Ancient JEWS CHANGED King David's Story In JUDAH (Genesis 38) | MythVision Documentary

It is unfortunate that some of the literary connections do not translate well into English and there are several that are really striking in the Hebrew. For example: @18:05 the name correspondence is very on-the-nose. Here I have transliterated each name in an effort to illustrate what I mean... YHWDH = DWD (Judah and David) ḤYRH = ḤYRM (Hirah and Hiram) BT ŠWʿ = BT ŠBʿ (daughter of Shua and Bat Sheba) ʿR = (unnamed first-born son of Bat Sheba) TMR = TMR (Tamar and Tamar) ʾWNN = ʾMNWN (Onan and Amnon) ŠLH = ŠLMH (Selah and Solomon) I actually think the very slight alteration in the names is a good indication that one story is borrowing from another, but then, also cleverly fictionalising one. @16:27 the “coat of many colours.” The significance is not in the word PSYM, it is in the combination of the two words: KTNT PSYM. The second word is rare, but the first word is quite common. They are used together ONLY in these two texts. @24:05 the phrase “evil in the eyes of YHWH” is extremely significant. This is the language of the Deuteronomist that he uses with great frequency to describe the failings of the Kings of Judah and Israel. But, this precise phrase is used in ONLY one place in all of Genesis, here in Genesis 38, and it appears there TWICE, and only once more in the entire Torah outside of Deuteronomy. But, perhaps more importantly, the phrase is highly charged with theological meaning—there is no way an author who knows Deuteronomy or the Dtr. would use it without also recognising it's significance.

I never really liked Genesis, but Phil Collins and Peter Gabriel’s solo stuff was OK.

Christian fundamentalists love to preach that the Bible must be taken literally. If a movie of the Bible was made literally, Christian fundamentalists would be absolutely appalled, because it would X-rated.

As a Christian my whole life I would never watch worldly movies and shows because they were immoral but I sure read these disgusting stories over and over again. It’s a strange form of abuse to have such purity culture as a girl but also read about these men who committed rape, incest, and polygamy but had God’s favor.

When I listen to these bizarre complex biblical stories involving multiple people from different families and probably different cities or villages, my first question is always "who was there in every single one of these instances (including bedrooms) recording everything that was being done and said between these characters? It's very clear that these stories are all made up. No way anyone could know the details of how someone felt or said while they were having sex with a virgin in some bedroom. And for those who insist that the stories were "downloaded" into the writers brains by God (isn't that what "inspired by god" actually means?) ... the question then becomes... WHY? I mean, why does the almighty creator of the entire universe inspire someone to write stories about the sexual exploits of other people? How this shit makes sense to Christians is beyond me.

an oral history retold a million times, then written and re written just as many. a desert people's story sure did change.

The sky god, who couldn't resist the beautiful daughters, was Jupiter/IU Piter and he had wings. In ancient Roman religion and magic, representations of the winged phallus are usually referred to as fascinum, and symbolise the divine phallus or the embodiment of the Roman deity of fertility, Fascinus.

Biblical marriage was all about sex. Indeed, much of the Bible is about sex, and much of that is perverse.

The Bible is X rated.

When detailing the incestuous nature of the patriarchs, you forgot to mention that Rachel and Lea were the cousins of Jacob.

The death of Ruth's husband and how she met Boaz go look at that story

Great video, Derek. The similarities are so striking between those two stories!

Nice analysis. I recognize that salt pillar artwork! 😉 I just discovered the fascinating story of the Samaritan scriptures, and they have several differences between those books and the Masoretic texts. Maybe you would consider finding an expert to review the differences with us. Thanks for your content!

Maybe Genesis was meant in part to explain the “genesis” of humanity’s moral decline….from what we might now describe as a Freudian perspective. Sexual drive is greater even than fear, if you think about it. Love is supremely powerful, and it’s proper sexual expression is supposed to be ultimately procreation, and to use sex in any negative way is an ultimate crime. That’s my take. God explaining the most powerful of human drives and their implications. Important place to start.

Based in people and locations but when recorded in writing they used parallels and patterns. There is a strengthening also of the possibility of composition of Genesis, kings /chronicles , and ruth during the same time period and under the same authorship consortium.

Great analysis as always! 🙌🏼💙 Just to add an interesting point, since I come from an Orthodox Jewish background: Jewish tradition recognizes many of these parallels, but their approach to that is that the "actions of the fathers are signs to the children", meaning that history repeats itself in very specific ways that are part of God's ultimate plan. From that perspective, the parallels you point out would actually strengthen the claim that these characters were holy people and were part of a spiritual narrative that God interacts with. That being said, I do think there's special pleading involved in that perspective, but that seems to be the mainstream opinion through all of Jewish religious literature in post-biblical times.

I really liked this video. It is like the plot of my book Josiah and the Theocrats, where the reader is led to consider that the cast is the inspiration behind Moses, Joshua, Aaron and Miriam.

It’s game of thrones for the ancient world. It’s a set of dramas set in some loosely based historical context with a lot of typography mixed in for good measure. It’s a story.

Hi Derek, think about to interview Brian C. Muraresku :) .. is going to be really wild !

This was really good.