NathanH83

Noah's Flood was about 3,000 BC.
The Tower of Babel was 400 years later about 2,600 BC.
The first Egyptian Pyramid was about 2,450 BC.
The Great Pyramid of Giza was about 2,350 BC.
Abraham was born about 2,000 BC.

6 days ago | [YT] | 52

NathanH83

One of Gail Riplinger’s complaints is that I said that the King James Version was translated from the Leningrad Codex from the 11th century AD. She says, No that’s wrong. The King James was translated from the Ben Chayyim Hebrew, not the Leningrad Codex.

Ok? So I’m thinking, how does that help your point? The Ben Chayyim is an even NEWER Hebrew text, not older. The Ben Chayyim dates to the 1500’s, even later than the Leningrad Codex.

So my point still stands, that the oldest complete Hebrew text that modern versions (ESV, NIV, NASB) ARE based on is the Leningrad Codex. The Ben Chayyim that the King James Version is based on is even newer than that.

But the early churches were using the Greek Septuagint which WAS translated a few hundred years before Christ, and therefore must have been translated from an older copy of the Hebrew, older than the Leningrad Codex, older than the Aleppo Codex, older than the Ben Chayyim, older than EVERY HEBREW TEXT that translators use today.

And this older Hebrew text MUST have included these extra 650 years in the Genealogies of Genesis 11. That’s the only way that they could have ended up in the Greek Septuagint, and the Samaritan Pentateuch, and the writings of Flavius Josephus.

If this “error” (if it was an error) originated with the Greek Septuagint, there’s no way that it would have made its way into the Samaritan Pentateuch, since the Samaritan text is a Hebrew text that pre-dates the Greek Septuagint itself. And Josephus wasn’t using the Greek Septuagint either. Josephus was given the Hebrew scrolls from the temple. When Titus Flavius destroyed the temple in 70 AD, he gave the Hebrew scrolls to Josephus. So why does Josephus side with the Greek numbers in Genesis 11?

By the way, the Samaritan Pentateuch and the original genuine numbers of Josephus agree with the Hebrew in Genesis 5. So I’m not so confident that the Greek Septuagint is right about the extra 500 or so years before the Flood. But after the Flood? We definitely have 3 textual witnesses for the 650 years.

1 week ago | [YT] | 26

NathanH83

I don’t see anything wrong with supporting Israel, I think antisemitism is wrong, and I think it’s dumb to blame Israel for things they didn’t do (like murdering Charlie Kirk -give me a break!)

BUT, I think Christians ought to be careful not to put them up on a pedestal, and bow down and worship them, as if they’re the superior race.

If Jews in the 1st century are guilty of removing things from the Hebrew Bible (as evidenced by the Greek Septuagint) then we should be honest and acknowledge that, and not resort to calling it antisemitism. Especially since there’s clear evidence even from Josephus (a Jewish historian) that the Jews did in fact alter things in the Hebrew text.

Josephus was given the Hebrew scrolls from the temple in Jerusalem, and yet he often sides with the Greek Septuagint (like including the extra 600 years in the genealogies Genesis 11).

Wanting to defend the ORIGINAL Hebrew over the Masoretic is not inherently antisemitic. In fact, it’s the opposite of antisemitism, because it’s wanting to defend the original.

But bowing down to the Masoretic, which has been altered, is similar to bowing down to the golden calf altar, because it’s not putting God first. It’s putting a text first rather than letting God lead you to the texts that Jesus and the disciples quoted from.

Skip the Carousel

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 weeks ago | [YT] | 35

NathanH83

The insane double standard of the Left is this:

“It’s wrong to rejoice over gun violence towards innocent victims…unless that innocent victim is a Bible-believing Christian that you disagree with. Then it’s okay to rejoice.”

Notice how the guy on the megaphone says, “We got Charlie in the neck!”

Wait, what? WE? Did he just say, “We”?
Why is he taking credit for something he didn’t do?

It makes me think of when the Pharisees said of Jesus, “Let his blood be on us and on our children.”

“When Pilate saw that he could not prevail at all, but rather that a tumult was rising, he took water and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, ‘I am innocent of the blood of this just Person. You see to it.‘ And all the people answered and said, ‘His blood be on us and on our children.’
-Matthew 27:24-25 (NKJV)

I can understand why you would rejoice over the death of someone wicked like Hitler, or Haman, or Jezebel, or Antiochus Epiphenes.

But these people are rejoicing over the death of a Bible-believing Christian who courageously stood up for his faith in Jesus, who showed love to his opponents, and who loved his wife and his children.

These people who condemn gun violence are rejoicing over gun violence.

If they’re rejoicing over the death of a Christian, then what they’re really saying is they want us all dead -all Christians everywhere. They want to kill us all, just like Jezebel killed off almost all of God’s prophets in Elijah’s day.

youtube.com/shorts/iDdfwKUla8...

3 weeks ago | [YT] | 0

NathanH83

“If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you.”
-John 15:18 (NKJV)

This is not an attack on one man. This is an attack on Christianity. This is an attack on Christ himself. This is an attack on all Christians everywhere.

The reason they hated Charlie is because they hated Christ in him.

Let that sink in.

😢

3 weeks ago | [YT] | 71

NathanH83

I was pleasantly surprised to see the rest of the “Patterns of Evidence” movies have made their way to Apple iTunes and Vudu (Fandango at Home).

Skip the Carousel

1 2

1 month ago | [YT] | 15

NathanH83

This is encouraging. Someone left a comment on CMI's youtube video, in response to me, about a timeline chart that he had made, which is for sale on eBay.

This is what he said:

-------
I agree with Nathan. I have done a detailed time-proportional chart comparing chronologies between the LXX and MT. This chart also integrates a comparison of Dr. David Rohl's new pharonic dating with the convention chronology. This dating fits with the Patterns of Evidence series. There are about 1500 additional years in the Septuagint chronology than in the Masoretic Leningrad Codex chronology. It is highly suspect that Noah's son Shem lived until the time of Abraham as Bible teachers expound using the Masoretic-based text. This disapears in the LXX-based chronology. Despite all the scholars who want to find fault with the Septuagint and its variants, the Apostle Paul, Josephus, the Samaritans and even the incarnate Lord nevertheless used the Septuagint. Today Eastern Orthodox churches still use the Septuagint. The chart I have produced took many hours to create and is available to the seriously interested on Ebay:
"Septuagint vs. Masoretic-based Ages Comparison Proportional Chart & Chronology":
ebay.us/m/JsXPxc
I belive the proportional chart with its supplemental information should convince any reasonable person that the Septuagint translated from the Hebrew Scriptures about 600 years before the Masoretic Leningrad Codex was created is more true to the original autographs and is definitely more consistent with extra Biblical information.
-------

2 months ago | [YT] | 23

NathanH83

They say the Apocrypha doesn’t belong in the Bible because there were no prophets at that time.

Ok? So?

So what if there were no prophets? There were priests. The Maccabees were priests.

Ask them this: “Was Ezra a prophet?”

They’ll say, “No, Ezra was not a prophet. He was a priest and a scribe.”

There you go. The Maccabees were not prophets. But they were priests.

So what’s the problem? Thank you for answering your own question.

If Ezra is the word of God, even though he was not a prophet but just a priest, then Maccabees can also be the Word of God. The fact that it wasn’t written by prophets does not disqualify it. Otherwise Ezra would be disqualified.

2 months ago | [YT] | 18

NathanH83

People say that the book of Tobit is endorsing witchcraft. But that makes no sense to me. Because the reason they say it endorses witchcraft is because an angel from heaven instructed Tobias, the son of Tobit, to burn the heart and liver of a fish on the coals of a fire in order to cast out a demon.

When people hear that, they just automatically assume that’s witchcraft. But is it? No, it’s not. I’ve literally asked people who claim to practice Wicca if they burn animal organs, and they said no.

But did anyone in the Bible burn animal organs? Yes, the Levite priests were commanded by God to burn animal organs in Leviticus.

I asked Grok, an A.I. chatbot: “Did God ever command the Levite priests to burn animal organs?”

This was the response:
———-
“Yes, God commanded the Levite priests to burn animal organs as part of the sacrificial system outlined in the Torah, particularly in the book of Leviticus. For example, in Leviticus 1:9, for the burnt offering, the priests were instructed to burn the entire animal, including its organs, on the altar after washing the entrails and legs with water: “But its entrails and its legs he shall wash with water. And the priest shall burn all of it on the altar as a burnt offering, an offering made by fire, a sweet aroma to the Lord.” Specific organs, like the kidneys and liver, were also mentioned in other offerings, such as the peace offering in Leviticus 3:4, where the fat, kidneys, and liver lobe were to be burned: “The two kidneys and the fat that is on them by the flanks, and the lobe attached to the liver above the kidneys, he shall remove.”

These commands were part of the detailed sacrificial rituals given to the Israelites through Moses, with the Levite priests responsible for performing them according to God’s instructions. The burning of organs symbolized complete dedication to God or atonement for sin, depending on the offering’s purpose.”
———-

So, if Tobit is endorsing witchcraft by telling Tobias to burn animal organs, then wouldn’t God also be guilty of endorsing witchcraft in Leviticus for telling the priests to burn animal organs?

I then asked Grok if witches burn animal organs and this is the response that I got:
———-
“The practice of burning animal organs in relation to witches varies widely depending on cultural, historical, and spiritual contexts, as “witch” is a broad term encompassing diverse traditions. Historically, in some ancient pagan or folk practices, animal sacrifices, including burning organs, were part of rituals to honor deities, spirits, or natural forces. For example, in certain pre-Christian European traditions, offerings of animal parts were burned to invoke blessings or divine favor, as seen in some Celtic or Norse rituals. However, these practices were not necessarily tied to “witches” as understood today.

In modern witchcraft, such as Wicca or other neo-pagan traditions, animal sacrifice or burning organs is extremely rare and often explicitly avoided due to ethical concerns and a focus on nature reverence. Most contemporary witches use symbolic offerings like herbs, incense, or candles in rituals. For instance, Wicca emphasizes “harm none” as a core principle, making animal sacrifice inconsistent with its ethos.

In some African or Afro-diasporic spiritual systems, like Vodou or Santería, animal sacrifice may occur, including burning parts of an animal as an offering to spirits or deities. These practices are highly ritualized, performed by trained practitioners, and not necessarily labeled as “witchcraft” within those communities.

Accusations of witches burning animal organs often stem from historical stereotypes or sensationalized accounts, like those during the European witch hunts (15th–17th centuries), where such claims were used to demonize accused individuals, often without evidence. There’s no universal practice among witches involving burning animal organs, and any such ritual would depend on the specific cultural or spiritual tradition. If you’re referring to a particular context or depiction (e.g., in media or a specific culture), could you provide more details for a more targeted answer?”
———-



I then asked Grok: “Does the book of Tobit endorse witchcraft?” and this was the response:
———-
“The Book of Tobit, a deuterocanonical text included in Catholic and Orthodox Christian Bibles but not in most Protestant canons, does not endorse witchcraft. However, it contains an episode that some might interpret as involving magical or ritualistic elements, which could be misunderstood as witchcraft depending on one’s definition. Let’s examine the relevant context.

In Tobit 6:1–8, the angel Raphael, disguised as a human, instructs Tobias (Tobit’s son) to catch a fish and keep its heart, liver, and gall for specific purposes. Later, in Tobit 8:2–3, Tobias uses the heart and liver by burning them on incense to drive away a demon (Asmodeus) that had been tormenting his bride, Sarah. The text states:
“Tobias remembered the words of Raphael, and he took the fish’s liver and heart out of the bag where he had them and put them on the embers of the incense. The odor of the fish so repelled the demon that he fled to the remotest parts of Egypt.” The gall is used separately to heal Tobit’s blindness (Tobit 11:7–14).

At first glance, this ritual—burning animal organs to expel a demon—might resemble practices associated with folk magic or apotropaic rituals (meant to ward off evil). In the ancient Near Eastern and Jewish context, however, such actions were often seen as divinely sanctioned remedies rather than witchcraft. The key points arguing against an endorsement of witchcraft are:

1. Divine Guidance: The instructions come from Raphael, an angel sent by God, framing the act as a divinely approved ritual, not a human-invented magical practice. Witchcraft, in biblical terms, typically involves unsanctioned divination or manipulation of spiritual forces (e.g., Deuteronomy 18:10–12).

2. Cultural Context: In the ancient world, burning animal parts or using them in rituals was common in both Jewish and neighboring cultures. For example, Leviticus prescribes burning animal organs in sacrifices, as you referenced earlier. The use of fish organs in Tobit aligns more with medicinal or ritualistic traditions than with what scripture condemns as sorcery.

3. Narrative Purpose: The story emphasizes faith in God’s providence, not reliance on magic. Tobias’s success comes from obedience to divine instructions, and the narrative underscores God’s power over demons, not human magical ability.

Critics, particularly from traditions that exclude Tobit from the canon (e.g., some Protestant groups), might argue the episode feels “superstitious” or too close to magical practices. However, within its Second Temple Jewish context (likely written 3rd–2nd century BCE), the text reflects a worldview where God could work through physical elements in miraculous ways, distinct from condemned practices like necromancy or idolatry.

In conclusion, Tobit does not endorse witchcraft but depicts a divinely guided ritual using animal organs to achieve God’s purposes. The episode might appear magical to modern readers unfamiliar with ancient practices, but it’s framed as an act of faith, not sorcery. If you have a specific concern or definition of witchcraft in mind, let me know, and I can refine the answer further!”
———-


Also, to claim that an act of demonic black magic could cast out a demon is contradictory to Jesus’ teaching when he told the scribes and the Pharisees that Satan does not cast out Satan, otherwise his kingdom would be divided against itself.

I asked Grok this question: “Does Satan cast out Satan?” and this was the response:
———-
The phrase “Does Satan cast out Satan?” likely refers to a teaching of Jesus found in the New Testament, specifically in Mark 3:23–26, Matthew 12:25–27, and Luke 11:17–18. In these passages, Jesus responds to accusations from the Pharisees that He was casting out demons by the power of Beelzebul (a name associated with Satan). Jesus counters with a rhetorical question: “How can Satan cast out Satan?” He explains that a kingdom divided against itself cannot stand, implying that Satan would not undermine his own power by driving out his own demons. Instead, Jesus asserts that His ability to cast out demons comes from the power of God, demonstrating the presence of God’s kingdom.

In the context of your previous questions about the Book of Tobit and rituals involving animal organs, you might be asking whether the act of Tobias burning fish organs to expel a demon (Tobit 8:2–3) could be seen as a satanic act. Based on the biblical narrative, Tobit’s ritual is explicitly guided by the angel Raphael, sent by God, and aligns with divine purposes, not Satan’s power. Thus, it does not involve “Satan casting out Satan” but rather God’s authority overcoming evil.

More broadly, the concept of “Satan casting out Satan” is used in scripture to refute the idea that evil forces would work against themselves. In Christian theology, Satan is depicted as seeking to maintain his influence, not diminish it by expelling his own agents. Any act of exorcism or spiritual deliverance in biblical texts is typically attributed to God’s power, as seen in both the New Testament and deuterocanonical texts like Tobit.

If you’re asking this in a different context—perhaps related to a specific theology, cultural practice, or modern depiction—could you clarify? For example, are you referring to a particular text, tradition, or media portrayal? This would help me tailor the response further.
———-

Skip the Carousel

1 2

2 months ago | [YT] | 15

NathanH83

Faith Alone…

2 months ago | [YT] | 44