, my my point in this is that To the to the point that Joseph goes through much of the Bible. If not all the Bible, I Googled it earlier and it said he did make it all the way through the Bible, but I can't back that up. Three ways. So I'm going to say maybe but nonetheless, he did, he did go through and edit a few things and some of those that are pretty significant, right? I mean they're not just Moving commas around here. They're they're the shifts. The idea somewhat Yeah, yeah, yes and no. So okay. now, here's This is this is my take on the the Joseph Smith translation.

1:08:22 So a lot of a lot of folks believe that the Joseph Smith translation is Is restoring some kind of ancient version of the documents. Like the original. version of The Book of Matthew or whatever. Or Genesis. The, the problem is that there's not really manuscript evidence for that. now that's not now I'm not saying that Joseph Smith translation was not without Revelation, but what I am saying is that when the Book of Mormon talks about praying plain and precious things being removed, my The way that I interpret that is that it is interpretations, that's kind of funny way to say it. I think most most of the the plain and precious things have been the way that we understand the scriptures and Joseph restored, the way that we understand and he did add a bunch of things too.

1:09:30 Clarifications and expansions on stories. And there is actually ancient tradition of doing this. Have you heard of the targums or the target meme? oh, so, there's actually quite a few of these different Target. Meme, Target him, is an Aramaic word. That means Translation. But it also means interpretation. The word Target means is means both of those things. So you could say. And so there was a number of ancient Jewish authors because of the Babylonian captivity. the Jewish people, the people from the southern Kingdom of Judah, they began speaking Aramaic and kind of lost Hebrew. At least in like everyday speech. And so these targets were written in Aramaic. but what they did is they they actually expanded the, the Hebrew text and added additional stories and additional dialogue and explanations for why things are the way that they are in the Hebrew?

1:10:48 And this is like this is in my and they don't they don't claim to be correcting the Hebrew. They're just adding clarifications and expansions and in my view, Joseph Smith is actually following this ancient tradition and so a lot of times when I talk about the Joseph, the Joseph Smith translation or the jst, I'll just kind of jokingly but seriously call it the Joseph Smith Target Because it is actually is doing exactly. The same thing that these ancient targum writers did So they would sew in synagogues, they would read in Hebrew, but a lot of people didn't understand Hebrew anymore. And so then they would they would follow it up by reading the, in the Aramaic, in the targum and which would have the same content. But with some Additions and explanations. So anyways, as far as, as far as Corruption of the text we'll get into.

1:11:44 Can I save this? We'll get into this a little bit later. Yeah, but sorry. But it is, it is a valid point and I will also say that I am certainly not saying that the the Bible, or any Scripture is inherent. but I don't go so far as to say, that there was no such person as Moses, which that is what the scholars say or that, nor that Isaiah was written by three different people. And that the Torah, the five books of Moses didn't even exist until after Lehi left Jerusalem.

1:12:25 And and like I said, not everybody believes these things who believes in the documentary hypothesis. But that is the, that is the majority view. That is what the scholars who put this forward, that is what they are saying. And so anyone who is saying something different to try to bolster their, faith is actually rejecting parts of the documentary hypothesis because it's too much to swallow. Actually, okay, no, that makes sense. okay, so here's In the, in the LDS world, I got Denver Snuffer there. We got Ward radio. You probably heard of some of these things stick of Joseph podcast quick shows and media. Join a Barnes Latter-Day Chad.

1:13:09 So, and there's there's others as well. But it's it's quite um, quite pervasive actually And like I said, it's it is affecting people's testimony. So amazingly I knew a man no man. LDS gentleman, brother. He has a testimony of the Book of Mormon. but because of the documentary, hypothesis ideas, He actually rejects The Exodus like that Rabbi. I was talking about. And rejects the creation story. And, you know, I talked about that as well. And so, when, when in the Book of Mormon Nephi is talking about, Adam and Eve and talking about Moses.

1:13:56 He, he just thinks that Nephi is not telling the truth. He doesn't believe Nephi is lying, but he says, Nephi inherited these false Traditions that had were put in place at about the time when he was alive and just is passing along these falsehoods that are now in the Book of Mormon. So, how about that first by CT wrestling? Oh, so that's that's dicey, right? I mean I don't, I don't really understand that that kind of like trying to hold that. It seems rather Luke Warren to quote Revelation, like I would say like be hot or cold, you know? Well, when you start getting into Nephi line, that's, that's kind of a different thing, right? I mean, Yeah, well, I mean the the documentary hypothesis if taken at its like it's it's it's scholarly consensus. It does invalidate, The Book of Mormon on many points. Actually, like, if you believe the documentary Apostles, I actually believe the Book of Mormon has better evidence for it that actually invalidates the documentary hypothesis but yeah, you know, so you could, you know, kind of pick which way you're going to go on that, but I have actually been in a meeting.

1:15:22 To this is just these are just kind of fruits and listing fruits of this of this teaching that's is become quite popular. I was in a meeting and this topic came up. It was discussed, I was mostly just listening but one of the ladies in the audience started talking about how when the scriptures were talking about bail. All that. That's actually just Jesus. And like Baal was originally like, is how Jesus was worshiped in the, in ancient times had I was I was shocked. I don't even know how to, I mean, I didn't respond. I was just listening, but it was wild but this, you know, those are those are the ideas that are in the water here because he goes, what we have is the Bible is actually just like a syncretism of all these different polytheistic ideas put together and some of the Gods went out and some of them didn't, but really there the same Gods sometimes or whatever.

1:16:17 And so, That is so dangerous. Because look, I know that ball means Lord. And yeah, whatever Semitic language it was in. Yeah, but that's different. Trust me. That's a different Lord than the one that is worshiped by. By the followers of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, right? Um, that is a different God than, than their God. Well. If you're coming at it from a perspective that would be the the normal thing to think. But I was there in the meeting where this woman and others, too. They were talking about it and they're like, yeah, this is Like we can learn some things about Jesus by studying what the scriptures say about bail, you know.

1:17:05 Well Josh let's talk this out right for just a second right? If we're going to talk about fruits of this, right? And if people are going to associate the god of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob with ball, Then it's not out of the realm of possibility, you know, that some really nasty things like, well, then, you know, if it just means, Lord, you know, then it's maybe, you know, abortion is okay, right? I mean there's it's got some implications tied to it. That's a little spooky, right? 100%. And then you have to ask a question. Well then how do you make sense when Elijah goes up and has his go-rounds with the priests of Baal?

1:17:49 Right, like obviously the God's Not that the god of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, he's not happy with with what those priests are doing. So, how do you make sense of that story? Well, I'll tell you, I'll tell you how you make sense of it because You by reading that scripture that you're talking about, you actually don't know what God thinks. You know what the author of that scripture wants you to think? And resting. And there was authors who came along and they won out in the historical struggle. and they didn't, like, Idol worship, they didn't like Baal and asherah, or Ashraf or Ishtar.

1:18:32 And so they ended up saying that. The priests of Baal and the priests of Astral like that, they were the bad guys, but that's only because you know, to the Victor go the spoils you know, history is written by the the Winner's or whatever. So that's the answer. Okay, now it's not. That's nuts because I saw a clip. a few years back at a book of Mormon evidence conference where it showed a clip of Tanner and not Tanner. Terryl and Fiona Givens, okay? Talking about the Book of Mormon and they made the comparison that well, Chief Captain Moroni.

1:19:13 He was probably most likely a war criminal Um because of how he treated the lamanites, right? Like, it was spooky to listen to but it's in that same vein, right? It absolutely is. Yeah. Once you Once you start to kind of open this door like it just it will go to its logical conclusion, which is all the things that we're talking about now. It's, it's it's it's it's it seems crazy. And I think people who swallow this stuff would also say. No that's crazy. But I have right here on my phone. Hey, a message that I say that this was just last week, I was talking with some Some folks in a chat group that I'm in, I'm not gonna name names.

1:19:59 About the subject of abortion came up and I'm going to read what this woman had to say. You mean, I, I hit it that close. Yeah, I was, this was you. I wasn't gonna hang this out. But man, you brought that up. Dang it. Another, one of my relating thoughts, I know it wasn't asked for. I do think and to add to the topic of the video. Those are video. The that was about abortion and about how the video was about how like it's okay if you kill a baby, if they haven't had the first breath, Oh geez. Okay, so I do think that the mother is supposed to be in charge of and responsible for the forming of a baby and the birthing process. I think it is her stewardship enroll. I also think that from an eternal perspective, the, the baby or Spirit child all so uses their agency to choose along the way and that the spirit being isn't forced into being born into a mortal body or any other body, I've heard it said many times that people feel heavenly father is in charge of dealing with the hypothetical dissolution of his kids who fighting against him or reject the fullness after receiving it. So sons of Perdition I've heard it said that he gets to decide and deal with If a being with a body and spirit are broken down and recycled into the universe or whatever happens to them after the particles fall apart to me that's like he has the ability to decide if a being is aborted at some point in their progression or existence and

1:21:31 people seem to be okay with that little shrug Emoji even if it's just pulling his spirit away because people have had enough chance or don't want it, he Heavenly Father gets to survey the situation and decide when he's going to leave them to destruction and darkness. And people, you know, Mormons seem to be okay with that idea. I think heavenly mother has the responsibility and jurisdiction to govern the gestation formation and birth stage of a baby child, child of God, slash being. I believe that she has the stewardship to assess a situation in that realm and work with a spirit child to see how things should progress for the best for their experience, Etc. She is all so not a baby making robot and is personally involved in the process and is a party that needs to be considered. I suspect heavenly mother is able to assess her situation, prepare all Needful Things and know in the moment is wise before gestating immortality, we don't seem to always be great at that for sure.

1:22:36 Ideally mortal women would use the wisdom and commune with God to, to lead them through their gestation and laborers. I recognize that not every woman. Does some women make sad choices and some have sad choices made for them. But I still don't think that the responsibility to navigate that stewardship should be taken away from them and given to anyone else. Women need to learn to be like heavenly mother. Oh crap. So like heavenly father can decide when you know Spirits get destroyed and heavenly mother can as well. And like Earthly women being in charge of whether or not they want to destroy a baby is like equivalent to how many father destroying a And Underpants and wicked, you know, dreamed. Soul at some Future Point.

1:23:27 So that these are these are fruits of this idea. I mean, you know, the the heavenly mother that the documentary hypothesis talk about is astroth. asherah Ishtar like, we know, How? She is worshiped. We know how bail is worship too. And like, like, Baal is Well, it's interesting. When you get into polytheism a lot of the, like the gods just kind of get Blended up. So like sometimes astroth is Elle's Wife and sometimes Bales, like Baal takes L's place because Baal is his son, and then he marries his mother who is Ashura or Ishtar. but yeah, like abortion is actually part of the worship of Ishtar like and we know this from the you know, the Canaanite Nations that Like left hit records right and archaeological evidence, things like that. So Okay, that's heavy stuff.

1:24:38 I'm just one bottle of wine. Go back to that. I'm just one bottle of wine on an empty stomach type of girl. So actually didn't mean to go to that slide yet. But but yeah, this is I think that people who, Have you heard this saying before? It's like whining on an empty stomach. This is saying that gets thrown around at my house sometimes, but it's for people who hear an idea. And like latch onto it without actually knowing the other side without actually studying out alternatives. And and they, they get drunk on a new idea. And that's a very common thing.

1:25:20 That's like a natural thing. And this wine on an empty stomach is just kind of a physical analogy to that mental or spiritual tendency that we have. So this is in contrast to having wine on a full stomach. So, on a full stomach means that you have That you are prepared with a wide variety, both breadth and depth of ideas. And you actually know some things already before you hear a new idea and then when you hear a new idea, you don't get pushed around by it so much, it doesn't affect you. In quite the way. And if it's a good idea, then you can go along with it. And if it's not, then you can reject it, but if you don't have, but if your belly is not full to begin with and you hear a new idea and it's you know it's sexy and attractive and you don't know any better and you're you know, you hear this idea about How the scriptures all come together and kind of the the applications that show up everywhere and how it explains this and that.

1:26:19 And you actually don't really know what the scriptures said before. You hear these ideas, then it's going to be really alluring, you know, you're going to be drunk. so, I think that happens with a lot of people, unfortunately, like I I sometimes get suckered into like commenting on YouTube. It's I don't recommend it, it's YouTube's, not really good place to have a discussion. whether know nor argument like, you can't have a calm or like, it's just a ridiculous place, but sometimes they get sucked in and You know, a lot of times the comments are like, well, have you read this or that? And I'm like, yes, I have and I can tell that you haven't, but it doesn't really do any good, you know.

1:27:06 Right. So okay. So there are there are there are problems and I'm just going to go over these quickly, some of these we've already gone over like so one is you know there's just logic problem if a single author would have a problem with contradictions doublets anomalies then why wouldn't the redactor that put all this stuff together? Okay, right, there's many things. Many, I have a have a type of their Dingle authors many, many examples of ancient documents that we know are single authors. Okay, that have the same anomalies that are supposedly evidence for multiple authorship. And so it just shows that those anomalies don't necessarily actually imply.

1:27:53 What the documentary hypothesis are saying they imply. There has been, and I think there's been a tendency lately to kind of back off on this, but until the last few decades like the text have been chopped up so much. And so finally, as to like make it like incomprehensible, basically like this doesn't even make sense anymore, we're cutting it up into so many small pieces. But I think they've backed off on that a little bit, but it is a problem. There's a great lack of consensus in the details because the whole idea is so fuzzy. And it's all so subjective about how you draw the lines and what actually is implying. What what and anyway that it, there is kind of a consensus that Like the scholars.

1:28:41 Definitely definitely know that Moses wasn't the guy. We all agree that there was no, you know, that that the what the scripture say, cannot be correct. You know, because that involves Supernatural things, so it must be a naturalistic thing. And the documentary hypothesis or versions of it, there's a fragmentary and a supplementary hypothesis as well. And these are like kind of versions of that. Anyway. Okay. One of the things that's a problem is that you must read the text in the most uncharitable way possible. Like I kind of that example I gave about Moses. And whether Zapora came with him to Egypt or whether Jeffrey like, you have to, you have to, in many times, you have to like intentionally misunderstand the text. Even though the taxes that and it's true, that's it is true that okay?

1:29:30 I don't I don't deny that the scriptures are hard to understand sometimes. But I don't think that the answer is to try to misunderstand it and assume that assume that the scriptures are incoherent because they just arose from these processes. These natural processes were talking about. I think the better response is to try to understand why it seems like there's an inconsistency there or to understand what the lesson is. Why is this thing being repeated? Is it for emphasis? Is it for poetic purposes Etc. Got you. So really it and I'm gonna have a bunch of examples like it's almost infuriating. How How they intentionally misunderstand, the text, when it seems so obvious to me. So anyway, you can be the judge of that whether I'm maybe I'm just maybe I'm reading into things, I don't know, we'll go over it.

1:30:22 You're back. I started to get the feeling that we, as fundamentalists and Orthodox Mormons. We need our own stuff up to. Now, we've been able to buy and purchase all of our scriptures books, art and music from other restoration organizations and that's been good. But there's no guarantee it's going to remain that way. All it can be a bit tricky as you scour, the internet, trying to find all the books from your favorite fundamentalists or Orthodox. Mormon authors. As I thought about this, I feel like I was really giving a solution now through the hard work of others because let's face it. I'm the guy least qualified and all the world to build a website. I'm happy to present to you 1830 Mercantile dot org right now on the website you can see that we have all the books that have ever been written, by four authors, including games, like, Drew Briny and Ogden crout also very soon, there will be a link to buy art and music. All produced by Mormons with a deep love for the restored gospel.

1:31:18 There's also places for you to get free resources where you can. Find podcasts videos, classes, and other presentations also coming very soon. There will be a place for events where you can list the events from your organization so that you can get the most out of that attendance. Now this can be as big as you want it to be. It's all up to you guys out there if you want to buy and post things on here. Now if you're someone who produces something that you feel like others can benefit from 1830 mercantiles, a place where you can make all of those products available for purchase. All you need to do is drop me an email at Mormon, Renegade at gmail.com and put 1830, and in the title of that email with a short message and either myself or someone else from the 1830 Mercantile team or reach out to you.

1:32:06 So we can get your product up there on the site now. To make sure that all the products that we offer are affordable and to ensure that the vast majority of the profits go to the producer, the website percentage is only three to four percent of the total cost and that's just so I can pay the pros that have created this website and keep the lights on the website itself. Finally, by making some of your purchases at 1830 Mercantile dot org, you will be supporting folks whose principles and morals are closed. If not the same as yours at the same time, not giving your money away to people who stand against everything you stand for. So no matter if you're looking to make a purchase or you're a seller that wants to get your products listed head on over to 1830 Mercantile dot org today, drop me an email and we'll make sure that we get back out to you.

1:32:58 Now back to the show. So, you must read it in a way that ignores literary style, so, common to the near East. So, You know, the poetic forms of things and switching from narrative to poetry. That's actually another like evidence they say oh look someone's just riding a story and then they like there's this poetic piece. Therefore these are by different people. because it's like it changes style in the middle of the The. In the middle of the narrative or whatever. Anyway, so I see no manuscript evidence and you do have to ignore the manuscript evidence that we do have, so now, this is So this is important. This is a thing that I see gotten wrong frequently. It's kind of not understanding the timeline of how we got things.

1:33:52 So you know Moses according to the scriptures he's you know 15 to 1400 BC, something like that. Along, you know, Israel exists for a while the the Assyrians come, and they capture the northern kingdom in like 720 BC, okay? And that is kind of where the Samaritans begin. Samaritans are those who are kind of Left Behind mixed with Assyrians Okay, King Manassa. He's a little bit later. 697 Manassa is Josiah's grandfather. Okay. Manassa, the scriptures describe him as one of the most wicked kings that that Judah ever had. That Israel ever had.

1:34:40 Because of his wickedness, probably or at least was probably part of it. There's a Temple that's built in elephantine Egypt. Have you heard of that? I have yep. 15 Temple. So those people, there's a group of like Jewish pilgrims who like left it went to the upper aisle. So that's Southern Egypt and billed, a temple and had a community there. Um, Josiah comes along a little bit later. Okay, this is where the the Torah really starts to get put together according to the documentary hypothesis. The. And then I didn't put on there, but right around 600.

1:35:20 Of course. This is all in the Babylonian captivity, takes place. Okay. 450 BC or so, the Samaritans are totally separate from the Jews. They actually build their own Temple. You know, just see if it's talks about this, they have their own Torah as well. And then sometime around 300 ish, 282. 50. We have the step two agents. So this was Jews again, living in Egypt and they translated the Hebrew scriptures into Greek. It's called the Septuagint because cept is Latin for 70 or 77 or 70 authors.

1:36:02 Okay. Anyway, that was during the time when there was kind of the Greek persecution with the, you know, the Maccabees and all of that. It was kind of in the things leading. Those that. Yes, it was. It proceeded that, but it was leading up to that it was after the Greek Empire had began to expand Okay. Ptolemy Ptolemy the second was the degree Emperor down in. Egypt, this is after Alexander dies and his kingdom gets split apart. All right, okay, then we have the Dead Sea Scrolls, there's those documents will go over quite a range. There, you can see, there was a another Egyptian temple called the Temple of anayas at 170 BC that was built in the, in Northern Egypt. So the Lower Egypt along the Like near the, the delta. And that was, these are all Jewish temples, right? Yes, that's right.

1:36:58 Yeah, okay that's right. And of course we have the Christian era begins, right? Jesus's yeshua's Ministry is right around, you know, 30 to 33. There's some debate about that but right around there gave the apostles they go for another Little while, of course the temple is destroyed and so on. This. And then when we get the Hebrew, the Hebrew text of the Bible actually this is interesting. The Hebrew. Scriptures that the King James is translated from and the NIV and the NLT and the ESV and like all the English translations of the Bible they come from. Um, this masoretic text here.

1:37:48 And the earliest. Complete masoretic text that we have is not until a little after a thousand ad, that's the Leningrad codex. We do have some fragments the Aleppo codex a little bit earlier than that. But here's the interesting thing about this is the Bible that we use like the King, James and other English translations are based off of or largely based off of it, didn't Exist. Or at least we don't have evidence. Okay? We don't have evidence of his existence until right around 1,000 ad. Is that seem late to you? It seemed a little late. Yeah. So The now.

1:38:31 They're certainly were Hebrew versions that existed before that. But we just don't, we just don't have them and we know that the, the Septuagint, for example, the Greek version. That was, that came from the Hebrew. Actually, we do have, we do have Hebrew versions, but it's the, the Dead Sea, scroll version, and they, the Dead Sea scroll version's. Actually matched the Step 2 agent. The Greek very well, and they actually also matched the Samaritan Torah quite well. Also like those three versions are much closer to each other than the much later, Hebrew text, which all of our scriptures basically, A descend from. So I just want to keep that timeline in mind. We're going to refer to it a couple of other times throughout any questions about that.

1:39:22 Nope, I'm all makes sense. Okay? So we talked about problems with the documentary hypothesis and then for Mormons, there's other problems too that you would think come up. And, you know, if you're a believing Mormon and you want to accept the documentary hypothesis, like you're going to have to deal with this. And you're going to basically have to disagree with. the proponents of the documentary hypothesis in order to In order to keep your faith or, or you might, and I know Mormons, you are in this category, too, who believe that? The, you know, the Book of Mormon was not Is not anything. There's nothing literal about the Book of Mormon that it was all. So, The product of Joseph's mind and it's a you know a useful a useful fiction.

1:40:09 That is an option fired fiction. Yeah, that's how I even like a Pious Pious fraud. So people believe that or that Yeah, so some some flavor of that. Anyway, like, we know like the Nephi and his brothers, they go back and they get the brass plates and they look at them and the brass plates which predate like the brass plates. Go a long ways back like they have Jenny all the time. We don't we don't know that it doesn't tell us when the brass plates were composed, but the records that are on them. At least go all the way back to Joseph of Egypt, right? Right? And it says, they contain the five books of Moses. So, according to the documentary, hypothesis at least it's it's most Accepted form.

1:40:59 Like this is not really, this is a problem. If you're going to believe in the morning, Yeah, no, I can see that. Now here's another one. And this one is a very big one for me, like, okay. And this is, goes back to the question you asked earlier about the, the contamination of the Bible that is kind of baked into Mormonism. And I, you know, I I totally accept that that is there, but the Book of Mormon actually says, when that's going to happen. So, This is in first Nephi chapter 13, it's on the screen but I'm just gonna I'm gonna read. Well I'll just read the highlighted Parts I guess.

1:41:40 Right Nephi season. He sees. The book that the Gentiles have. And he says it is a. So, just reading the highlighted Parts, here it is a record like unto the Engravings which are upon the plates of brass. So the Old Testament saved, they are not so many. So there's some, you know, extra apocryphal books that the brass plates have Nevertheless, they contain the covenants of the Lord, which you have made unto the house of Israel. And Germany University 24. When it proceeded from the mouth of the Jew, it contained. The fullness of the Gospel verse 25, wherefore these things. Go forth.

1:42:20 From the Jews in purity. unto the Gentiles, according to the truth, which is after God and verse 26 says and after they go forth by the hand of the 12, Apostles of the lamb from the Jews and to the Gentiles, then you see the formation of the great and abominable Church, which is Most abominable of all other churches for behold, they have taken away from the gospel of the Lamb, many parts, which are playing, and most precious, and also, many of the covenants of the Lord, have they taken away. And then down to verse 29, which I don't think you, Oh, I can't see all of that. Not all of it, but says verse 29, it says, and after after these plain and pressure things were taken away, It Goes Forth unto all the nations of the Gentiles.

1:43:07 And after you go forth unto all the nations of the Gentiles, even across the many Waters, which he was seen with the Gentiles, which have gone forth out of captivity, Of Cs because of the many plain and precious things which have been taken out of the book which we're playing unto the understanding of the children of men, according to the plaintiffs, which is in the Lamb of God. Because of these things, which are taken away out of the Gospel, am exceedingly, great many do stumble, yay, in so much. That Satan half great power over them. So it's actually repeated several times here. They says, in verse 25, there says, when it goes from the Jews to the Gentiles and it specifies that in verse 26, that that is when the 12 apostles, begin to take it from the Jews to the Gentiles. And you see the formation of the great and abominable church, but when he gets when it first gets transferred, it is pure. But then, the great new Bond will Church comes. And Then they are the one that corrupts and in my view most of the corruption is a Corruption of understanding, not necessarily of content.

1:44:09 Although I do believe that things were taken out that shouldn't have been. But as far as the material that we have, Um I think it's mostly correct. I do you know I do like Joseph Smith's explanations and expansions and things like that, but we can look at And go back to our timeline here. Okay, we can look at the Septuagint. And the Samaritan Torah and those and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Those were things that existed before. The gospel went to the Gentiles. which The Book of Mormon says that those things were pure at that time, Or at least pure enough for the angel to use the word pure when describing it to Nephi.

1:44:57 And then not until after the Christian era, basically, the beginning of the Christian era, do we see that there is corruption in the Old Testament, in those things that went from the Jews to the Gentiles, right? That is what Nephi is saying. And so So this is, this is interesting thing, is that, when you compare the masoretic text to the Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the Samaritan Torah that there are Corruptions. And I will say that many of the Corruptions half to do with Messianic prophecy. And in the Hebrew text that we have a lot of the Messianic prophecies are significantly weakened.

1:45:42 And there is a lot of debate about this. My view is that that this altering of the Hebrew text, I believe that the Hebrew text was altered and that the, the fragments and, you know, the textual tradition that we have of the Septuagint, and the Dead Sea Scrolls, that we found, and Samaritan Torah. I believe those represent a more pure version because they actually have their Roots traceable to. Before the time, when Nephi says the corruption will take place. So, when you compare these older versions to the newer version in the Septuagint, the prophecies about, Jesus are much more clear.

1:46:22 Like, it's much harder to deny. That Jesus is Messiah. When you read the Septuagint compared to what we have in the King James which came from the Hebrew, the later Hebrew Hey, so I'm going to sum something up and then you can tell me if I'm right or wrong. And in what I think you're saying here and then I might have one more follow-up question to that. So if I'm understanding you correctly here, it's that your belief on this is that Joseph came. And He restored Maybe not so much, the text, but the understanding of the text is that correct? Yes, I think that was the, the major contribution that Joseph made to the Bible and I think you know, there are there are ah, there are a few kind of, Corrections relatively few though.

1:47:19 I think I would say the majority. 90% of the The things that Joseph Smith did in the jst were like, expansions and explanations, not contradictions to what was already there. You know what I'm saying? Oh, I see what you're saying. So with that, then how would you how would you make sense of of Article of Faith 8 where it says as far as it is translated correctly, right? Because translation is a lot different thing than just understanding well, actually, I don't think that it is, you know, I talked to you about the, the targum, the Aramaic like that word Target him means Translation. But it also means interpretation. and like, every every translation is an interpretation, Okay. All right.

1:48:12 Nope. I follow you. So so I think the the Joseph Smith translation is Is like is perfectly. I think it's perfectly proper to understand it as a As just misinterpretation of what the text is, getting at what the text is meaning with with inspired editions. Like, I believe that, but yes, but but I will say that the, like the The texts that we have like the historical physical evidence. Shows. In in my opinion shows the what Nephi is saying is correct that the the books that we have of the the Old Testament prior to the Christian era are different in many ways. From the book, from the, the books of the Old Testament that we have.

1:49:03 That kind of surface after the beginning of the Christiana. Okay. Okay. Now the next question I would would have here. Is. During Joseph's time there's more than one version of the Bible floating around, right? The Gutenberg the Geneva Bible. I think we're all in use. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, that Geneva Bible for a long time was what found favor with most Americans? Because it was extremely hard on tyrants. So do these do these same things, you know, concerning the documentary, hypothesis hypothesis, Do they apply to those other versions? Right.

1:49:47 Do we see the the Old Testament in the Geneva being fairly close to the King James? Yeah, yeah. There's some questions or for the Gutenberg Bible, all that stuff. They are from the Hebrew tradition. Yeah, which is the from the master erratic. The master Rick for tradition. Okay? Which is Which is fairly late. Now, in saying this, I don't want anyone to kind of get the idea that there's drastic differences as far as like, like unrecognizable different cities or something like that. There are, there are many. I will say this is interesting too. I don't know if you've ever had this experience, where you're reading the New Testament and you come across a quotation of the Old Testament.

1:50:31 And then you go to like, Cross-check it, you go to the Old Testament and you see that doesn't quite say what the New Testament says. Have you ever? Yep, if you haven't, you should try it sometime. You'll find out that there's a fair number of quotations, supposed quotations in the New Testament, you know, that are usually about about Christ about Messiah, that you go back and look in the Old Testament and it doesn't Say that it doesn't quite say that. But the thing is that if you actually Like those quotations in the New Testament are from the Septuagint. They're not from the masoretic. So if you go to the, if you go to the Greek, like the Greek, the Greek Old Testament is what the early church used.

1:51:19 Gotcha. Okay, although there's complications even there. We don't need to get into that, but I would just say, yeah, that is. that is the version they use, and then at some point with the Protestant reformers they felt that the Hebrew was like more authoritative because it's like because it's the original language but it is not as old actually even though it's the Original language. So anyway, it's just it's there's a lot of interesting history there. Okay. Are you did you said, you had another question? I think. Or was it the follow-up question was about verse 8 out of the Articles of Faith.

1:52:01 Okay, so I guess we probably said what I want to say about that. Yep, you did. Okay. So, I think you did. Good enough. So this is, this is a problem. They have the apparently they have the Torah before you know, before battle the Babylonian captivity and and it's old as well. Like it's not a new thing. Like oh we got to get these new scriptures. So I know these are on the brass plates. They've been handed down for Generations like this is an old document at the time. It's an old document at the time of Lehigh, right? Okay, we got this with the timing like Nephi says, when the right when the corruption is going to happen and it's going to be at the beginning of the Christian era, when the Great Wall church is formed.

1:52:46 And then, you know, then we have this as well. I mean, okay, here's something else to say is We do, we do have the the jst but the jst doesn't say. These are uninspired. Writings, these are, these are compilation of mishmash of Warring factions from the northern and southern and the Priestly in the kingly and the deuteronomist, and with the redactor throwing it all together, like Joseph, it doesn't say anything about that. Like Joseph Smith, accepts the authorship as presented at least ours we can tell. And you mentioned this earlier like yeah, there's a problem if you say That Moses doesn't exist. Because Joseph Smith sure doesn't believe that. Right, like Moses Wright.

1:53:38 And Joseph saw, Moses Envision, and in and appeared to him in person as well. So, Um anyway and and even even in the like the deuteronomist hypothesis, this is kind of the the piece I would say, Deuteronomy hypothesis. And we're going to get to this more in detail later, but this is the piece of the documentary hypothesis that Mormons latch onto the most, but you look at the jst of Deuteronomy and there, it's It's hardly touched like just so even if you are like Joseph Matrix like he didn't make corrections to Deuteronomy, he corrected to he corrected two things. One of them is, it says, if an animal dies by itself, you're not supposed to eat it. But you can give it to like a stranger who's with you? Joseph Smith change that said, and you cannot give it to the stranger either.

1:54:32 Okay. And then the other one, the other one is Is another change that? The deuteronomist. The dude, the people who believe in the deuteronomist hypothesis, don't like So, if you believe in the Deuteronomy hypothesis, you actually don't like the jst because the jst affirms Moses. Like the changes Joseph made a firm the Mosaic authorship. The other one is when Moses gets the second set of tablets that God says that he wrote on the second set, everything that was on the first set. Like they were the same, right? Except for the milk has a big things. Right.

1:55:13 But but Joseph Smith writes that in, okay? But He but he like in in making that change, he just is affirming that it was that Moses, it was Mosaic authorship, you know? So, Alright, alright, so yeah. Yeah, it's yeah, I guess if you're going to subscribe to it fully It's going to become an issue. The the Joseph Smith translation is actually at odds like it with the documentary hypothesis and I do not see how they can be. reconciled without without paying down the documentary hypothesis. To like what I said earlier of like, when, you know, well, someone maybe touched up Deuteronomy after Moses died like that, I can get on board with that and like, that doesn't contradict with the restoration but saying that, right, that Deuteronomy was not written by Moses or was significantly changed like Joe Smith translation does not. Really support that at all.

1:56:17 So no. And that look that has been my one big critique that what I said, right? I haven't made up my mind entirely on this but that is a big critique for me. on, on the hypothesis itself is that if Joseph goes through the Old Testament, um, he misses a lot. Right. Um, obviously, he goes through it tight enough that he finds that one part there about Giving the dead animal to a stranger enough that he feels to correct it. I think I think that would be proof enough that he he went through that thing pretty exhaustively. Oh yeah.

1:57:03 Yeah, for sure. okay, there's one more thing that, you know, if you're believing Mormon that you have to deal with and that is And that is Jesus. Because Jesus loves Deuteronomy Okay, like we talked about quotations in the New Testament. Like the Torah, the Torah is the main target of the documentary hypothesis and of course, the deuteronomist hypothesis part of that. You and, you know, just from the picture I have there. You could probably guess like which book does Jesus quote, the most from Its Deuteronomy. Yeah, as far as books from the Torah and he quotes from Deuteronomy more than any other book in the whole Testament except for Saul's. The number one thing that Jesus quotes but Deuteronomy is the next and it's, you know, it's the most quoted book in the tourist.

1:57:56 So, So, either you're saying, like, I mean, people have different ideas about this, but to me, it seems like you're saying Jesus is part of the conspiracy, you know? Because Jesus just seems to be totally either either. Jesus, is totally ignorant of the conspiracy, the deuteronomist conspiracy, and he's just kind of ignorantly quoting these things. Kind of like the belief of that fellow who thinks Nephi's not speaking the truth because he's just like inherited lies. So, you think, maybe Jesus is ignorant, which is not really a good look for messiah or Jesus is misleading. People, because he's always like, he always just gives this A positive impression of the, of the law and of Deuteronomy in particular.

1:58:43 So, you know, and Jesus, testifies of Moses, as authorship repeatedly as well. So that's that's pretty rough. Yeah, that's that's tough spot to be in. You can, you can do things. I have, let's see. I'll say this right now, I guess there's going to have later, but I have talked with people, like I've asked him like they're giving me these ideas and I said, you know, when when Jesus was asked, About what is the greatest commandment? you know that he quotes Deuteronomy He says hero Israel, Lord Our God. The Lord our God is one actually says all in Hebrew, which Shema Yisrael Jehovah Elohim.

1:59:34 Let's see, I'll say Jehovah. Israel Yahoo. And then he says and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, my mind and strength, right? That's the first crate and great commandment that's from Deuteronomy chapter 6, And so I'm like, how do you how do you square this? With what you said earlier, which is that Deuteronomy was like fabrication of these deuteronomist who were conspiring to get rid of the true worship. Of. L and Baal and asherah. And they just like pond off this forgery with and put Moses his name on it for the sake of authority. and the answer like I got was Jesus was actually Jesus was speaking sarcastically. That like when Jesus quoted Deuteronomy he didn't he didn't believe it but he knew that they did and he was like using it to shame them like he was speaking ironically or like saying you believe these things you know and this is and how false she are that you believe this is so great. Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't Jesus, quote Deuteronomy when he's repelling Satan.

2:00:43 Yeah. Yeah. Actually, I've talked to someone about that too different person. I said that, that to me would be a weird place to be speaking sarcastically they said, oh nothing, nothing better. When you're confronting your enemy, then slapping him with his own words, like putting up his own words, writing his face, you know, quoting the devil to, to the devil and, you know, I you can believe that people do believe that. and but, I mean I don't find that I thought that to me is bad for you. but that's kind of what you have to believe, because Jesus loves Deuteronomy Jesus quotes at all the time.

2:01:23 So you have to either say he is ignorant. He is in on the conspiracy. Or. He just is quoting Deuteronomy in a in a sarcastic or mocking way. But there's a problem with that last option. I mean, these all have problems obviously, but problem with the last option because Here, there's no indication anywhere ever that Jesus like corrects that he never likes tells his disciples. Now I, I quoted Deuteronomy to the Pharisees because they believed it and it's, you know, I'm quoting it to their shame. But when you read Deuteronomy, you should understand that, you know, not to be, you should not be misled by my words, you should understand. The Deuteronomy is, has all these false things, right? There's never anything like that. Like Messiah is giving the wrong impression. Messiah is giving him, you know, if, if Jesus doesn't believe it but he's quoting it.

2:02:17 He's then you're saying that that the Messiah is misleading people. Right. Because he never seems to like correct the impression that he's giving. So that's not good either. I don't know. No, it's a little problematic, right? Yes. Okay. So that is, I don't know what time is it here. 9:00. I don't know how long you want to go. I have the next part is the deuteronomist. Hypothesis specifically. Yeah, we can go as long as you're you're you want to go Josh, keep going. Okay.

2:02:58 Okay, so I got here. This is a YouTube video by The Interpreter Foundation. I love The Interpreter Foundation. They do a lot of excellent stuff. But they had this is a while ago, this is just, you can see the date there. They had Margaret marker, come out and do a two-part series. I actually got on the zoom call and was participating live. And I actually asked her a question because she was going through all of these interesting differences in the text of the Old Testament. But the thing that she was doing is she was looking at the Hebrew.

2:03:41 And the Greek and the Dead Sea Scrolls. and she was showing that these things that there's like changes that have been made but the problem is that she was She was using these. these changes to show that her, you know, that the document that the deuteronomist you made the change But the problem is, is that the two agent comes first, and then the Hebrew masoretic text comes later and not the other way around. And so so here's at at right at little after an hour my question gets played. So yeah, so that's one one person is just making the observation unlikely to respond to it. That the things that have been presented show Corruptions in the biblical texts that occurred after the beginning of the Christian era, since the mass, Reddit taxes is much much later than the DSs and the lxx as the Book of Mormon repeatedly, testifies and not early as the Deuteronomy as hypothesis asserts comments on that.

2:04:49 Well, the origin. Of the masoretic text is much disputed. It must have been decided by a group of people, I don't think a text just settles and becomes fixed. I sometimes You know, people say, well, the text became fixed about such and such a date, but text, don't fix themselves. Somebody fixes them. And the final form of the masoretic text, Did come into being. In the Christian era. Okay, so she basically says, yes, that's correct. We don't know the full origins of the masoretic text fine but it comes into being in the Christian like after the Christian era. Okay?

2:05:38 So she just admits that and then she keeps going on that we can ask, but we can't answer is Who determined and what criteria determined what version of the text should become sacred canonical? What should be included within the Canon, because he, the church Ethiopia, for example, has Enoch in its can and that's certainly doesn't appear in any Canon that space on the mathematic text. All sorts of questions you have to answer but to recognize that they must text. That is the basis of the Christian translation of the Old Testament to recognize that that was in fact the Jewish texts Fixed determined settled after the Advent of Christianity and perhaps in reaction to it that is very, very important indeed. Okay.

2:06:28 So there's she says she just concedes the point again. Yes, it was the Jewish texts, it was fixed and determined, and settled, after the Advent of Christianity and perhaps in reaction to it, that is my belief as well. um, so like she says this, but I don't know if she realized and I don't think that people in the the zoom actually realize that she is agreeing with the The commenting. The comment that I made that all the things she's showing all the differences are actually showing that the changes were made after the beginning of the Christian era which is what the Book of Mormon says. And not before. During the reign of King, Josiah and the Babylonian exile.

2:07:10 Like she is saying, Or like the, like, the documentary, like the Deuteronomy hypothesis says. So like, I think that the Book of Mormon is actually in harmony with the manuscript evidence that we actually have and Margaret Barker agrees here. but also says well but you know we don't we don't know things, you know which is true but the evidence that we do have actually agrees with the Book of Mormon and not with her. So interesting, that's fine. She could debate forever about what the boats might have been. And all the rest of why this was in goodbye. This wasn't But it is a mistake to assume that the Old Testament that we read now is the Old Testament that Jesus knew most. So yeah, the Old Testament that we read now is not the one that Jesus had, but but we do know what Jesus had. Its the Septuagint.

2:08:06 Or at least the Septuagint is very close to it, and we can tell because of the quotations. So, when you say the Septuagint, That wouldn't have been in the Greek though, right? Yes, it was in the Greek. so, so Are you saying that Jesus was reading the Septuagint and Greek that he was? okay, Greek was the I mean, the it was it was Greek was the lingua, Franca Aramaic was as well. He Jesus probably spoke. He was probably multi-lingual. I mean he's a Son of God after all. But just normal people even were were probably multilingual there, it's probably very similar. You know, you have a Israel is a small country and it is in the crossroads. okay, between northern and southern Mediterranean and Africa and Egypt, right.

2:08:58 Um, So and you know, of course, at the time of Jesus life, they were occupied by Romans. who spoke Latin and Greek and so, yeah, the the scriptures that were in common circulation, the Old Testament, scriptures were In Greek, there probably were Hebrew and Aramaic copies floating around too. But like I said, the most of the quotations of the Old Testament, That we can find in the New Testament like they match with Septuagint. Sometimes they match. Sometimes they match with the masoretic all. So But when the masoretic and the septic, when the, you know, when the Greek and Hebrew diverge, then the quotations usually follow the Greek, the subtitle.

2:09:48 Yeah. Okay, so those are stubborn facts. All right. Oh I'm gonna pull up another video. Okay, so this is a stick of Joseph podcast. This is a And they are, they're talking here about Richard? Friedman's book, who wrote the Bible. And they're talking specifically about the flood story. And the flood story is one of those kind of doublets where there's, there's like There's there there. Postulating that it's two different stories that kind of got matched up together. So we're gonna we're gonna play that here. Is that we say there's markers.

2:10:36 And so, Jay has certain markers and E has certain markers about. For example, how they refer to God his name assertions? They make one author says that Yahweh does not reveal his name. Ever until he meets Moses on Mount Sinai. Well, another author says that ain't true because God's Gonna name all these are these guys and there's oceans of these isn't just one thing, right? And they're all and they and when the cars put them together, like it's so interesting that all these evidences line up. Yeah, very little contradiction. Okay, so here's here's one of the They say with very little contradictions funny. But so here's one. This is one example that they give and this is, this is one that just like, if you believe in the restoration then and the Joseph Smith translation then Then I then I don't understand, you know, but so they're saying in Exodus, Exodus chapter 6.

2:11:27 Right here. A Exodus chapter 6, verse 3. the Lord appears to Moses and says, and I appeared unto Abraham unto Isaac and unto Jacob by the name of God Almighty. But by my name, Jehovah was I not known to them. Okay now, okay, you're reading that and you actually can go through, you know, in Exodus and read about Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and the name. Jehovah shows up.

2:12:09 So clearly this is a this is a contradiction. And therefore, you know, this wasn't by Moses, it was, you know, different authors or different factions, right. This is what Mike day here. He's the one talking Mike day. Just I like he uses that as an evidence for this hypothesis that he's teaching and this is, you know, what Friedman in his book pushes as well. Okay, who's the guy in sitting next to Mike? Is that Dave? That's Dave Butler. John Butler. Yeah. So he's he wrote in the language of Adam, that's kind of his most recent book.

2:12:52 And that. That borrows on a lot of these ideas. I will say too here, like I'm going to Mike day and Dave Butler, like they are some of the big proponents of this and I've been pushing this and they're pushing, you know, this book. And other books like it wellhausen book. They they like it. I don't really understand how they can do that and kind of ignore they like it's it's kind of funny because they feel like these things support the The restoration. And yet, I feel like they contradict it and are not necessary.

2:13:33 Like, I feel like you you can if you want to know about heavenly mother, you do not need to rip out the Bible in order to do that. but that is right, that is that is the That is the fruit that I feel like is coming from these. Conversations. Now they will say they are believers, okay? So they're not atheists or something. Uh but I think that the things that they're espousing like what we just heard. So we just heard Mike talked about this, this contradiction in Exodus where Jehovah says, I wasn't known Abraham. Didn't know my name. Okay, but but he's, but Mike is a Mormon, like, and I'm a Mormon, okay?

2:14:18 Or a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, whatever. And, like, just down in the footnote, it says, like there's there's a jst on this that actually. helps us to understand this, it says, I'm going to read the whole thing and it insert the jst. And I appeared unto Abraham unto Isaac and unto Jacob. I am the Lord Almighty the Lord, Jehovah, and was not my name known to them question, mark. Yeah. Oh interesting. You have it open there in front of us, you looking down there. I do. I do? Yeah, I have I have an inspired version that I oh excellent, I use.

2:14:58 Um, okay. Yeah, no. And I appeared unto Abraham and Isaac and into Jacob. I am the Lord God Almighty and the Lord Jehovah and was not my name known unto them. So here. Okay, let me let me sum this up and tell me what I'm missing here. But here we have One of the places. Where Joseph makes an inspired change, right? Well, I guess not. I guess it's the same as what's in The. In Exodus, right? Yeah, it's exactly the same.

2:15:42 Yeah, we have nonetheless. We have Joseph second witness saying? No. They they did know the name. Jehovah. Absolutely. Now, this is, this is the thing, is that the King James Bible translates it this way. Okay, But in, in ancient Hebrew and other, you know, ancient Greek and stuff too. There's a there's very little punctuation and certainly there's not something like a question mark. And so, the thing about Hebrew is that you can read it and you can understand it as a declaration or as a an interrogatory, right? As a question, and the context, the context will guide that Oh yeah, in the Joseph Smith translation.

2:16:26 Okay, so here's where it's interesting, right? The verbage is all the same, but in the Joseph Smith translation, it's a question mark behind the word them. That's right. And it actually that actually flips, the meaning to exactly the opposite if you have 100% flips demeaning there, right? Yes. Um, but because he, he's basically asking kind of, I don't want to say rhetorically, but he's asking sarcastically, if you will, right, was, I not known to them? Did I not tell them? My name is a rhetorical question. Yes, exactly. Yes. Yeah. Saying I revealed myself to you and I revealed and didn't I reveal myself to them? Yes. And when I reveal myself to to Joseph Smith and I won't I reveal myself to everyone who seeks me, right.

2:17:12 This is the the understanding so, Now the what? Let me, let me put this into context because this is a big one here, right? Yeah. If we take Joseph that his word, right? And the text that that Joseph then goes back and and revises. And they're basically disagreeing with the head of the dispensation. Am I right? Or am I wrong in that assertion there? I Yeah. By by pushing that this is like evidence for the documentary hypothesis. They are going against or at least ignoring What Joseph said.

2:17:58 Yeah. That's interesting. And I don't, like I said for I can understand this, I, you know, the need for a again for the need academically. To search for a naturalistic explanation for things. Like I understand that but, you know, I missed, I'm a chemist. But if you are a Believer and you know, you have testimony of Joseph and of his work then, I don't know why you would repeat that as like evidence against. Exodus being written by Moses, you know? Now, I will say too that the King James translates, it that way as a declaration.

2:18:43 But there are other Bibles that recognize that this Hebrew phrase ought to have a question mark at the end. And so, there are Bibles that have question marks at the end of that, Sentence as well, and English English Bible. So, Okay, I got another One queued up here. But the vision and asking these guys whose names are really awesome that I can't pronounce but then Julius bellhousing in Germany comes along and he's a Lutheran and he sees this development and this editing that takes place in these multiple sources and he's totally all in. He's reading the Bible, not as a privilege text, what? I mean by that is he doesn't read it because it says God said, it, therefore everything in here is perfect. He looks at it as. Okay. Well, how would I approach is a scholar and read it and read it with a critical? I not criticizing it to like dis it. But to what is it doing?

2:19:28 What are its assertions? And so he comes to the conclusion. As Dave talked about that, there's an editor who has lots of sources and he's compiling them and he has in his mind die, a theological view of place where he's trying to go and then he publishes a book called and I can never say the first word Pro legomena of the history of Israel and he publishes it around 1878. Now this is important because think about what Joseph Smith does. And think about his assertions, he says in 1829. So we're prior 50 years prior to wellhausen bell housing I have a book. There's an editor. And his name is Mormon. What does he have in front of him? A lot of Records bunch of sources, and what does he do with them Bridges? He's editing them. And by the way, does he have in his mind die at theological place? He wants to take this and a message. Could you say he's biased? Yeah, but he's also doing history.

2:20:10 Just think about what that saying. I just want to drop that there and go. That's really interesting. You see what I'm saying? So I mean okay, so I'm gonna tell you the so this is this is interesting and I think this is a it's kind of a Sneaky thing that I do. Yeah, it's like making equivalents between Vols documentary hypothesis and what Mormon does to compile The Book of Mormon. Yeah, and so he like makes this equivalence and, and I think it's again, it's if you don't think about it too much, it's very enticing. Like, oh yeah, I can like relate to that. That's what we, that's how we will. I know this thing about the Book of Mormon and now, I can like, tie the the Bible to this kind of process as well, except that They'll housing doesn't believe that Moses existed, you know. Mormon believed that Nephi and Jacob and Alma existed, right? We believe that those were inspired men and yes, Mormon, a Bridges and compiles things, but the documentary had hypothesis says no.

2:21:19 There those people. Those people did not exist and those, these are stories that were just put together to control the people, you know? I mean, and you don't have to believe what believes necessarily, but to like try to make this equivalent so that it's like palatable to a Mormon ear. I find a little bit disingenuous. Yeah, no, I yeah. I, I see that quite a bit and the the other thing that I would see that's problematic. Is. Unlike the Book of Mormon, where Mormon tells you what he's doing, right? You don't have necessarily the same thing for the five books of Moses.

2:22:03 You don't have someone saying look, I'm making an enrichment, right? And so they have yes, it's different in that way as well. And so there, there are scribing meaning to something. And I'd like to know I shouldn't say meaning. There are scribing intense somewhere and I'd like to know where where it is. They they they're hanging their hat. On that intent. I mean maybe they have something, right? I, I've watched these guys a few times. Um, I, I genus usually like most of what they have to say but this one, I would say, okay, where, where you making that inference from what? What are you hanging? Your hat on here? To say that the the author or authors depending on your view of this. We're making an enrichment.

2:22:52 Right? I don't see any place. You're you're you you have to you have to take a guess, you don't have to do that with the Book of Mormon because Mormon tells you what he's doing, right? I'm making an abridgment, he States his intent right there. You don't have that anywhere in the five books of Moses. Am I right? Or am I wrong? In that job? You are correct? Yeah, it is a false equivalence and, you know, but it's just to it just bait for Mormon ears. So, you know, this is the, this is the book that they're pushing in this, you can see there right in the middle. This is what this is, what Richard Elliott says. On this, this book that they're pushing Richard Elliot says, on page 14, Until the past generation. So recently, there were Orthodox Christian and Jewish Scholars who contested the documentary hypothesis in scholarly, the article's at present.

2:23:42 However, there is hardly a Biblical scholar in the world actively working on the problem, who would claim that the five books of Moses were written, by Moses or by anyone person. The critical analysis or authorship has all been extended beyond the five books of Moses. And as touched every book of the Bible, even the book of Obadiah, which is only one page. Long has been thought to be a combination of pieces by two different authors. Hmm, like there's not a single book in the Bible that was actually written by inspiration in the way that the book claims they're all process of Natural Evolution. That is that is what is what this book. That they are that they are pushing teaches. It's crazy. so drop anyway, like I said, like, I understand In academic.

2:24:39 Circles. The need to have natural explanations for everything. and I and I prefer that for the most part, but, you know, I have I have spiritual Witnesses of things, too. That That I also. Put stock in. Look cute. It's one thing for a dude like me, who's kind of a meathead to be like You know, I I prayed about this and and this is what I came to and that's all I have to hang my hat on for me. That's enough, right? I get it. When I find something that makes it line up. Otherwise, that's fine. But Josh, you're coming from a different place. I mean, like you're you're a scientist, right? I mean, So I find that to be interesting as well. Yeah.

2:25:26 Yeah. Okay. Yeah. I mean, I have a, I have kind of a jaded view on science as well, because you know, as an Insider like I know full well that Most most scientific papers are. Are fudged are, are falsified in some way. There's a huge, there's a huge pressure to publish those things. And like you're 10 year and your employment depends on publishing and not just to say that it's all garbage but it's mostly garbage. Yeah. No I hear you. Okay, let's continue. So I got another one more clip here from this one. I think North.

2:26:07 Yeah, I do. I see that. Well, here's the question, do these accounts ever contradict each other? That is such a good question. In a sense, they all do, right? Let's get to the Noah and just one minute. Let me just patriarch's wife gets lost after by the king. Is that is it Isaac or is it? Okay, so that we talked about the Sarah with the two stories and all so Isaac with Rebecca. And like this. I kind of, I am I get embarrassed sometimes listening to the logic that's behind some of these arguments like, well, there's two stories, therefore Therefore there must be two authors. It couldn't be that like a similar thing happened. right, it just like that does not the the assertion does not logically follow from the observation, but there's no way like nowhere in history.

2:27:08 Do we find monarchs lusting? After other men's wives, never right? You know, I just accept in Egypt. Except, you know, in Israel with David and except with Premiere all throughout your up, right? Like I just like it's a thing that's what monarchs do. Well, you know, that's what corrupt him on our two, the right? They yeah, yes I did. Okay, here we go. So now, so here's the here's the argument, right? Is that, is that we've already said this, but that the flood story is not one. Flood story. It is two and they haven't been jammed together. So number both of the northern and southern Kingdom. Remember to flood story, but they were different in significant particular. Okay? And somebody in the court of Hezekiah, didn't put them in in succession or didn't like say, well one must have been in Phoenix day or something, which is another technique sometimes use, he just interlace them.

2:27:54 So we went through and jammed two complete accounts of the flood together into one and we don't notice it because we tend to sort of just turn our brain off and mechanically read as we go through. And I know we say this a lot that will put in the description and sometimes we most times we come through on that. Sorry there's a little further than I wanted to go but okay. So they they actually go through. I'm not gonna listen to the whole thing, but they go through and You know, they split The Narrative of the flood into like two separate narratives and read them side by side and comment about their differences. And you know, and then opine about, you know, the difference is between the northern and southern Kingdom, the J and the E. The actually, this is the the J and the P sources, but p and E are like together sometimes anyway, um, so you know they say There's contradictions.

2:28:57 So the first version P says that it rained for 40 nights and 40 days. And then they asked how long was the flood? And it's like well the flood lasted for about a year but it said that it rained for 40 days and 40 nights. And and they say, well, that's a contradiction. Do you do you think that's a contradiction? Dave? Was that hard to understand for you? Oh no. I I was thinking, you know, don't we have some of this in the New Testament accounts as well, or maybe not out now. Conjugations, but they definitely emphasize different parts of the same account, right? Yeah. That's actually a good way to put it. So no, I don't think. So.

2:29:40 This is actually like, I thought of this example, this is kind of an example. Like, have you ever had a flooded basement? I know I have not yet had the privilege or the honor of that, you need to immediately find a piece of wood and knock on it right now. Okay, okay, good for you, good for you. So you just my examples, gonna fall flat here but suppose suppose, then that I was talking to a different Dave Sanders who had had a flooded basement before And I was gonna ask you how long was it flooded? And you know, usually you'd say a couple of days because and then I'd ask another question.

2:30:21 Well, how long were the pipes leaking? And you say, you know, a couple of hours because, What happens usually is the the water leaks out, and then you fix the plumbing first. And then you start cleaning up the mess. Right. And cleaning up the mess depending on how many inches or feet of water or in your basement that might take. Days to pump everything out, and then to let everything dry, right? Right. And so now, Now, that's like just a normal storytelling. But if you were a documentary hypothesis And you heard someone tell this story what you would say.

2:31:02 You would say, aha. There's two different versions here. and it must be, it must be that like, you and your wife have different versions of the story because And you just said both of them kind of Blended together so as not to offend her because there's obviously tension in your relationship. Otherwise, why would you need to preserve both accounts? You are obviously the shorter time. Like you said that it was only a couple of hours before the pipes were fixed but then, but then it was days for the water to go away and that's a contradiction. But obviously you're saying the shorter time because men naturally have the job of fixing things when they break. So you would want to make yourself appear in the best light possible while her recollection of how long it took for you to fix.

2:31:52 The pipes is, which is not really how long it was wet is probably more accurate. Since she is not incentivized to lie or embellish the facts for the sake of her own reputation. In fact, the longer length is probably the older or original story but the shorter length of time began to be reported and told as a rebuttal in order to for you to save face. Holy cow. So this is, this is how this is, how the documentary hypothesis will pick apart stories. If you say, My basement flooded and the pipes were leaking for two hours and then it took us two days for the water to go away. Say ah, wow. That was there's a two different stories you're telling there and we can figure out from Clues who the authors of these two different stories are and what their motivations are for telling these different stories, you know?

2:32:43 And so this is the kind of this is the kind, this is exactly the kind of analysis that happens. So in all actuality they're just emphasizing different parts of the same story, right? They're talking about how long it rained versus how long the water was was covering the Earth. That's exactly right. But then they think we've identified different authors, we've identified various Styles and and the details that they're interested in, we identify the motive for the discrepancy, we've identified the timing and the evolution of the story. See I can tell all these things about you and your wife and your different versions of the story because of this contradiction that I detected, right? So anyway, I think it's I think it's embarrassing when when people hear experts talk, this is where I was going to bring up the like the wine I guess the wine on an empty stomach.

2:33:30 But here's an expert talk about something and they just let their brain fall out like oh that's a really interesting that you can tell all this stuff from all these Clues, right? So, anyway, so here's a funny thing, I'm going to actually Stop sharing this and I'm going to share something else here. Okay. So hopefully you can see this. Yep, got it. Okay. Can you see that? Yep. so this is the this is the thing that documentary hypothesis, you know, don't Appreciate or realize is that sometimes? Things are said by hebraic authors more than once.

2:34:14 Simply for poetic reasons. This is Kai Ausmus, right? This is a chiasm. This is the story. Of the flood and it is a beautiful and precise them. That. Has as its Center that God remembered Noah and ends the flood. And it is, it is a beautiful in its structure. And the crazy thing is, is that the documentary hypothesis and I put up here, I don't know if you can you probably can't see my mouse, can you see my mouse? You can't. Yeah I can't. I can see here rolling around.

2:34:54 Okay good. so, I have put the, the different sources so Richard Elliott. He has in the back. He has an appendix where he looks okay. He has a more, he has a more thorough. Book called The Bible and its sources. But in the back of this book who wrote the Bible, he has kind of an abbreviated version of that. And yeah, all the different verses throughout the Torah and which of the authors he thinks are most likely to have written it. So, I have those here. So the flood story is split between the the Jehovah's or the yahwist source and the Priestly source. Okay, amazing thing is.

2:35:34 This supposedly was written by this this poem here. Was written by two different kind of Warring arguing, factions of people and everywhere where they have an asterisk here. So, Shem ham and japheth are introduced into the story right here. In Genesis 6 verses 9 through 11. I haven't in that was you know a signed to the Priestly Source. I have an asterisk here because if you go to B Prime then Shem ham and japheth, they are introduced again off. The they come off the boat, but this was written by the yahweh's source. So, basically P and J are just like completing each other's thoughts.

2:36:16 In an amazing number of these parts of the chiasmus here. So that seems pretty miraculous. That this would just like spontaneously arise from from this without the other and even, even when it doesn't. So if I have so this one God makes a covenant with Noah. Okay, Janice chapter 6 verse 18, that's the Priestly Source you go to E Prime. God makes a covenant with All Flesh, and this is all by the Priestly. So either way, it's not good for the documentary hypothesis. One is there's two different authors who are like far apart from each other in time and space writing this poem together, that just is perfect in its form, or you have A single author that is actually repeating himself. Which according to the documentary hypothesis is evidence for multiple authors.

2:37:20 So that's not good either. You know, what's a better hypothesis is that this was one person who wrote a poem. Yeah. Yeah I see what. Yep, I see where you're going there. You know it. Oh, that's the other crazy thing. Is, you have a couple of Mormon guys like Speaking against chiasmus, you know? That's just so one thing that you really can, hang your hat on the iron, the divine origin for the Book of Mormon, right? Yeah, yeah. The McCormick is has beautiful classic structures full of it. The Bible does too in other places. Um, and yeah, that is evidence evidence for the like, the authenticity, the break or origins of the Book of Mormon. So, Okay, I'm gonna stop that.

2:38:14 I mean go to another video. okay, so here they're talking about again, a different term about the differences in animals because Noah is commanded to bring pairs of all the animals except for the clean animals, which are supposed to bring seven pairs. But single player of the rest. And so after six verse 3 where God says, I've never told anybody my name is Yahweh Moses, let me let you in on a secret. Well, just read everything before that and go, you know, if there's many times in Genesis, something's afoot at the Circle K, right? Like something's happening. That's what we just read, are their conflicts. Yeah, there's a conflict in the Noah story, right? Like some of the days. You can reconcile like well, no, it rain 40, but the water was still there for 150, but the one story says seven pairs of clean animals.

2:38:58 The other story says, two pairs of clean animals. Like that's it, it's one. It's one or the other, right? Okay. All right. Now I won't go to the I won't go to the the scripture and read it but I will just say like this is another example of like you you have to, you have to intentionally like you have to play dumb. You have to intentionally misunderstand the text. But he goes on, actually, in this to say this is the great thing about the LDS position is that you don't have to believe in, okay, but we're not we're not talking about just like mistakes here.

2:39:41 We're talking about Like fraud, and we're talking about, like, making up stories. And just like slapping them together. Like it's it's more than just biblical inerrancy that we're talking about. So, What what actually what actually happens. Let's see in in Genesis. It says, at one point it says, It says seven pairs of clean animals. And then it tell and then it says that the animals went on the ark two by two. The clean animals and the unclean animals went two by two. Well, two by two.

2:40:26 Just That this is the crazy thing is that this two by two, they're saying this is what this is saying is that the clean animals there was only two of the clean animals. When really, it's just describing how they walked up the ramp. C. They went up the ramp a pair at a time. And it actually does not contradict. Yes. Read the text and just try to understand what it's saying. It's not that difficult to see what it's saying, but they make a big deal about it, like you like they just play dumb intentionally misunderstand it. And say this is clearly a contradiction.

2:41:06 It's like man say it's like I don't know if you've ever talked with the if your kids like my kids are lawyers, my kids are a little lawyers and they like will if they can intentionally misunderstand. What you are saying? Oh yeah. Well like that is. Oh, what's happening here? It's it's a little bit childish as far as Not to like and I don't want to be careful here. I'm I like my day and Dave Butler and I like the things they write and say that they, they're obviously learned men, they are Scholars and they have a lot of good things to say. And you know even Margaret Barker has a lot of good things to say and I'm not saying anything against heavenly mother and things like that. I'm all I'm saying is That the documentary hypothesis and going along with this. this theory that just ignores and creates problems and infers things that aren't really, inferable doesn't really seem like a necessary thing. Like, the Book of Mormon can stand just fine without having to tear Deuteronomy out, you know? Oh yeah, in order you know, I see I see what you're saying there.

2:42:25 One verse tells you how many pairs go in the other verse tells you how they entered the Ark, right? How those pairs entered like yep. Mmm. Okay, let me stop that. I'm going to, I'm gonna pull up another video. Okay, this is Gospel tangents you know, gospel tangents, thank you. Yep. So this is Colby Townsend. He's a Les. Scholar. He does biblical. Studies. And he's actually on here, talking about the documentary hypothesis.

2:43:07 He is he is totally in favor of it. And he's actually gonna tell us what it's like reading. The reading, the five books of Moses. From a perspective that totally Embraces the documentary hypothesis. So, it's like that where it's just, it's really from a close reading and careful attention to detail. The, the Torah is an unreadable text. If you're really taking it step by step, as a readable cars, literal literary, just a narrative reading. If you're just reading the narrative and taking seriously, the information that's getting you and your sister compiling, that information you go, it's unreadable. Okay, we we cannot understand the Torah. We cannot understand Genesis Exodus. Leviticus and numbers.

2:43:57 There's so many contradictions, it is hopelessly. Contradictory and as it is. As he says, as he said several times, it is an unreadable text. Have you ever felt that way when you read the scriptures like I can't even understand this. No, it's it's a pretty cohesive narrative right now. That's not say you're not going to struggle with some things as you go along, right? I I've said that reading the scriptures does require you to get familiar with the language of scripture, right? It can read kind of clunky when when you're first getting into it but it definitely tells a narrative the, the other thing that I can't help, but Wonder here. Is that?

2:44:45 And I can't remember which one it was, but there was somebody higher up in Authority in Mormonism. That had once said, I think we need to and I'm paraphrasing here. Move away from the Old Testament, right? And Here. This is the most blatant call. I've kind of heard for that, you know, where where you call it unreadable or whatever almost like a yeah let's distance ourselves from that text sort of a thing. Well he he definitely he definitely, he likes to study it. I mean he that's what he that's what he does. So but I think he would definitely distance himself.

2:45:28 Because he takes seriously the documentary hypothesis would distance himself from any sort of literal understanding. any sort of literal or faithful, this is just like a historical curiosity. For right. Okay, I have another some more Colby Townsend here, the main competing arguments right now within scholarship or just described. So you can either go with the documentary hypothesis which tends to argue that that the different sources were written a little bit early. So maybe earliest of those would be 8 9th century BCE which I haven't mentioned yet is really early for writing, linky, write Hebrew at least because one of the main arguments that really sort of shut down the possibility of Moses.

2:46:16 Being the author of the Torah is the fact that written Hebrew didn't develop until after Moses's life. Moses didn't speak Hebrew, he would have spoken it. Probably a version of it was much earlier version of it. But yeah, you wouldn't have he wouldn't have written it not in the form and in the, in the linguistic, like linguistic form, I guess is really the best phrase. I should have used that the Torres written in, it doesn't develop until after his life. So they're continuing debates about that as well. What does that mean for the writing of it? But really the most Scholars pretty much all Scholars that are really engaged in and to Tuple criticism agree that Moses couldn't have written it. And that the five books of Moses couldn't have come together until at the very earliest. The return from the Babylonian exile which has other years that approximately that would have been 530, BCE, or so. So it's worth the end of the sixth Century BC. And so, that's the earliest that they would have been compiled together.

2:47:07 That's like, more would have been compiled at the Book of Mormon terms, right? The Toro, the five books of Moses would have been long after Lehigh left, Jerusalem compiled in the five books. Yes, yeah. That's that's an interesting that leads into your paper. Doesn't it a little bit? Yeah, there's definitely some connections there. Okay. So yeah, I I got something right off the top of my head here. Just yeah, that's here. Just thinking Why did it have to be first wrote down in Hebrew? Well this yeah wasn't Moses and the rest of the children of Israel coming out of Egypt at that point. Yeah.

2:47:49 Well, I will I will just say without getting into that. Um like Colby says, this very matter-of-factly as though as though, as though, we know, something about that, but That is, there are debates about that. And like, I fall I fall on the side. I mean, I, I believe that Adam wrote okay, Colby does not and the dude, the documentary hypothesis does not allow for Adam to have been keeping records. Okay. Great price. Aren't we told the atom absolutely keeps a book of remembrance? Yes.

2:48:32 Yes. But again you're coming out at it from like you like believing the scriptures over the scholars. so, but if you, if you are putting your hat hanging, your hat with the documentary hypothesis, and the scholars that Produce it. Then you're going to have to understand the scriptures in a different way. Other than literal like it's going to be the scriptures are an allegorical thing. The scriptures are A Pious fraud, the scriptures are inspired but not. Literally true or you some version like that. You know, which is, which is possible, but it's not really possible to believe in the scriptures as written.

2:49:15 Like, as far as they're like, literally true. And now, I'm not saying everything in the scriptures is literal. Like, I believe a lot of stuff in the creation account. For example, is how symbolic meanings. So, don't get me wrong there. But kind of a traditionalist understanding. Is out of the question. and again, and look, I'm going to withhold total judgment till I do the other episode here but right now it seems like you're kind of in a conundrum that if you're going, if you're going to a spouse this you now have to figure out a way. To get around where Joseph, if the, if the documentary hypothesis is clearly true.

2:50:00 You now have you now have to reckon with Joseph Smith, right? Because he's He's perpetuating those same errors. which really takes away his ability as at, at least a Seer and if at worst both a profit and is here, Right. Few weeks back. I had just in Franken on the podcast where he laid out a bold plan to help people and families. From all areas of the restoration that are looking for a new home in Mormonism. Mormon Legacy Ministries is an online multi-faith effort to be a place where folks can come and learn and have Fellowship while they find their new church home. Now, it doesn't matter.

2:50:44 If folks, end up back in the LDS church, a fundamentalist church or an independent, we just want people to go where it is that the Lord tells him to go where they can do the most good. Now, as of last Saturday, a few of those meetings are now up and running. So there are four meetings there are available to you on the second and fourth Saturday of every month at 3 p.m. Mountain Standard Time. A sacrament meeting is available on Monday nights at 7 p.m. Mountain Standard Time. Is a men's meeting on Thursday night at 6 p.m. mountain standard time. A gospel. Fundamentals class is available then on the first and Tuesday of every month at 7 p.m. mountain standard time, starting in October, a women's meeting will be held. Now it doesn't matter if you are a member of the LDS church, a fundamentalist a person from other restoration branches and investigator or never Mormon.

2:51:39 These meetings are available to all now it doesn't even matter where you live East Coast West Coast, Midwest Canada, Mexico, Europe, you name it you have access to all these meetings. All you need to do is to go to Mormon legacy.org, scroll, the bottom of the landing page and just click the link of the meeting you want to join. That's it. So whether you want a soft place to land, while you look for your new church home, You're curious about early Mormon teachings, or you just really want to be part of something and they're already member of a church in wanna stay there, but want more opportunities to serve. This could be the place for you. Again, you can access all those meetings and reach out to anybody with the ministry by going to Mormon legacy.org or by clicking the link in this episode shown notes.

2:52:27 Thank you. Yeah, I yeah, I don't think that it is. It's not. Yeah, I mean you said it already and I've said it too. I don't think that it is compatible and I also don't think it's necessary. I think you can get all the things that you want. from the documentary hypothesis, which is Finding heavenly mother. and, and also, Not having to understand the biblical the the biblical account as being. Literally in errant. I don't think you need the doctor many hypotheses with the Deuteronomy hypothesis to get those things. Oh no, it's your Mormon, right?

2:53:17 Because look, it and this is why it's so important to understand terms, especially within Mormonism, right? We definitely have a Canon of scripture, right? But it can and simply denote a collection of We have the definition of scripture, which is anything that the Lord servants, say, while moved upon with the whole by the Holy Ghost, right? And we get to include all of Joseph's inspired writing, write all of his sermons that are inspired. Um, which add greater context to these things. So, to your point, as Mormons, I I don't think I'm with you, I'm not sure.

2:54:00 We, we need the, the Deuteronomy hypothesis or the documentary hypothesis to get to some of those sacred truths, which Joseph clearly spoke on multiple times. Yeah, without feeling the need to throw Deuteronomy in the trash. Yeah. Or or anything or any part of it, even. so, okay, the deuteronomist hypothesis. What is it? So, tell me. So I asked you about the documentary. Hypothesis. Tell me what, you know about the deuteronomist. Hypothesis, specifically, Okay. And and this one I'm way more fuzzy on. So again, correct me if I'm wrong but the Deuteronomy hypothesis, I believe is the one that that really focuses on the Priestly class.

2:54:47 Interjecting their Authority is that that's kind of the supposition in my right there. Yes, sort of, I mean, the there is a there is a separate Source called the Priestly source. So the Deuteronomy is different from the Priestly Source, okay? Um, but there is kind of some overlap there in that. The. well, I'll just go the deuteronomic hypothesis is That. The idea that King Josiah who the Bible describes, as very righteous is actually, he's actually one of the most vile and wicked kings that has existed or at least, or at least that he is manipulated by vile and wicked persons who are the deuteronomist. They are conspirators.

2:55:41 And you know, as evidence for this and this is true like he was he was eight years old when he began to Reign his father. Amnon and his grandfather Manassa were all just described as our described as the most wicked of Kings the deuteronomist, hypothesis would disagree. They think that the things that Manassas and amnon did were righteous and then Joe Sia, who's reforms, kind of undid what his father and grandfather were doing that. Josiah was and his and the people who may have been controlling him that they, in fact, were the wicked ones.

2:56:23 And but eventually, but they are in charge and so they get to write a history. A. So, the deuteronomist. those who posit the deuteronomist hypothesis, like, Where are we? Know, going wrong way. Oh, there's just a This is from the list. A little side note here, I'm actually in this film. Are you as an extra? I'd have to point it out though but This is the this is the new BYU film studios there in Provo.

2:57:09 But when you were, were you ever be BYU? I was never at BYU. But funny thing is that the church was kind of was redoing their Old Testament videos like for Seminary. Seminary in Sunday school and stuff. And so they sent out a letter to like all the wards in Provo and Orem area saying we need, we need Temple recommend holders with beards because they're kind of hard to find. It's gonna be in these movies. These Old Testament movies. Anyway, if you if you ever watched this movie about King, Josiah?

2:57:53 So, part of part of the story, let me get to the the conspiracy here is according to the story. Okay, the story King Josiah. They're like they're doing some work in the temple and they find this book of the Torah. and according to the the deuteronomist hypothesis, this this Torah that they find is the book of Deuteronomy. Yeah, so if you look at, if you watch this film like me and another guy or like, carrying this box with like stick, it's not the Ark of the Covenant or anything like that. But it's a, it's like a big heavy chest and it's got sticks through rings that were carrying with and like one of us like slips and drops it and they're like, cracks cracks open like a tile on the floor.

2:58:41 And, and then they pull it back and there's this like hidden Scripture down there anyway, so I'm in that scene. so, anyway, they They say that that just Sia actually. I did away with like the worship of asherah. These are asherah idols. Can you read the inscription or nothing inscription? But the The phrase there. My eyes are up here. Yes, asherah so, So, the deuteronomist they have as their goal to remove the Messiah.

2:59:21 And remove the atonement. They don't like that. Okay? And they want to consolidate power, pull it, both political and religious. They kill the milk has addict priests. They only allow Temple worship at Jerusalem, they all want to create a king. Because Deuteronomy is the only place in the Torah, that mentions a king. So they're like, oh we want to, we want to Kingdom, we want power. So we're gonna write that into the scriptures. They want to enforce strict monotheism like we don't even, we don't even believe in angels. Okay. They want to remove the worship of heavenly mother. They want to double down on the law. They want to punish him forbid, spiritual experience, Visions, Etc.

3:00:08 And they want to teach instead of instead of a Um, corporeal God. They want to teach in a formless incorporeal. God. So there's that, I guess. So not only not only did they fabricate the book of Deuteronomy but also, what's been come to known as the deuteronomic history. So these these Wicked guys, they wrote Deuteronomy and all so Joshua, Judges first, Samuel second, Samuel First Kings, and second Kings. These are all and then in contaminated other books as well. so, the stories of David just gone, Well, there is some of those stories are in Chronicles. And and Chronicles is untainted, or at least less tainted. Okay, according to the hypothesis, okay. Now.

3:01:09 When when they found this book of the Torah, that's the heat with the Hebrew says, when they found this Scroll of the law. This book of the law, the deuteronomist hypothesis and most Scholars. Like, because most Scholars agree with the deuteronomist hypothesis, they say that the book that they found was Deuteronomy and only Deuteronomy and not the rest of the Torah, because the rest of the Torah actually came later. Remember Deuteronomy was the first Um, now again there are variations of this. So I think we don't get it all of that, but but that's the main Theory. So Now why do they say this was probably Deuteronomy because then Josiah starts doing these reforms. And if you look like the things that Josiah does they're like they're found in the book of Deuteronomy. So voila, the problem with that argument is a couple of things. One is There are several things that do to that Josiah does that are only mentioned in Exodus and Leviticus all. So which is kind of evidence that it was probably the whole Torah and not just Deuteronomy because Those things that just say does aren't found in Deuteronomy, they are in Leviticus.

3:02:36 And exodus. And the other thing is that again, we go back to this timeline thing here. So Josiah is right here. And you know, he forges or his advisors come up with a forgery Deuteronomy or they seriously edit something that maybe already exists, you know. Some people believe that version but the problem is, is that the Samaritans they separated from, they were separate from the southern Kingdom and they separated, you know, 100 Almost 100 years almost a century before Josiah comes along and then they are in the northern kingdom.

3:03:19 And, you know, the southern Kingdom gets taken captive and whatever. And then, you know, the Samaritans they have they have their own Torah. They had their own Temple, their own Torah and guess what? Their Torah contains Deuteronomy. So it's like it's the same thing which is, you know, it's not proof but it's definitely is definitely not in favor of the deuteronomist hypothesis and actually showing that since they split off before, Josiah That they probably had and they they claimed that they had these books before then and also the fact that Josiah does things that are mentioned in Leviticus and exodus. Probably, it's probably not true. And of course I don't believe it's true. I believe that it was the the whole, the whole Torah and the like, if you look closely at the The manuscript evidence. It seems to indicate that interesting. Hmm. so, my eyes are up here today. The.

3:04:30 Show the Ashura ashrae polls. This is this is what the when the Old Testament says grows. Yep. Or Grove, right? This is Asher. She was, she was a poll. So you see this is, this is a little, you know, figurine and she's just straight. Like she's a, she's a pole asherah, Astro polls or these Groves. They were, they were Branch lists. Trees or in a tree shape but without branches it was just basically. I mean, she's got arms I guess and some other protuberances teachers features. But so, I was going to read what the scripture says about Manassa.

3:05:13 I don't think I need to. But it I mean Manassa is just described as It is being extremely Wicked and it says that manasse is the one that put Idols of these Canaanite gods and goddesses in the temple, and God was not pleased with this. but the deuteronomist hypothesis say, when Josiah Cleansed the Temple of those things that he was that he was doing that. He was the one that was in the wrong but they just rewrote the history to make it look like Manassas. Was the bad guy? So, oh, anyway.

3:05:56 For the sake of time. I think we'll skip this so there's no, you're good. I'm, I'm next, I'm exhaling because it again. I mean, this is this is the thing. I like, I look at these asherah poles, these little idols and things. And, you know, he talks about talks about bail. All so baleen and asherim. These are the the figurines or the, you know, the idols. Right, I just think, okay. like okay maybe this represents Jesus and heavenly mother like but I but do I really have to be like Telling Latter-Day Saints like this regardless, this is a Graven image.

3:06:36 Like are we going to like Drop The Ten Commandments to? You know, right? Yeah, that's that's where I was going, right? Is like, look. Even even if they were going to, yeah, go ahead. If even if even if they are meant to be. Representations of something that's doctrinally sound, you still have to understand that. That the Lord's chosen people in those days were specifically commanded not to make graven images. and so, One way or another. There's conflict there, right? Nothing harmonizes. Well. No, it's it's total confusion and Chaos. It's like we're going to we so badly. Want to.

3:07:23 Insert. Heavenly mother that we're going to be happy to get rid of the Ten Commandments in order to do it, you know. It's like, yeah you don't need to do that. You don't need to do that. but, but you do if you if you Like if you if the deuteronomist hypothesis is your jam then you do have to get rid of the Ten Commandments in order to like double down on that this was a righteous thing. And To have these Idols everywhere and Josiah was the bad guy. Amazing. amazing, you know, one of the things that Oh, there's there's Gideon. You know this is but Gideon is in judges. And your judges was also part of the deuteronomic history. But Gideon, chopped down and ask her a poll and to use it as firewood to offer burnt offering. So, another thing that there's complaints about is, you know, and they'll point to the Book of Mormon, see The Book of Mormons says, That Lehigh was quote a Visionary, man. And you, his family has complaints about that. Like, yeah, you're having these visions and they're making us go through all this hardship. and you know, Mike day and Dave Butler like they will say the reason why his family was complaining is because Lehigh was going against Deuteronomy because Deuteronomy is against.

3:08:55 Vision's. And Visionary experiences. Now, you want? 2 here, what Deuteronomy what they're actually talking about. Absolutely. What page where you at in general and Deuteronomy chapter 18 here, here is where it talks about. Lehigh being a bad guy is where Deuteronomy says, lehi's, Visions are evil. Okay. Deuteronomy 18 verse Now, I'll start at verse 9. When our come into the land, which the Lord thy God, give Athey Thou shalt not learn to do after the Abominations of those Nations. There shall not.

3:09:41 Be found among you anyone that maketh, his son or daughter to pass through the fire or that uses divination or is an observer of time or an enchanter or a witch or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits or a wizard or a necromancer. For all these things are an Abomination to the Lord and because of these Abominations, the Lord thy God drive them out from before the Thou shalt be perfect with the Lord thy God. Okay, so there you go. So Deuteronomy is against having spiritual experiences. So, when the part about passing through the fire is about killing your kids to Idols, right? Yeah. And black worship. Yeah.

3:10:23 These other things are clearly things that would fall Within. More Canaanite sort of of worship practices, right? Um, I mean, I mean that you with visions from from Jehovah to to his people, right? That would be, that would be the the plane that would be the obvious reading. But like I said, Remember, You must like intentionally misunderstand in order to try to make this fit, So that's that's the complaint against Visionary, men.

3:11:04 Let's see. I'm not gonna go to that quite yet, so there's another complaint. So this is the, this picture here is, this is Steven Wright being, right? He's about to get stoned there. So Vision, you know, Visionary man. There's another complaint that is made and it's frequently repeated. That is that Deuteronomy and the deuteronomist, that they hate Messiah, and they hate the idea of atonement. There is no atonement in Deuteronomy and I'll talk more about that in a minute. But first of all, the idea that Messiah is not in. There is just like every time I listen to one of these lectures about Deuteronomy like, And I encourage everyone to do this.

3:11:47 If someone says Deuteronomy says, this, or Deuteronomy does not say this, you just have to go look because very, very like, disappointingly frequently. I find that Deuteronomy obviously does not say anything. Like they are what they are. Spouting off. So this is one of those. You go to will stay in. Chapter 18, I should close it yesterday. Chapter 8, Deuteronomy is actually one of the most famous. Prophecies. About Messiah. And let's see.

3:12:28 This verse 15. The Lord thy God will raise up unto the prophet from the midst of the of thy brother and like unto me unto him. Ye shall hearken. According to all that thou desires of the Lord thy God. In horror in the day of the assembly. Let's see. No, there we go. So just verse 15, I guess. Oh no. And picking up on in verse 18, I will raise them up a prophet from among their Brethren, like unto the meaning to Moses and I will put my words in his mouth and he shall speak unto them. All that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass that. Whoever will not hearken unto my words, which he shall speak.

3:13:08 In my name. I will require it of him. okay, so that's like that's one of the most famous Messianic prophecies ever and this is And so to just say Deuteronomy, get rid of the Messiah and gets rid of Jesus, it's kind of. Yeah, this is actually quoted. I'm just gonna go chronologically here. Nephi is in first Nephi 22 verse 20. Starting at 20 and the Lord will surely prepare away for his people into fulfilling of the words of Moses. Not the deuteronomist. Which he speaks saying a prophet shall the Lord. Your God, raise up unto. You like unto me him. Shall you hear in all things whatsoever.

3:13:49 He shall say unto you should come to pass it all those who will not hear the prophet shall be cut off from among the people. Now I need by declare unto you that this prophet of whom Moses spake was the Holy One of Israel, wherefore, he shall execute judgment in righteousness. Okay. Then we have in the New Testament going chronologically Steven here, Steven when he is giving his speech he says That this is that Moses. Which said unto the children of Israel, a prophet shall the Lord, your God. Raise up unto your brother and like unto me him. Shall you hear talking about Jesus again? And then, of course, Jesus himself, when he visits the Nephites in third Nephi says, behold. I am, he who Moses spake saying a prophet shall the Lord, your God, raise up unto you of your brother and like unto me In shall ye here in all things whatsoever.

3:14:36 He shall say unto you. So I mean Jesus himself says Well, actually, all of them Nephi and Steven, and Jesus all say, this is what Moses said. Moses spoke this prophecy. so, I don't know what to do about that. I mean, I know what to do about that. I don't know what other people might do about that. yeah, and then again, we have the conflict where Arguably, one of the greatest, if not the greatest prophets in the Book of Mormon makes the same mistake by calling saying, that Moses was the one who wrote it. yeah, so I mean one Argument that I've heard. is well, there must have been there must have been another book. That contained that prophecy not Deuteronomy because we cannot have Deuteronomy.

3:15:33 It was a different one which we don't have its lost, we don't know which book or we might have ideas about which but we can't find it anywhere else except for Deuteronomy. But we know that it can't be Deuteronomy because we know that Josiah was the bad guy and it wasn't for my Moses because we want to have Asher apples. Like that's kind of the that's kind of the logic chain there. I'm going to, I mean, I'm going to skip this. Well, I'm gonna show part of this. Is a, this is scripture Central. And I like, I like scripture Central too. They put out a lot of good stuff, so, but she's gonna talk about, she's talking about Deuteronomy and she's gonna talk specifically about the, the Shema, the Shema. for those who don't know, I mentioned earlier, this is the This is the the first and greatest commandment Jesus quotes.

3:16:23 This from Deuteronomy, chapter 6. So she's going to give some commentary on that, okay? In the restored gospel, we believe that Joseph Smith actually was told that Joseph Smith translation. That the first law is not the same as the second law that initially. When we have the place, the tablets given to Moses. It said something different and I'll read you what. Joseph Smith changed this to do it on me. 10 verse 1, he says hewn other tablets, similar to the one that you broke, he says, and then I actually gonna pause this is actually. I think this is a dishonest, you see the ellipses there? Because she's saying, oh, they were different. These tablets were different, but the part that she left out, says the tablets were the same The same exact same words on the second tablets on the first except in the Joseph Smith translation.

3:17:13 I just I want to go ahead and read this. I feel like I feel like it's worth the exercise. It takes a little bit more time, but I feel like for this argument it's it's worth it. So here's what it says in the jst at that time. The Lord said unto me, Hew the two others tablets are, excuse me, tables of stone like under the first and come up unto me. Upon the mount. And make the anarch of wood. Oh, it was that the that's that's Joseph Smith. Deuteronomy, 10:1? Okay, and go to to two as well. I think.

3:17:56 And I will write on the table. The words that were on the first tables, which thou break us save the words of the Everlasting, Covenant of the Holy priesthood and thou shalt put them in the ark. So basically the Lord is saying there. Look it's going to have all the same stuff. Minus the stuff about the Holy priesthood. That's right. Yeah but she's saying it's totally different set of instructions that one had like the first one had the old stuff and the new one or sorry. The first one had the Everlasting Covenant. The holy priest of the milk has itself and the second one had all the ironic stuff that we have now but what the jsd actually says is The first one had all the stuff that we have now.

3:18:43 Plus more plus basically, plus the stuff that in the temple, Joseph Temple, ceremony. So anyway, I just, I just that kind of stuff annoys me, just how kind of its kind of obfuscates things. It's a little, a little, a little dishonest, I think to say that they were different missing some context there, for sure. Yeah. But the whole the whole documentary hypothesis is really quite I mean the whole thing is anti Torah. I mean so it's not that that's the idea behind it all is to kind of undercut the authority of the authors of these, The quote authors or the books, undermine the authority of the books, you know? Anyway, okay.

3:19:27 Okay, she goes on to. 251 this collection of the law, has perked to the attention of one, of my favorite biblical scholars in the Old Testament. Margaret Barker, and she found that the book of Deuteronomy is different than the other books. If you want to know something funny about this picture right here. She's talking about the book of Deuteronomy different. This is actually a Samaritan guy. So he's he's got his Torah there, which predates Josiah. So that's funny that she's showing that because that does not And that's funny. Okay here we go. The Torah Genesis Exodus have a lot of references to the Lord. God Yahweh Elohim and both are present and they're both working hand in hand.

3:20:12 And then we have other references about the Tabernacle and the importance of the temple and the importance of God's throne, in relationship to the priesthood ordinances and the sacrifices pointing to the great sacrifice of God, and all of those are taken out of the book of Deuteronomy. Okay Deuteronomy. He's got like all those things about talking pointing to the sacrifice of Jesus, like those are all gone from Deuteronomy. Of course, it's not true. Like anyone who's read Deuteronomy like, does knows, that's not true. But I don't, I don't really understand things like this. I'm gonna fast forward here a little bit to 915. So this is just quoting this, how Christ is quoting this Mom, right?

3:20:54 As the greatest commandment I say to be quoting false scripture. Good question. Only changed a slight degree. It's just changing the focus onto the law. And they asked you what's the most important law and he turned love God. And of course, the second to love your neighbor which he takes that Leviticus 1918. but as I look at the timing of these changes, So, she says, Jesus changed it but he'd actually doesn't like Jesus. Actually just quotes what Deuteronomy says like. He doesn't quote it different than Deuteronomy he quotes. Exactly what Deuteronomy says. So I do not know what she's talking about here. If they did come to pass at the time of Josiah, that means the brass plates, that Lehi and Nephi took probably had already been So, I wanted to look at the Book of Mormon and say they the Shema is what most important scriptures in all of the five books of Moses. Can we find them in the Book of Mormon? And so, I began looking.

3:21:44 I started out with this wonderful verse about teaching her children, I thought we've got verses on teaching children. We got new things, I've been born, good parents and therefore I was taught, you know, does it refer to this Shimmer like found second? If I-25 one verse that we quote often but look at the focus in the Book of Mormon compared to the focus in the show, not the show, not just focused on the law and listen to in the Book of Mormon chapter 25, verse 26 in second 85, we talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preaching Christ, we prophesy of Christ, we write, according to our prophecies, that our children may know to what source they may look for a mission of their sins, and they can continue on in verse 27. Wherefore, we speak concerning the law that our children may know to the deadness of the law and they Okay. Actually when that go a little longer but she goes on she talks about how if the Shema is like so important. uh, then, you know, should why can't we find it in the Why can't we find it in the Book of Mormon?

3:22:42 And she can't find it and I don't know why she can't find it because it's right here. so, um, I mean, move, I move these Tiles around. If I can Oh no. Okay. So, Shema is in. Deuteronomy. When I move when I move this around, is it blocking your view? Can you see that probably can what? No, I can't see it. Oh, okay, good. You can see my cursor but not the the zoom bar. Yeah, that's correct. Okay good.

3:23:26 Okay, Alma chapter 37. Says, oh, remember my son and learn wisdom in thy youth, gay, learn in the youth to keep the Commandments of God. Yay, and crying to God for all thy support. Okay, and then you go to Deuteronomy chapter 4 here and it tells the people less self forget, but teach them to your sons and my son's son's. So here is Alma saying, oh, remember my son and teaching teaching his son, this is a commandment from Deuteronomy. Um he says crying to God for your support Deuteronomy says, what nation is. They're so great who hath God so near, so nigh to them as the Lord, our God is in all things that we call upon him for. And, and then here in green, it says, therefore keep their for and do them meaning, the Commandments for this is your wisdom.

3:24:20 So here, Alma says, learn wisdom in that youth, learn to keep the Commandments of God. And then we go. I mean, that's a pretty tight parallel. I think we go to the actual Shema. Which is in Deuteronomy, chapter 6. So, in between in between four and five, Moses gives the Commandments, the ten command, he like repeats, The Ten Commandments. And then in verse, in chapter 6, he says hero Israel. The Lord, our God is one Lord, and thou shalt love the Lord thy God, with all thine heart. All thy soul, with all thy might like your whole being so Alma says, let all your thoughts be directed unto the Lord.

3:25:00 And let the place on the Lord forever. Okay. And he says, and these words, I command these days shall be in your heart. So as this council with the Lord and all you're doing, he will direct thee for good. And then again, it says Thou shalt teach them diligently unto your children, so here he is. Oh, remember my son, learn these things. And then the Shema says, you shall talk of them when you sit in your inline house and when you walk, by the way, So, he says, let all your doing be in the Lord and wherever you go, if you're sitting in your house or walking, by the way, wherever you go, let it be in the Lord. And the resting says, and when you lie down and in the Shema, and then in Alma says, and when you lie down at night, light down to the Lord, the email watch over you to sleep and then the Schmo says, and when you rise up and the almost says, and when you rise in the morning, let your heart be full of thanks to God.

3:25:55 Man, the it's like it's like there. It's like the Book of Mormon. People have Deuteronomy. Right. Yeah, and I, you know, I think they, I think they did. So okay. I'm gonna stop this sharing. Need to look at how things can be corrupted and what the truth is behind them. for example, how about the term, the Lord of hosts Oh, that is a term. That is not used and I don't believe it's used at all. I think in any of the deuteronomic books So I'm gonna stop right there. It is true. This is this is one of the things like people like these.

3:26:36 Uh these people pushing this idea. They say things and you have to go check. So it is true. That Deuteronomy does not use. Lord of hosts. And he's this is a criticism in his mind. This is evidence because Lord of hosts implies that there's other Angelic beings So and of course, the deuteronomist hypothesis partly is that Angelic beings and spiritual experiences are unknown. So, so he says Deuteronomy and the deuteronomic books do not use. Lord of hosts, will it is true Deuteronomy doesn't but neither is that term found in any of the other books of the Torah? It's not in Genesis Exodus the videos are numbers either. So that's not really an indictment against Deuteronomy and then in the deuteronomic history. So Joshua Judges, Ruth, Samuel, Samuel King's It does appear. Okay, so it's in Kings 13 times in Jeremiah, which is one of the actually Margaret Barker believes and many other people do to believe.

3:27:33 Jeremiah is the the author. of Deuteronomy because Jeremiah is like, Criticizing them for their idolatry. And Jeremiah uses the term 71 times. So according to them, Jeremiah uses it 71 times in Jeremiah. But when he goes to write Deuteronomy, he doesn't use the term at all. That's right. Yeah, that's right. So anyway, it's in. It's in the other deuteronomic books as well. So what he just said there is just factually incorrect. So keep that. Keep this going. What does it mean? Why would they not use that?

3:28:15 Why is that non-existent there? well, imagine how something can become corrupted if there is Idol worshiping and and people start Worshiping, all these hosts of Heaven? And you have a theology like the deuteronomist did of a single god without any father, in any son and you want to flatten the higher, so to speak into one single entity, God called Jehovah. And you want to get rid of the premortal life. Which is represented in the holy of holies. Where the council happens, right? The council in heaven happens. That's what the Holy Holy. That's where the Throne of God is and we see all these other Temple images and Visions from profits. Like in the Book of Mormon. In the very first chapter of Nephi, Lehigh has a vision of God on the throne, Surrounded by 12 and then surrounded by concourses of angels, hosts of angels that are praising God.

3:29:05 So if I have a theology that wants to limit all of that, reduce it all down to one single entity, which also gets rid of Christ. Okay. So there you go. That's that's you know, pretty skating indictment. But even though Deuteronomy doesn't use the term Lord of hosts and neither does any of the other books in the Torah, deuteronomic, the other deuteronomic books do plenty. And, and actually Deuteronomy Deuteronomy does have visions of or this idea of the Of the hosts of Heaven. It's actually mentioned so, King James Bible, Deuteronomy 32 verse 8 says, when the most high divided to the nation's their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel. okay, now that didn't say anything about Heavenly hosts, but if you actually go to the Septuagint, Step two agent version says, when the most high gave the nation's their inheritance, when he divided up human kind, he set the boundaries of their peoples.

3:30:27 According to the number of the Heavenly assembly. Okay, and if you look in the New Living Translation, it says he established the boundaries of the people according to the number of his Heavenly Court. And in the ESV it says he divided up the people of the Earth according to the number of the sons of God. So these are these are references to the Divine Council that the Heavenly courts. Now. now in the in the NLT and the ESV there, they differ from the King James even though the NLT in the ESB were translated from the Hebrew, but the reason is that they when they made their translation, they actually consulted the Septuagint And when the step two agent differed, sometimes they'll go with the agent sometimes with the Hebrew.

3:31:19 And so people might say, aha, see the words changed, so that's evidence of the deuteronomist, right? but you have to remember this timeline, So yes, the Hebrew is different from the Greek Septuagint. but that change if it happened was after, After Joe Sia, not during or before, right? Just like the Book of Mormon, says, not like Margaret. Barker says so, Hmm. Okay. Go to 2949. Okay, what they do is they consolidate power into one Central place only and that's in Jerusalem.

3:32:02 So they have complete control over this. And and this seems to be the what Jesus confronts when he is in his more life. And okay, there you go, those deuteronomist. They just want to consolidate power. Okay. And what did you say, complete control over? The Narrative essential? Yeah, complete control over everything, the political and the religious religious life of the people. now, if you actually read Deuteronomy, though, It doesn't. Like this is the this is the hypothesis but you just read Deuteronomy and it doesn't really support that very well. So I'm going to read what Deuteronomy Deuteronomy? Chapter 1 verse 9 says, Is Moses speaking and I speak unto you at that time saying he's recounting an episode, that happened in the wilderness.

3:32:59 I speak into you at that time saying, I am not able to Bear you myself alone, the Lord your God, hath multiplied, you and behold you are this day as the stars of Heaven for multitude. The Lord God of your fathers make you 1,000 times so many more as you are bless you. As you have promised you How can I myself alone? Bear your Temperance, and your burden and your Strife, take you wise, men and understanding and no one among your tribes and I will set them apart. Make them rulers over you. And he answered me and said, the thing which I was spoken is good for us to do. So, I took the chief of your tribes wise, men and known and made them heads over. You Captain's over, thousands captains, over 100 captains, over 50s, and captains over tens and officers among your tribes. And I charged your judges.

3:33:44 At that time, saying here the causes between your brother and a judge righteously between every man and his brother and the stranger that is with him, he shall not respect persons in judgment, but ye shall hear the small as well as the great. You shall not be afraid of the face of man for the judgment is God's and the and the cause that is too hard for you. Bring it up to me and I will hear it. So right out of the bat Deuteronomy is talking about, like democratically elected officials. The government. Chosen by the people and a system of judges. And so like just saying the deuteronomist are all just about like consolidating control to themselves. I it doesn't really fly for me.

3:34:27 Know. Know, because if I'm not mistaken, I think this is the first time period we ever see. A democratic, you know, Democratic Republic, kind of image. Um, Scenario set up right there. There's not another one prior to that, that's unprecedented. Yep. Yeah. So Anyway. Okay. you're gonna get, It. We're gonna get tired of just seeing what? The deuteronomist hypothesis say and then checking the scriptures and finding out that it's not really as they as they are saying. So, Okay, so this is this is along those same lines about like consolidation of the power, okay? I'll go through this list quick and then we can check out what we're talking about, okay?

3:35:23 So send Kings 23 and Deuteronomy 12 too talks about there's only one official altar where you can have an altar. Yeah now it doesn't say Jerusalem anywhere and do remind me 12, you read it, it's not in there but what it will say is the place where God shall choose to put his name Hashem. The name, that's where he puts his name is, where the altar shall be in the Assumption, and Deuteronomy is that's Jerusalem. So this is the this is actually an amazing thing. He just said, One Truth and One Lie. the truth is, he said, It doesn't say, Jerusalem anywhere in Deuteronomy chapter 12. That is true that he says, the Assumption in Deuteronomy, is that it is talking about Jerusalem, where does he get that? Because actually, it's not just Deuteronomy 12, but it's the entire book of Deuteronomy does not mention Jerusalem anywhere. And so this assumption that he's talking about is his actually, it's his assumption that is the Assumption of the Deuteronomy hypothesis.

3:36:16 That they are putting onto the text. It actually does not say that okay. Hang tight. I got a question. Yeah. Why should we expect it to mention Jerusalem? They haven't Jerusalem, hasn't been founded as a city yet, right? Correct. Yes. Yes, you are correct. So and it doesn't say it. And the other thing the crazy thing is, they say, well, You know, Jerusalem is going to end up being it, but it's actually quite a while. So, supposedly these deuteronomist. I mean it's not just its to the temple that I mean that's what it is.

3:36:56 It's you're supposed to bring your offerings to the temple. That's what Deuteronomy Deuteronomy is not saying that there's only one Temple. And we know that or one location, we know that because when they get into the land the Tabernacle moves around quite a few different places before it, finally, settles in Jerusalem. And then, eventually the temple is built by Solomon. While Solomon's Temple is in operation. We have. A bunch of other Jewish temples. We have the one in elephantine and the one in Leon topless that The dimensioned.

3:37:43 So, this is the kind of the relationship between Jerusalem and Lee and topless there. Okay. And you know, here's the amazing thing too, it's not just like, oh, this was, this was a rogue temple in Leon topless. I will, I will say that the historical record is clear that there was a rivalry. okay, but the ancient Jewish writing say You know, written by people in Jerusalem, say the Jerusalem Temple is preferred. But if you go and do your offerings at the Temple of onias, that's what it's called. Temple of anayas, which is in Leon, topless or heliopolis. If you do your sacrifices there, it's, it's okay, like, it's, it's accepted. And if you have a vow and you redeem it, there it's good. And if there's priests from Leon topless from, you know, the Temple of Anais, and they come to Jerusalem for a visit, we're not going to allow them to officiate, but they are allowed to eat the holy things while they're here. so, it's not like, It's not like, um, the people who had the book of Deuteronomy interpreted it the way that Mike is saying that they interpreted it.

3:38:57 They did not interpret it that way. Right. Yeah. And then, of course, we have, we have extra temples in the Book of Mormon, too, and Nimble more people. They build more than one Temple. They have Nephi. And is there a hemla and bountiful, right? Yeah. So um, I will get more into this later, but what, what, what Deuteronomy is actually saying, and what the ancient Jews understood and what the ancient Nephites understood as well. Like they harm, they harmonize with each other, they do not harmonize with the deuteronomist ideas, but the ancient Jews agent he bites, they harmonize with each other which is basically, in a nutshell, if you are close enough to a temple, then you ought to bring your offerings there. instead of building an altar and offering it yourself, That's, that is what you saying that is, what the agent Jews and the fights understood and they're in agreement. So Oh okay.

3:40:03 Which actually holds like water even with fundamentalism a little bit, right? This idea of you know, a temple is preferred but in times of strife like Like fundamentals have been in for the better part of 100 years. You do the best you can, right? You dedicate other spaces to get it done. Yes. That's right. So that's exactly right. Okay. That's the place where God Wells and his, he's residing or his presence. Is there. And he is manifestly seen and he's anthropomorphic. Yeah. The anthropomorphisms in Deuteronomy are removed and for Layman like me, you're gonna explain me this that God has a nose and fingers and eyes and anthropomorphisms, are these descriptions of God. Like think about when you're on your mission. Did you ever have anybody say you can't see God? oh, Okay, because no one can see him. And you're like, well, Moses speak to him. What to, what ya face to face to face is a man speaks to his friend look okay, so he says the anthropomorphisms like describing God is having a body or parts, like those are removed from Deuteronomy, that's what he said, but You know, I I've never researched this before but I just watched this and just everything that they say I'm just like, oh I'm just gonna check that.

3:41:07 So I was like did a word search and Deuteronomy for body parts hand fingers, arm face feet whatever and in Deuteronomy God sees and he has an eye and he has eyes and he walks and his feet are mentioned and his hands are mentioned many times. And his right hand specifically is mentioned and his finger is mentioned and his arm is mentioned numerous times and his face is mentioned and his mentions his nose and says that God sees and hears and smells and eats. This is in Deuteronomy, Mike just said all the anthropomorphic references Deuteronomy are removed but like, it's just like, it's just as full of anthropomorphic, references, as any other book could be.

3:41:48 I don't even understand where I guess coming from Margaret. Barker, something like you read Margaret Barker, instead of Deuteronomy, I don't know. But I just did a word search and like this one up. You know, and that's interesting that you're finding all this, right? But I want to say this isn't the only field we see this in, right? This idea of rather than read the sources itself, you're going to focus your studies on what other people have to say about the text. That you would all the time with the Constitution and case law. Yeah, it does skew things right because when all the sudden, you don't let the text speak for itself.

3:42:30 You can get away with a lot more. Yeah. You can start to deviate. pretty quickly, if you're just Experts quoting experts, quoting. Experts and no one goes back to bother, you know, to look at what the text said, right? Yeah. Okay, one more here. This is. I mean this is just I'm just gonna fast forward a couple of minutes. The ways you would have to get Jesus out of the Old Testament is by getting rid of the idea of an anthropomorphized God. Disembodied, God, make him transcend it. So that's the name of the other one is the secret things. You're on a 2929 says essentially, that the secret things are only to worry about God, that's kind of his domain. The secret things that Mysteries. You just worry about keeping the law and then Deuteronomy, 412 we have to read this. So go to Army for 12, this is a must read.

3:43:12 Talk about rewriting the scriptures and many biblical Scholars. This is a must read. This is the tutor on this rewriting the scriptures to fit their theological view, which ironically enough. Do you want me says? You can't do that. Don't be right scripture and then we write it. Okay. So Jack before us, this is 12, this is God speaking to Moses. And this is what he says in for 12 and the Lord spake unto you out of the midst of the fire. He heard the voice of the words but son. No, similitude only Heard a Voice Moses. I know what exit says that you saw me, but you didn't all you heard was the voice. That's it. You didn't see me. Yeah. Because in Exodus, it says he saw the face. Yeah, it's 24 verses 9 to 11. Moses Nate app Aaron and Abu in the 70 sons of Israel. Go to the top of the mountain and they have a covenantal meal with the way in face-to-face. That is the quintessential essence of coming into God's presence of the Holy is where the king miraculously feed you.

3:43:54 Okay, so there we go. That's a, that's a pretty big contradiction. Deuteronomy says. You can't see God. You didn't see God. God has no body. and, But Exodus says otherwise, right so now I'm gonna, I'm gonna go to one more here. This is a Margaret, Barker herself. The seventh of the Lord are in there with him revelation, 22 verse 4, they shall see his face. His name shall be on their foreheads. Now, that's just not throw away line. That's the key thing. They are back and they see the face of the Lord. Now, the deuteronomist had. None of this, the deuteronomist emphasized that there was no vision that you saw, you never saw the Lord dear chapter 4, let me find you the bit. You don't want to be chapter 4.

3:44:42 First 12, this is their account of Sinai and they call Sinai Hall rep for some reasonably chapter 4. Verse 12, the Lord spoke to you out of the midst of the fire. You heard the sound of words but you saw no form. There was only a voice. So for the Deuteronomy say absolutely, you can't see the Lord. So why do you think? Because this is, and it's funny because atheists will use this as an argument to discredit the Bible and say it's not worth anything. Like look, there's obvious contradictions in here. Why were the Deuteronomy are those who put together an edited the Bible? Why were they okay with just keep seeing that in Exodus? Does he think that they just kind of I would put that? I would know the answer to that. Why it is that the book of ice and indeed the book of The Prophet's, the books of the prophets are in the Hebrew scriptures. That's a very big question.

3:45:27 She would they, they're very confused and they would like to know Why Deuteronomy says you can't see God face to face? But Exodus does and the other prophets, they see God and stuff. I mean, I'm gonna answer, I'm gonna answer that for him here in a minute, because there is this dividing line that goes right through one of the key notes of the Deuteronomy. So you can't see the Lord. They didn't believe what we call it Foundation, okay? So and I see the Lord and human form is he killed at the end of chapter one, The likeness of the glory of the Lord, It's in human form, but the Deuteronomy said, no, no. You just hear the words, there's no human form. That's one of the characteristics, and that was one of the things they didn't like about the first temple.

3:46:07 Okay. I'm actually. I've heard I've heard this line of reasoning. Several times by Margaret Barker and by other of like her proponents and I am, I am seriously embarrassed that I'm seriously embarrassed that the Paul the Paul Brothers there sitting there that they just gulp this down and they're so Just to put it bluntly. That's like scripturally. Illiterate actually I actually showed this to my children. This supposed contradiction I said, how can you explain this to me like my eight year old? Has enough.

3:46:55 Reading comprehension and knowledge about the scriptures to explain. What's going on? So I'm going to Its. I can't even. Okay. So there's that. Let's see. Okay, so here's the, here's the contradiction that they're saying, right? In Deuteronomy, 4 verse 11 and 12. Says, I'll just read it again. You came near to me and stood Under the Mountain. Sorry, my zoom things are in the way and the mountain burned, with fire in the midst of heaven with Darkness clouds and thick darkness, and the Lord spake unto you, out of the midst of the fire, he heard the voice of the words but saw no, similitude only heard a voice.

3:47:41 And then in Exodus says, then went up Moses and Aaron Nate Abbey who in 70 of the Elders of Israel and they saw the god of Israel and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of sapphire stones and as it were in the body of Heaven for its clearness and then later on, it says, Moses went up even further and, you know, talked with God face to face. And so, what is going on? Well, if you are going to be Honest about your evaluation of scripture. Then it seems like you ought to read the rest of what Deuteronomy says and the rest of what exit says. And so, so Exodus also says, Right before before Moses goes up. sorry, I can't read that quite but he says, The people saw the thunderings and the Lightnings and the noise of the trumpet and the mountain smoking.

3:48:37 And when the people saw it, and this was by, by the way, this was when God had given them the Ten Commandments. Got to come down on the mountain, spoke to them in Fire and in Thunder, the sound of the trumpets. And the people saw it, they removed and so far off the cinemas speak thou with us, and we will hear. But let not God. Speak with us, lest we die. And Moses said in the people fear. Not God has come to prove you. And that his fear, may be before your face, is that you sin, not and the people stood afar off and Moses and Moses Drew near to the thick Darkness where God was and the Lord said unto Moses, thus shall saying the Trinity, digital EFC that I have talked with you from heaven.

3:49:18 Okay. And then you also have to read all of what Deuteronomy says which says no Prophet has a reason again in Israel, like Moses whom the Lord knew face to face. So Okay, so exit, some people, a few people seeing Moses seeing the Lord face to face Mm-hmm. And most of the people like, all the children of Israel not seeing him, but just hearing his voice but not seeing him. Okay. And then Deuteronomy says, you all didn't see him. And this is Moses speaking to the children of Israel. This is not a contradiction, is ridiculous. This is not the Lord.

3:50:06 Talking to Moses saying you never saw me. This is Moses. That's right. Is Moses talking to the children of Israel saying, you never saw him and then Deuteronomy later says, yeah, Moses did talk to him face to face like and they're like, saying that this is a contradiction, this is, this is, It's, it makes my makes my brain melt out of my head. I'll tell you though, what they what they do. is this Deuteronomy 34 verse 10 here where it says Moses did speak face to face that contradicts with the earlier verse in Deuteronomy. Therefore, those are written by different authors. So Deuteronomy 3410, which just makes it obviously harmonizes and it doesn't even need to be harmonized anyway, like even if this verse wasn't there in in Deuteronomy, like Exodus just says, most of the people didn't. And and by the time, by the time, Moses is speaking in Deuteronomy, there was, you remember there was that was Moses, Nate Ababa by who in 70 how many of those guys are alive.

3:51:10 When they're none it, when they're ready to enter the promised land zero of them. Moses is the only one Moses, Joshua and Caleb are the only ones left. Right. Okay, so so Moses is saying, none of you saw him like this is I give you just like have even a slight a faint idea of the timeline in your mind when you're reading this. And and you're not intentionally trying to misunderstand, Then it's it's not that it's clear. As far as you yes. Oh, okay. Sorry, get a little animated there. No, no. It's it's look, I can see the frustration here. A little bit, right? It say one more thing. I'm sorry.

3:51:52 These these videos that I've been showing you like these these people these videos have been seen. 67890 thousand times. These people have a huge audience. I mean, that's not, I mean we're not in the millions, I guess but tens of thousands of times. These things have been viewed, they have they have tens of thousands of subscribers. So this this information is being put out. And it's, it's frustrating for me. Go ahead. Oh yeah. I mean Because again, it it does feel like it's just cherry picking what you want and then the stuff that you can't cherry pick, you just assigned to a different author.

3:52:41 Right. And imagine, you know, because we must preserve the hypothesis, which is that these this is an incoherent text. That is the that is the most important part of it. Yeah. You know, this is reminding me a lot of what you see in, archeology right, archeology is really horrible about. They picked a narrative and they're going to ride or die with that narrative. No matter what right, the predominant narrative for a lot of years was Clovis first, right? And it took a lot of time to overturn that and a lot of evidence more than it should have, right. I'm like it was pretty conclusive early on. but, Gosh, yet again.

3:53:26 I'm And I'm not a guy who likes to just discount Scholars, right? I'm not that guy. I do feel like Scholars. Do do good. Excuse me. Can you good work? Um but so so often they have to stick with the narrative or else they're persona, non grata, right? You don't get published, you don't get read and that affects 10 year and all those other things. Yeah, absolutely. Have you heard of Chesterton Spence? Know, this is a philosophical idea. Chesterton was a philosopher, okay. I'm not, you know, I don't I haven't read a lot of him, but this idea is a famous idea.

3:54:11 If you haven't heard it before, you probably will, Now, that it's mentioned. but, Go ahead. Oh, that's just gonna read it. What were you gonna say? Oh yeah, I'm yeah, so yeah, yeah Chesterton Spence is this bill softball idea and you know there's a little quote there. I mean read a little bit longer quote, this is from his original 1929 riding. He said In the matter of reforming things as distinct from deforming them. There is one plain and simple principle. Let us say, for the sake of Simplicity offense or a gate is erected across the road. the more modern type of reformer, goes up to it and says I don't see the use of this. Let us clear it away.

3:54:56 To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer. If you don't see the use of it, I certainly won't let you clear it away. Go away and think and then when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, then I may allow you to destroy it. So like if you if you find something, this is kind of along the the wine on an empty stomach thing. Like if you don't know enough about something, To understand the use that it might have, you should you have no business trying to destroy it. Until you can understand the use First. And understand its value. And then maybe if you think you have something better than you can, then you can replace it or destroy it or whatever. So yeah, no.

3:55:48 It's Yeah. And that's, that's what we see a lot of. Right is, is this idea of well? It's Antiquated. It's outdated. We don't need it and then you're offering. Yeah. Okay. Let's see, I'm gonna skip that part. I am going to, I am going to You know, one of the this is another, this is just amazing again. People are like oh the ashram which is the Groves like those are all good. And you know we see we see this the Tree of Life in The Book of Mormon that's Ashura.

3:56:30 And so the Book of Mormon loves asherah. but the tree of but asherah, you remember, Ashrae is a branchless tree. Ashtray is a stump ashra is without root or branch. Those are that's like the representation of her. And I I actually disagree that the tree of life or the menorah in the temple is a representation of Astra. It is something distinctly different, but the Book of Mormon actually aside from like references to the Tree of Life, which they hypothesized is a secret reference to Ashura, you know, and there's they have good evidence for that, but I don't think it actually fits very well.

3:57:10 They're actually isn't explicit mention of the Grove's. Up in the Book of Mormon. This is in third Nephi. Chapter 21. Jesus tells us what he thinks about the Groves. 21 starting at verse 14. Yay, will be unto the Gentiles except they repent. For it shall come to pass in that day. Saith the father that I will cut off thy horse from out of the midst of the, and I will destroy that chariots and I will cut off the cities of thy land and throw down all thy strong holds and I will cut off the witchcrafts out of thy land, and thou shalt have no more soothsayers. you know, against the the Visionary men, Thy graven images, I will also cut off, and I standing images out of the midst of the and thou shalt no more worship.

3:58:06 The Works of thy hands and I will pluck up thy Groves out of the midst of the. So, I will destroy that, I say cities, and it shall come to pass that all lines and means, and stripes, and Priests, and Hortons shall be done away for his show. Come to pass say at the father that at that day, whoever will not repent and come into my beloved, Son. Them will I cut off from among my people? Oh, House of Israel. And I will execute Vengeance and fury upon them even as upon the Heathen such as they have not heard. that's far enough I guess, but Yeah. so now like Jesus is talking about future time and you know, we're approaching that I suppose closer than we've ever been But he says he's gonna, he's gonna rip up, pluck up, the Groves out of the midst of thee and destroy your cities. and now, you've read Return of the Gods, Jonathan Cahn? Yes.

3:58:58 Yep. I mean I I believe that that is happening. I believe that. That Baal and asherah or Ash, or Ishtar. Those are, you know, Ashura is the like Canaanite name is the battle alone in name astroth is the Sumerian name. No, inanna. Is the Sumerian name astroth is the Phoenicians name, I think Philistine. Same God though, no matter what name he wanted to. so anyway, Jonathan Khan, he has in there the like that these three Bale. Ishtar and molec like they have, they are making a return.

3:59:41 Her. And, and to be honest, I, I feel like this delusion of the, the documentary hypothesis, the deuteronomist hypothesis is part of that return of the gods that this, I, these ideas are becoming increasingly popular. And when I'm at meetings with LDS people, and they're like, either saying, they don't believe the scriptures or don't believe parts of the scriptures or they are like looking to like learn lessons about Jesus by reading about Baal and asherah and stuff. I'm like oh my goodness. Like like this is a this is a pretty deep infection. so, Know, the other thing that's popped out here. and I'm not saying these folks are are necessarily cognizant of what they're doing, but a lot of this seems founded in kind of critical theory, right? They talk about destroying the hierarchies, they talk about, you know, the you know making you know the the overt feminist references, right?

4:00:43 And again, I'm a guy who believes that that women are entitled. Oh and what you get and in. Mainstream Mormonism, right? I am I am a believer in that but nonetheless this does seem to point towards kind of a religious critical theory that should have some can a little concerned here or at least it could be used in that fashion. I'm not saying these folks are using it that way but it definitely lends itself to that. Absolutely, yeah. That is the, that is, it is a part of that, like religious Marxism and whether or not These folks are in that camp and I don't believe they are. I don't either. no, not at all and like and again, I I like all these people, I watch these, I watch these YouTube channels and I like a lot of the content but But I think this is, I think this is bad fruit, that they're that they're playing with. So, Okay, here's another one.

4:01:43 Here. So at a high level, there is a feast called the day of atonement. You know, it probably is Yom Kippur if you are Jewish friends, right? This is a festival celebrated today. Albeit somewhat differently than as is set forth in the engine. So you do the erudite pronunciation you just say like yeah, I'm kippers coming up on Wednesday. Get your Pathways is ready on Tuesday. Like all the elementary school teachers did you know like Yom Kippur? Yeah that's awesome. Okay, the David Thomas so let me say right now. Okay, I'll spell out some detail. We will spell it some detail but here at a very high level, is the deal. Okay? On Yom Kippur, the core sacrifice was a sacrifice of Two. Goats, if you have been watching all of the video posts, we put together, okay? One of the things you have heard us say, is that Jesus appears in the Old Testament as one of a pair of serpents. Okay.

4:02:26 He also appears as one of a pair of goats. And so, we're gonna see basically the same pair, but not as serpents as goats and they have different Fates on the Yom Kippur holiday. Okay, and, and Yom Kippur implies the theology. At teachers at the Theology of atonement and deuteronomist, hate it. So they take it off the calendar. Okay. So yeah, say the deuteronomist hate the day of atonement. The hate atonement, so they take it off. The calendar. Interesting thing here is he says, and this is just very ironic. He says if you're Jewish you know I'm talking about the day of atonement actually, happy happy Yom Kippur Dave this is a ya the name of there.

4:03:07 Yep so I was there find this extremely ionic, ionic chemist ironic because he's saying they took it off a calendar but I bet that none of the people discussing. This actually celebrate Yom Kippur Like they have take they the people discussing it have taken it off the calendar. But Deuteronomy doesn't actually take it off the calendar so that's just kind of an irony there. Let's see. I'm going to skip the next One here. But I'm going to, I am going to say, though, we're gonna go quickly through that. There's some other clips about how this is.

4:03:48 This is a big criticism is that dude that that the day of atonement is absent from Deuteronomy. Now, first of all, this is just kind of a, it's kind of a ridiculous idea. It's like, well, since Deuteronomy doesn't mention everything, then we know that it's like a forgery, like it's like every like like Nephi doesn't mention the day of atonement. You know versus bye and Jacob. Enos jarom Omni words of Mormon, like none of those mentioned the day of atonement either and they don't have to like every book of scripture doesn't have to mention something or else it's evil. You know, or else. That means that does that mean Nephi is against the day of atonement.

4:04:29 No, that's not what that means. You cannot imply that like the logic of these arguments is just mind and numbing, okay. The second thing is that it's not even true Deuteronomy. Actually does mention the day of atonement. Sorry. Skipped over a couple slides there. And this is, this is how it does it though. It's it's actually a little bit tricky. Okay. So how Moses fast how long does Moses fast?

4:05:09 I wasn't 40 days. Yeah, 40 days. That's what, that's what I learned. But actually the scriptures say he fasted 40 days three times in a row. 120 days. Maybe with the maybe with days, in between there, Okay. And these were, these were the times, okay? He first, he goes up there to the mountain, right? He gets the use my pointer here. He gets the first set of Commandments. He comes down that takes 40 days. And there are worshiping the golden calf, right? It mentions this in Deuteronomy chapter 9 verse 9 and exodus 24:18 and mentions. He goes up and it mentions 40 days and 49 nights he's fasting, they come down, Moses breaks those Commandments and then he goes back up to ask for forgiveness. okay, of the, the people like to try to Intercede, he intercedes for them. He acts as a mediator interceding for them. God says, I'm going to take you and Destroy them. And Moses says, no, no, don't do that. Like everyone will make fun of you. so, So God relents tells him to go back down, Moses gets another set of tablets. This time Moses provides a tablets but God writes on them. The same thing that was on the last ones. Minus the milk has it stuff and this was for 40 days and nights as well.

4:06:38 So, all together it's it's 120 days, you know, plus maybe a day with the golden calf and a day after coming down to carve out some new tablets or whatever. Right. But here's the here's the amazing thing. Is that? In Exodus. in Exodus, it says, That I went up 40 days here. To get the first tablets and exodus says I went up 40 days to get the second tablets. But in the middle when he's asking for forgiveness, he does not say 40 days in Exodus. But it doesn't Deuteronomy Deuteronomy says that was 40 days.

4:07:18 Also, and, Let me just make sure that I'm saying that correctly. So, if you if you actually take Deuteronomy combined with Exodus, then then Deuteronomy Completes the story. and, Yes, Deuteronomy completes the story and let's us know that Moses was. Fasting and came down with the replacement Commandments. After God, had forgiven their sin on the day of atonement. Oh, okay.

4:08:01 All right, so it doesn't say Day of atonement but there's definitely something stronger than a and an allusion to that, right? It is Israel's sin is Forgiven and God says I'm gonna keep you all as a people still and give you my law again and we're going to keep pushing forward towards the promised land and that that if you, if you know what Deuteronomy is saying, Deuteronomy is telling us that was on. Yeah, that was on the day of atonement. Interesting, so pretty cool. Now I said that the Book of Mormon oh something else interesting when Moses comes down from the mountain in the first time with the tablets, There isn't anything about his face blowing. So his face is glowing when he comes down with the second ones. Okay, now I said the The Book of Mormon doesn't say anything about the day of atonement either. And so like are we too logically infer them? That the Bookworm is against the day of atonement? No, of course not.

4:09:07 That's, that's stupid, that's lazy. That's like intentionally misunderstanding. But we do have this reference in the Book of Mormon as well. And that's abandoned. I because I've been today comes to King, Noah, and he's preaching and his fate says, his face is shining, like, Moses was And he's right. The priest about the ten commandments. And then something really amazing happens, all. So on the day of atonement, you know, how the The ceremony goes, like they have the two goats, right? And one of them, one of them gets killed and one of them gets sent those free. The scapegoat, yeah, Into the Wilderness. That's right.

4:09:48 So with a Benedict, we have that as well. Like his face is glowing. He's talking about the Commandments and then one of them gets killed and one of them gets sent out to the wilderness. Oh, I see ya. Anyway, so so Deuteronomy says, Deuteronomy talks about Yom Kippur and the Book of Mormon does too. But you just have to actually study them a little bit. And then you can see that. So, Okay. Let's go back. Okay, here's another one. Here's another thing that they say that Deuteronomy says Another day, like the Book of Mormon is the German thumb for the Old Testament and by the way guys, there's no mention your employment anywhere near me just as a side is because it's because they ran to the Americas.

4:10:41 I think if things the Book of Mormon obsesses about that these hates. Yeah, that's that to the list. Okay. Yeah, the deuteronomist, they get rid of. They rip says, they ripped out the German thumb. There's quote there's no mention of the German thumb anywhere in Deuteronomy. Okay, well there's not any of the New Testament either. Right? Yes. I mean that's what I was saying before. It's like that. What does that even prove? That doesn't logically imply anything. But so, here it is. You're in thumb. There. Oh here we go, Deuteronomy 33. Verse 8. And of Levi, Moses said, Let Die film and the be with thy, Holy One.

4:11:28 There's a little bit of a that's probably the high priest whom now disapprove up Masa and with whom that is driving the Waters of meribah. So it doesn't say you're in mythology, says someone in Europe. Okay, so is that what is that? Why? Is that why? That's a true statement? I don't know. It seems dishonest to me or at least ignorant. I don't know. ah, yeah. It's right there. Like And, and look, again, I like the Stick of Joseph, right? I, I genuinely do right. However, and, and look, having heard those guys speak. I don't think they mean this, I don't think this is nefarious, right? I think this is a classic case of reading somebody else and then taking that to the bank without checking the primary source.

4:12:19 Yeah. Or the. Sake of time because I know it's after it's after midnight where you're at. I'm going to I think I'll skip the next video is maybe I'll just kind of summarize. What they say, but the next one is Zion media. There's a there's a fellow named Latter-Day. Chad, he's big on. he's pretty big as far as like, Content. He puts out, I think he's on tiktok. But anyway, he talks about how I'll read some of the things. He mentions again, Deuteronomy chapter 4 outright says it gaslights the reader into saying that Moses never saw God.

4:13:04 You know, of course we saw that that is not actually true. And here we go in Deuteronomy. 412 outright says, this is what he says. Just Deuteronomy says outright says, Moses did not see God, they're outright says it. Which it doesn't. And it says, if anyone claims that they've seen God, and that's a path towards idolatry and that they will be killed. And as also, that is not what Deuteronomy says. Deuteronomy is not say that anywhere that is just It's just a falsehood, whether it's intentional or they're just regurgitating. Something that they read or heard, I don't know.

4:13:46 Also he says Deuteronomy 29 straight up says if you seek the mysteries of God that is one of the things that Bell punish you with death for all. So not true Deuteronomy does not say that Deuteronomy. 29:29 says The secret things belong to the Lord Our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and our children forever that we may do all the words of this law. Like that's what it says and he is saying that that is saying, if you seek the Mysteries then they're going to kill you. And I just don't get. why he's saying that, say that it doesn't, it doesn't, but but the deuteronomist hypothesis, the Mormon Mormon version of Deuteronomy, Deuteronomy hypothesis is that the people in Jerusalem are deuteronomist. Lehigh says, I've seen a vision.

4:14:38 That is why they want to kill. Because Deuteronomy says, if you have a vision from God, we will Stone you to death. I don't think that's the reason Lehigh said that they wanted to kill him. I think it's because he was calling them to repentance, right? Like, I think yeah, yes, I think I said so. Again, the, the plain reading It doesn't usually. The plane, the plane reading. Doesn't usually support these hypotheses. but you have to kind of make some assumptions and intentionally misunderstand things. Or misrepresent things. So here's another one.

4:15:24 Says. Says God cannot have a body. Okay, Deuteronomy says, God cannot have a body. I don't, that is not anywhere in Deuteronomy. It also says that one man can not atone for another's sins. Okay. And so this is what this is. He's saying this is so like the deuteronomist are clearly arguing against Jesus and atonement because Deuteronomy says one man cannot atone for another man's sins. Now, this is, I think super funny because when I heard him on this video when I heard him say that phrase, I immediately thought of Alma chapter 34, which says now, there is not any man that can sacrifice his own blood, which will atone for the sins of another He's using this as like, he's like, trying to prop up the Book of Mormon and push down the book of Deuteronomy. And I don't even mean he doesn't realize that the Book of Mormon is the one that he almost quote, The Book of Mormon not Deuteronomy.

4:16:22 I'll tell you what Deuteronomy says. The the verse that he's complaining about is in Deuteronomy 24. It says, the father shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for their fathers. Every man should be death for his own sin. And from that, go ahead. I was gonna say that's that's the Article of Faith, right? That is the Article of Faith, isn't it? Like so it's like that's nothing different than what Joseph is saying, that's nothing different from what the Book of Mormon is saying that verse is not that verse is not speaking. Against Jesus, or against the atonement, that verse is just talking about Justice. And how it should be administered and that you should not.

4:17:08 Punish family members of people who are guilty because that's the way they do it in Babylon, you know. All right, and I think in Alma they're he's talking about look one mortal can't take on another mortal sins. Right. That's that is what he's saying. And that's all that's all Deuteronomy is saying and it's just, it's just a misrepresentation and intentional misunderstanding. Like, you just try to make it hard instead of just, instead of just making it harmonized in the obvious way that it does. We're just going to like, force it to contradicting our minds, so that we can have a different author. I don't, I don't understand, but and see. It's so its, it's, it's completely the opposite of what Joseph was was saying, right?

4:17:54 Is that Know, these things can be understood, right? Part of the appeal, to Mormonism for me was, is I don't have to wonder anymore, right? And I shouldn't say that there's always something we're seeking after to learn, but the promise was that you can learn them, right? They can be known. And so to take a religion which part of the beauty was a certain level of certainty, right? And then introduce more uncertainty into that I I find to be a bit disturbing on some level. Like agreed. Yeah, I am going to.

4:18:36 I do want to listen to this one. He actually the part he was going to talk about is like some of the early church fathers. Accusing the Jews of altering the scriptures. Okay. Because the Greek doesn't match the Hebrew. And he is using this as evidence for the deuteronomist tampering. But you remember that time line? That happened. Right? Not happened. Then happened later. And like you, I don't understand why they keep trying to push it back, even though it's like known that was after. But it's Strange. Okay.

4:19:19 Need wisdom, the law of the Lord is with this very legalistic what leads to the Pharisees Viewpoint, right? That I personally believe there's a real law of the Lord that was given and it was changed and altered in Jesus came to fill the real waffle or that's why you This is funny. He says he believes there was a real one, but Jesus came to fulfill it. But like all the quotes, all the quotes that we have from Jesus are from the Deuteronomy that we have. There isn't any quotes that Jesus says that are not found. In, you know, there's no real, the real one that he's talking about doesn't seem to exist except, you know, in as a hypothetical thing. But there's no textual evidence for it and scenario, like the Pharisees trying to get into stone, the adulterous woman, right? Um, because regardless, Jesus Christ isn't going to tell you to murder your family members for worshiping different, right? Imagine like you have a sister who converted to Hinduism and then Jesus just comes down says, you have to Stone her now. Come on.

4:20:11 Alright, that's ridiculous. That's all not Jesus Christ. It's obviously not the religion of the New Testament. It's not the religion of the Book of Mormon that guarantees and protects people's religious liberty. Even if they disagree, Okay, so this is a this is a kind of a dishonest or like a disingenuous way to frame things too like he compares. The woman taken in adultery. and then Compares that to well what if you have a sister who converts to Hinduism, Like Jesus is not going to tell you to Stone her. You know what? But he's like, he's conflating two different things. There one is like a privately held belief and then one is like committing, the sin. This openly committing crime.

4:20:52 And so I'm gonna actually read what the Book of Mormon says, because he says, like the Book of Mormon is the real deal, right? And Deuteronomy is this Forgery. Alma 30 verse 7. Now there was no law against a man's belief. It was strictly contrary to the commands of God, that there should be a law which should bring men. Onto unequal grounds for us. Say at the scripture, usually this day whom you will serve. Which is a quote, from Joshua, by the way, which is part of the deuteronomic. Books that they say, you know, didn't exist. Okay. Now if a man desired it's just all over the place. Like you can't, you can't you can't hardly Find a contradiction to this Theory you know walking around just gonna stumble upon it. If a man desire to serve God it was his privilege or rather if he believed in God, it was his privilege to serve him but he Um, but if you did not believe in him, there was no law to punish him.

4:21:50 But if he murdered, he was punished unto death. And if he robbed, he was also punished. And if he stole, he was also punished. And if he committed adultery, he was also punished. Yay for all his wickedness they were punished for. There was a law that men should be judged according to their crimes. Nevertheless there was no law against a man's belief. Therefore a man was punished only for the crimes which he had done. Therefore all men were on equal ground. So here at Latter-Day Chad is like, see the Pharisees are so awful, they want to Punish the woman taking an adultery and it's like, what if your own sister? Believed to different than you then Deuteronomy says to Stone her like no, no, no, no. You are mixing up belief and actions and the law punishes actions not believe.

4:22:36 That is clearly what the book of like in the book. For the Book of Mormon people, the woman taking an adultery would be stoned. Okay. So don't like we don't need to like fool ourselves thinking that there's like this huge contradiction between them. There's not right? Yeah. No. I see where you're going there. Now, I will say the woman, taking an adultery is an interesting story. um, And, of course it was it was a trap for Jesus. Okay, what was the Trap? The Trap was They were under Roman rule and the Jews did not have any Authority granted to them by Rome to execute anyone.

4:23:20 Mmm. So they bring this woman and they say what should we do with her? see, because if Jesus says, Well, don't Stone her. We don't have the right to then he'll then they'll cry blast me. He's speaking a lot. But if he says, let's go ahead and stone her, then they'll say he's breaking Roman law, that's him of sedition. So Jesus Stoops down and writes on the ground and we actually don't know what he says. but, there's some good theories out there, but my Personal Theory. Is that he's quoting Deuteronomy?

4:24:00 Because in Deuteronomy, 22:22 says, what to do. If you find, says if, if a man be found lying with a woman like caught in the act was what they said. The woman was caught in the act. If a man be found lying with a woman married to a husband and they, then they shall both of them die. Both the man that lay with the woman and the woman, Social now put away evil from Israel. So, the law is, if someone's caught in the act, you bring them both. so, I think Jesus was writing Where is the man? Oh, and they didn't have the man. And so the whole thing was illegal like according to according to the law. So Jesus actually got held the law. The tour, he pulls huge Ron in me he again floats Deuteronomy and around about way.

4:24:50 To say This Woman's life. Yes. So he holds the Roman law and the Torah simultaneously and just Escape their trap. And he says, well if you, if you want to do it, you know, would you if you think you're doing it correctly? If you're doing this without sin on your part, then go ahead and of course they all right. Shrink from it because they know that they would be violating Roman law and violating the Torah both because he just reminded them. So anyway, that's that's that is speculative. We don't know what he wrote on the ground but I think that's interesting but it was so Okay.

4:25:33 The last I'm going to share, we got to do. We got to do one more. No, that's good. One more video, I'm gonna skip a little bit. This one's a. Kind of long, though. so this, I'm gonna go to it but this in this one, They talk about how. There's hardly any parallels between. the book of Deuteronomy, what country makes it about and The book of Deuteronomy and the Book of Mormon. Now, I actually have I would show it here but I actually have a file from Drew Brian. He did when he was a law student. Call.

4:26:17 Let's see, actually, all right, there it is. There's Drew handsome, man. There Deuteronomy is influence on nephite. Jurisprudence, this is like a 50-page document that he has of quotations and references to deuteronomic law in the nephite system. And arresting everywhere. Okay. It's amazing. So I can get that to you later or yeah. Yeah, definitely. Anyone who's listening wants to contact Drew like he's available. He's got a Forgotten. Mormon teachings podcast and you can contact him there or whatever or contact Dave and Dave can you contact?

4:26:59 He's gonna be jumping on with me this week too. So I'm super excited for his new scripture project. Yeah. A little plug-in that restored restored version of the scriptures. It's gonna be awesome. Yep. Okay. So, go back to the that video. so, The. What's going to happen here is this fellow Jonah Barnes. Okay? I like Jonah Jonah's a lot of stuff with the apocryphal books. A very interesting but he is dead set against Deuteronomy things that it is absolute trash. and, So he's come up with another theory which is there's another book to replace Deuteronomy that he thinks was on the brass plates.

4:27:52 So, we're gonna listen to and his proof. He has absolute proof for why the book of Deuteronomy is false And this other book, which is called The Testament of Moses, or the, Assumption of Moses is correct. Okay. That way book of Moses was that would have been the fifth book in the pentateuch. That was replaced by the deuteronomist and became the book of Deuteronomy. Yes. Yes, it's that's revolutionary stuff, bro. It's not from the Dead Sea Scrolls. But yes, so the Assumption of Moses is a text that comes, that was discovered. What year was it by Antonio Sirianni. Okay, Library the video. Toca, I'm Rosie Anna. In Italy.

4:28:33 Barn. I can't remember the year, but after Joseph Smith, but I'm Antonio 61 thank you. It's the Assumption of Moses was found, you know, is known from a single six Century in complete manuscript and Latin. It was discovered by Antonio in the biblioteca in Milan. In 1973 by an 1861. Yes he discovers. It's only on one main script. Really. So this day they've never found evidence of anywhere else. Just surprised This Woman's. Yeah, because the burnt it because that's what you do with a Visionary, man. That's why I was afraid of being known as a Visionary man. So, so if you read this text, it's much shorter than me much much, much, much, much more, but it is the last words of, of Moses. So some people call The Testament of Moses, they say the Testament of Moses, not the Assumption of assumption. Well no it's just a testament Moses, right? We'll come back to that. Okay. so, Actually have a copy of this.

4:29:17 This is, I was like, oh interesting, he thinks that He thinks the Testament of Moses is like where we get like the quotation about the Lord. God will raise up a prophet among you like unto Moses his words, we hear you know that one we read earlier He thinks that was probably in. Yeah, Yeah. By by Charles RH Charles Okay, and I got a bookmark in here. The Assumption of Moses also called The Testament of Moses. There's my copy right there, so this is amazing. You know why?

4:30:02 This is amazing. I actually went and read this. Okay. Again, you just any time these guys say something, you just go to check the source and it's like, oh my goodness, like in the first couple of lines. It says. When the people had gone forth after The Exodus, it was made by Moses to Aman be on the Jordan in the prophecy that was made by Moses in the book of Deuteronomy. Like this Assumption of Moses, what she says? He's a Deuteronomy didn't exist. This was before Deuteronomy, like in the first chapter, in the first, almost the first line, it mentions the book of Deuteronomy and then it quotes from Deuteronomy. Be strong and good courage. And then it talks about a central place of worship. In the place, which he has made from the beginning of creation of the world, that his name should be called upon. And then, it talks about establishing the kingdom. And then it says they should not sacrifice to their sons to strange gods, and they should and says it. Moses says they're going to set up Idols in the sanctuary and worship them.

4:31:10 Like says all the things that that Jonah Barnes hates about the book of Deuteronomy. Oh, and oh, The other thing I didn't. like, One. What's Jonah hanging? His hat on, right? Tell me why you think that that that that that book, right? The what was it called? The Testament? Moses. Yeah. Why why does that? What makes you think that that was supposed to take? Deuteronomy is placed the next big leap. They take. Well, of course we only find one copy because the Deuteronomy must have burnt it, right? And I'm like where how do you get there right?

4:31:53 Like they are making very specific inferences. Where they can't. They they don't back any of it up. It's just well, let's throw crap against the wall and see what sticks here. Yes, exactly. It is grasping at straws, wild wild assumptions, huge leaps without evidence and there's so much evidence in this book against what he's saying, like this this book supports Deuteronomy, Okay. The other thing I'm going to show you this next, this is the other. This is the other big thing. We're not to the proof yet, but the Assumption of Moses says, And do thou Joshua. Son of nun.

4:32:34 Keep these words and this book For, from my death. Until his Advent. There shall be. 250 times. Okay. So anyway, so this is like some prophecy about the Messiah coming. But it mentions Moses's death in parentheses. There's a scribe that put Moses's assumption Okay, but I want you to just remember that this Testament of Moses, like it mentions, Moses's death. So, Okay. Here we go. 20 little more almost 26 minutes right here.

4:33:20 Okay. And Dave Butler. He doesn't really say much but he's just they're nodding at everything that ever seen in Hollywood, you know that, what's going on here? Well, I'll ask you. Do you believe the Book of Mormon? Absolutely. The Book of Mormon directly contradict student Army, Boom directly contradicts it. So this is going to be the proof. The Book of Mormon directly, I hope that you've seen already that the Book of Mormon and Deuteronomy actually pretty well in harmony, if you just don't intentionally try to miss understand things. How so it doesn't kind of disagree, it completely directly contributes contradicts Deuteronomy, but not the other books of Moses in a way that makes it. So, it looks like Deuteronomy is the one sticking out not the Book of Mormon and guess what?

4:34:00 Contradicts it about? The Assumption of Moses. The Assumption of Moses is that he didn't die, he was taking up to heaven. That's exactly the point where the Book of Mormon disagrees with Deuteronomy. If you remember the end of Deuteronomy, I know you do Dave something funny about to do wrongly itself. All right. Moses dies twice. Right? It's says Moses dies and then says Oh by the most died. Wait, where's the very last couple of verses? Okay? This is Moses died and then goes all the Moses was buried. It says he was buried. Like somebody wanted you to know like he's dead, okay? Very end of Deuteronomy. Anybody can read it, it's real just like the end of Mark. Okay. we'll, real weird real just showing to so, here's Here's the question, does Deuteronomy say that Moses died twice? Is it a real weird and disjointed? Well, let's just read it.

4:34:54 So, here it is. I'm going to, I'm going to read that. So Moses, the servant of the Lord died there in the land, of Moab, according to the word of the Lord, and he buried him in a valley, in the land of Moab over against Beth peor. But no man Noah's of her unto this day and Moses was 120 years old when he died, his eye was not dimmed, nor his natural force abated and the children of Israel wept for Moses in the plains of Moab 30 days. So the days of weeping and mourning for Moses were ended and Joshua. The son of nun was full of the spirit of wisdom. For Moses had laid his hands upon him and the children of Israel. He conducted to him and did as the Lord commanded Moses and their Rose. Not a prophet since in Israel like onto Moses, Okay, did that seem weird and disjointed to you couldn't follow it. No.

4:35:43 Oh, they have Moses dying twice. Know. No. No, no. It just it says, okay. I it's so it's so funny. Okay. um, you're gonna go back. And keep on going here. 2752, just jump ahead. Just a little bit. well, funny thing the Book of Mormon says, uh, know if you look in the Book of Mormon Alma refers to this in chapter 45, okay. Not only does alma directly contradict Romney but he assumes everyone knows he has the people know.

4:36:24 Look, I could put these side by side in scripts. Yeah, so here, first 19. Okay, 19. And it says Alma dice. The saying that went to Broad in the church that Alma was taken up by the spirit or buried by the hand of the Lord, even as Moses. But behold the scripture say the Lord took Moses unto himself. So the knights know the story, they know that Moses didn't die that he was translated he was translated, does it say in the Old Testament? He was buried. Yeah. Where wherever you just died I was for baby go down. Go down. No, you're going up. Oh no, you know he was buried. Okay? Buried in the valley of Moab against what. Oh here it is. Never six and he died in Linda Moab and he was buried there.

4:37:04 Oh, so the Book of Mormons says that Moses was translated, while the book of Deuteronomy says that he was buried. Both can't be true at the same time, right? So then later on Okay. Just skip ahead a little bit. Instead being translated. So the early Christians knew it. The Nephites knew it that Deuteronomy is wrong. It's directly contradicted by the nephite record not only just one guy, but Alma assumes people. It says the same went to broaden the church. Everybody knew this Okay, and then jumping forward a little bit more. Well, all Christian. Well anybody reads A New Testament knows that Moses was on The Sermon, on the Mount or on the mount Transfiguration how to get there. Oh yeah, he couldn't have been buried if he so Moses could not have been buried.

4:37:44 He had to have been translated, not resurrected because Resurrection hasn't happened yet. Okay, so on the transition, who else who else was there? Like he was also training military fire taking up the Chariot fire so you have Moses who's taking up Elijah's taking up. Come back again all Christians read this. But Deuteronomy here says he's dead and he was buried and a story. This is so weird game, weird, right? Wow. So the Book of Mormon agrees with early with the New Testament and it agrees with Antonio City, Annie the degrees of this apocryphal work, and let me know this and they all disagree with Deuteronomy. So, here's my theory. Okay, all right, some big claim. So let's I mean, let's just see. So, does the does The Book of Mormon, proved Deuteronomy fraudulent by direct contradiction. Let's read what the performance says. Okay, Alma 4518 and when Alma and they kind of read it there too.

4:38:36 When Alma Had done this. He departed out of the land of their Hamlet, as if to go into the land of Melech and he came to pass that he was never heard of more as she was death or burial. We know not of behold this. We know that he was a righteous man and the saying, when abroad in the church that he was taken up by the spirit or buried by the hand of the Lord, even as Moses. But behold the scripture say at the Lord, took Moses onto himself and we supposed that he has also received element in the spirit to himself therefore for this cause we know nothing concerning his death and burial. Okay. So here he says. there's a direct contradiction, because In Deuteronomy it says that Moses died and was buried.

4:39:21 It does it say Moses was buried in Deuteronomy. Yes. It's right there. It's highlighted okay. Does The Book of Mormons say that Moses was buried? And they said, no, The Book of Mormon does not say that Moses was buried, says that he was taking up. Now, can you read this? Does it say that Moses was buried? Or buried by the hand of Glory. Even as he was Buried, buried by the hand of the Lord, which is like an idiom or, you know, a euphemism for translated, right? Taken up even as Moses was yeah okay. Now look now we're going to go back to Deuteronomy Okay, when Jonah read Deuteronomy just a minute ago, it says he read it this way.

4:40:08 Moses, the Lord died in the land of Moab and was buried. About, that is not what it says. Deuteronomy says, Moses, the stone of the Lord died, there in the land, of Moab, according to the word of the Lord, and he buried him. So the question is, who is he and who is him? Can you tell? Who is he? And who is him? I would assume he is. he buried him, he being the Lord and him being um, Moses.

4:40:50 Congratulations. You have the reading comprehension of a sixth grader, at least. Yeah. But hold on a second. Let me push back. Well, it says, in in a valley in the land of Moab, but that could be, he was translated in the valley, in the land of Moab. Utah. That's exactly right. And says and we don't know if it's Sepulcher just like just like I said of Alma. We know nothing concerning his burial. Yep. Yep. Oh, these are these are parallel here. It says buried by the hand of the Lord says the Lord bearing him. In the Book of Mormon and in Deuteronomy, it says the Lord buried him, okay? They are they actually both say exactly the same thing. They do not contradict okay. And Jonathan thinks that he just, like, discovered something new.

4:41:35 I don't know what he thinks he thinks, That until the Book of Mormon came around. Everyone was just confused by Moses showing up or something. but that is not the case in even in Josephus, let me see if I have it here and take what he's of the Jews. Josephus wrote that. A cloud appeared and stood over Moses whereupon, he vanished from sight. Like Moses was taken up in a cloud like that. Everyone everyone has always known. That anyone who studied it? Anyone who's read it closely has already always known. just like, Just like the Book of Mormon says, the scriptures says, the Lord took, Moses to him unto himself.

4:42:25 That is what Deuteronomy says and you just have to intentionally, try to misunderstand it to get a contradiction that proves due to me wrong. You know something else I think that's worth pointing out here. Is that anybody who's been through the original endowment, the lecture at the bail, Definitely says some things about, you know, Moses, writing things cryptically, right? Because he does not want to reveal the mystery of godliness in the scriptures. Right. And so, even though it doesn't come right out and say, oh, yeah and the Lord, you know, translated him or took him up to heaven or resurrected him. Whatever the case is, Well, if the ward is, if Moses is that concerned about the mysteries of godliness, I would think that this would fall under that same Banner, right? And he's going to be very careful on how he works things and I think you're seeing Echoes of that same thing looks like. I mean It looks like, you know, in Alma very familiar with that verbiage to convey the message he wants to convey, which would require a foreknowledge of Deuteronomy to begin with. Yeah.

4:43:41 Using this idiom buried by the Lord. Yeah. Like That is borrowed from Deuteronomy like that's that's ridiculous. So anyone who's listening to this, who wants to send this video to our link to it to all these YouTubers so that they can repent? Please do They need it. We all need it. So, okay, I'm I'm not gonna do the next one. but, We are we are I only have a few pages left. Oh, Um, and then we can both go to bed. Yes. so, in the next I know sleep, when you're dead, The next video that I was gonna show basically talks about again, the like the centralization of the worship and it says no one is allowed to build altars. Therefore, this shows that Lehigh was like a countercultural guy because One of the first things that Lehigh does is he goes out into the Wilderness and build an altar, right?

4:44:54 Okay, but the thing is that if you actually, we talked about those other temples like there was the Temple of onias in Egypt, and like the ancient Jews Like This is in, this is written in the talmud. They wrote about it and they said that Temple was legit. because, It was out of the land of Israel. It was far enough away. Okay? Because Mike day, like he quotes he quotes from Deuteronomy. He doesn't quote from Deuteronomy 12. If you quote from Deuteronomy 12, then we might get a different impression, but he says that Deuteronomy 12, forbids, anyone from building altars anywhere, but that is not what it actually says.

4:45:35 It says, it says that when you shall observe to do these things in the land, which the Lord that God give us the when you go over Jordan and dwell in the land, which the Lord, their God gives you, then there shall be a place which the Lord your God shall choose to cause his name to dwell there. And did they show you bring all that I command you your burnt offerings and your sacrifice is your ties and your heave offerings and He goes on and says, take heed to thyself that thou offer not thy burnt offerings in every place that they'll see us. But in the place, which the Lord shall choose, okay? So, but this commandment is when you get into the land. Where you're going to dwell, then there's going to be a centralized Place otherwise like the the inference is otherwise if you're outside of the land.

4:46:23 Then it's okay to offer sacrifices because it's just like three days away is if you're four days away or whatever, like that's a long way to drive cattle or whatever. So Lehigh run. I mean, you actually get the prescription of what to do when you're away from the temple that is correct by implication. so, let's see. Oh shoot. And I thought I put it here but there is I don't have the exact reference so but you can actually look this up. Like, there's articles that have been written about this because it's it's like a potential criticism of the Book of Mormon that Lehigh, who is not a little priest, is says it travels three days outside of Jerusalem.

4:47:12 And then they build an altar and offer sacrifices. Okay, so interesting in in the Dead Sea Scrolls, they found a document that is in giving interpretations on Deuteronomy commentary on Deuteronomy. And it says, it says, if you are three days away or more, then you can offer sacrifices. This is, this is the ancient understanding. And like I said there was, it was other temples that the ancient people who supposedly were under the spell of the deuteronomist like allowed. It's because they just actually read Deuteronomy carefully and and Lee High read Deuteronomy carefully as well. And knew that. Once you get out of a certain radius in your basically outside and three days, three days journey is basically outside.

4:47:56 No matter which direction you go from Jerusalem. If you travel for three days straight, you're going to be outside of the land of Israel. And so, so Lehigh was no different. He went down by the Red Sea, and, and, you know, the borders of the Red Sea and offered sacrifice there, but it was not in Contrast to Deuteronomy. It was actually in harmony with it, so oh, okay. so, you know, here's the, the last question I guess is so if, if getting rid of the graven images, And coming up with a forgery Deuteronomy and getting rid of Jesus and getting rid of the atonement and making a king. And you know all the things that they say the deuteron is for doing if that if none of that really holds water and none of it really does, it just contradicts The Book of Mormon and it contradicts the other scriptures and you have to just kind of twist things and misunderstand things, if that's not what was so wicked.

4:49:04 If that's not what was going on, then what was it? That was so wicked about Jerusalem at the time. and, so, there's actually On one hand, we have witnesses. Of the wickedness of Jerusalem, we have four Witnesses, four prophetic Witnesses, Lee High and Nephi. And Jeremiah and Ezekiel. And Lehigh and Nephi. They don't give very much detail Lehigh says, wickedness and Abominations. and Nephi says wickedness too but they don't kind of they don't elaborate on those but Jeremiah does and it is like I don't know. There's there's dozens, probably dozens of verses like just, like, almost every chapter.

4:49:54 Of Jeremiah is. telling the people in Jerusalem that they are, you know, that they're committing Abominations with idols and they've brought Idols into the house of the Lord, and it actually says that they have back slid. So, in other words, they have Josiah has only been dead for a while and they've and they've gone back to the ways of Manassas and amnon. And brought brought the idols back into the temple. And they started doing molec again. They started doing sacrifices to bail and, you know, burning their children, and doing all the things that that the dark Triad.

4:50:41 Want them to do and Jeremiah says, they've, they've backtracked from what from the reforms of Josiah, and just hammers them over and over for their idolatry as like the main thing and Ezekiel does the same. Ezekiel says, they are guilty of worshiping these foreign Gods Idols bringing them into the house of the Lord. Even the priests are corrupt. Etc. so, like the, like the I think that the the testimony of the scriptures is clear and unified. And so I so I think like, what are the what are the consequences? Of.

4:51:28 Accepting when we've talked about some of these already. Some of these we haven't though but I think there's always this. There's this feminist push to try to, you know, pray to heavenly mother and wanting the priesthood like wanting to be the same as the men. You know, they have these, there's these feminist goals of society. It's interesting in the Stick of Joseph podcast several times. I noticed I get the beginning of these podcasts. They're like now listen, we're not saying you should be worshiping heavenly mother and praying to her and whatever. We're just gonna show you the what the ancient people did and what the truth you know. Like going to say what we're gonna show you what the truth of all this is and so like they kind of have a conflicting message there.

4:52:14 We have the abortion helps women to be more like heavenly mother. Okay, crazy ideas. Bail is Jesus Son of el and asherah or astronaut? A. but I'm going to I'm going to say one other one that I haven't mentioned yet and I don't, I well, I will say I've been to some Not secret, but private private meetings with some very well connected. Church members. where some of these things were discussed in at length and people inside the church you know departments who are involved in these projects and this this idea of the, the deuteronomist hypothesis and the The undercutting of the current narrative and the feminism, and all that, all those things that are tied with this, I this desire to bring back Canaanite goddesses. Is tied at the hip.

4:53:25 To all of the changes that have happened to the LDS temple ceremony. And and you know and this is this is part of the motivation behind changing, the simple ceremony to get rid of. Um, to get rid of need to bring feminism kind of things in. And I don't know, all of the, I don't know all of the plans, but I do know that we're on like part three or four. Now of a 15 part plan to like incrementally, change these things. and that, like I said, is it is tied that they have actually have Have some information on send you later. I was going to send it to you before, but I just didn't get around to it but if you're interested, Yeah, I'm very interested in you and I should compare notes when we're not being recorded because IQ have heard some things. So what to do with all of this?

4:54:31 So I have kind of different bits of advice depending on where you're at. So if you are a fundamentalist already, I would just say don't fall for this crap, like just stick to the scriptures. Hold to the revelations. Hold to the rod. Okay, that is what fundamentalists do best. You have watched before, no doubt, you've watched generations of Latter-day Saints. Let go of the scriptures, let go of the revelations and try to do something better with them. A disregard. The word of God in one way or another. Okay. And this is no different than those other things. So, don't let go. You will wander off into strange paths and midst of Darkness, just like you have seen other people do. if you are in the mainstream Church, okay, you don't need to tear down. Deuteronomy Joshua, Judges Samuel, Samuel King's Kings. You don't need to tear down the scriptures in order to believe in heavenly mother or to find her in the scriptures. If you want to know more about her, then you should look to your own tradition.

4:55:42 Ask a fundamentalist some questions. Okay. Study. What the prophets said, the early brother and in this, dispensation the prophets in the apostles rather than studying the Pagan Methodist, okay? Margaret Barker you think you're chasing heavenly mother but you're actually chasing Lilith Okay, and there are is actually and you know who Lilith is? Dave. Yep, the first wife of Adam who is Right refused to submit to Adam. And then she there's some stories that say she became the the demon that that's mother of demons, the infants. That is right, that is right. That is Lilith, that and Lilith becomes in the stories of Lilith is Ishtar, like she.

4:56:25 So you are chasing after the wrong, heavenly mother, don't do that. Okay? If you're a progressive Mormon, And you're going to keep pushing irrational things that don't work. Social contagions that are neither science nor religion. If that's you then the documentary hypothesis is well fit right in with your ideology. So go for it, okay? And if you are an atheist or an agnostic and you're not going to believe in the Divinity of the scriptures anyway, then at least pick a different theory that isn't. So, obviously flawed So pick one that doesn't require you to ignore the text that you're trying to Bunk. So that's my advice for those people.

4:57:07 There you go. That's my, that's my take on the documentary hypothesis and the Deuteronomy is deuteronomist. Hypothesis in particular. Gosh, that was awesome. you know, I want to say this after looking at this now, and again, I'm gonna withhold Full judgment till I get the other side here. But there are some things here that really Disturbed me right? Um As they ought to I think. Oh yeah. Me too. The part the part that worries me the most is. How much critical theory is in this, right? It oozes critical theory and for anyone that doesn't understand critical theory.

4:57:48 Critical theory is the thing that drives marks and its formation and it's early. Expression. Right there has to be some sort of a presser oppressed class, right? And you can have that between the Sexes. You can have that between People with political clout with people with money versus those who don't have it and it's it's meant to incite conflict. and what I'm seeing here is that it's kind of doing the job, right? Because what we're seeing is that it is conflicting, With what's been revealed thus far, right? If look Joseph made no qualms about saying if he didn't think a book didn't belong in the Bible, right? He's got some things to say about the song Solomon, right, right.

4:58:42 So, he but, but not only does he leave it in, he makes Inspire changes to it. Right? So, if you're just gonna call BS on the whole book. Well, guess what? You're gonna call bs2 on Joseph, Smith's Inspired revision of it, right? And for him to pick out, something a settle as. Um. Yeah, you know what, don't give the dead animal to the stranger. No one gets it. That's a very small thing that he picked up on which tells me. He combed over that text more than just you know, right to a cage and point to something. So this idea that you're going to have your cake and eat it too.

4:59:22 I think is if you Embrace that full idea, right? The of the documentary hypothesis, the the deuteronomist hypothesis you have to contend with Joseph again, you are going to find yourself at odds. I believe with Joseph at some point on this Yeah, I concur. So but anyway dude that was good stuff. Hang out for just five minutes. I'll let you go to bed. Yeah. Awesome. That was great. All right. Bye everybody. Hey bye.