PhD, theology & religion Honorary fellow, Cadbury Centre for the Public Understanding of Religion Speaking requests: live@thewatermarkagency.com

Herriman, UT
This dogma isn't supported by the texts. According to Exod 23:20-21, the angel of YHWH was authorized to identify as God & exercise divine prerogatives as a result of being endowed with the divine name, not as a result of eternally & by very nature being the very God of Israel.
The Angel of the LORD in the OT was, in fact, the pre-incarnate Logos. Moreover, all theophanies in the OT were “logophanies.”
10
9
117
4,239
The angel of YHWH is an interpolation in those passages where their identity is conflated with God, but Exod 23:20–21 accounts for it as an outcome of the messenger's endowment with the divine name, a vehicle of divine agency/authority. See chapter 6 here: sbl-site.org/wp-content/uplo…
Yes, Jacob wrestled with The Angel who is also the LORD—a truth known to OT saints too:
3
8
65
3,883
We're talking about the convoluted narrative of Exodus 24 & what it was like to see the God of Israel on today's episode of @data_over_dogma piped.video/watch?v=YIDSOQ2u…
3
6
25
2,278
I edited that post & should have harmonized my terms, but you've flatly refused to delete posts you've acknowledged are misinformation despite objections from the person you've misrepresented, so further spread of that misinformation is knowing & willful & is thus disinformation.
Replying to @maklelan
You are such a pompous fool. You use disinformation and misinformation in the same post as if they are the same thing. Grok: The main difference is intent. Disinformation is false or misleading information that is deliberately created and spread to deceive, mislead, or manipulate.
4
4
176
5,261
So I appealed to the current state of the field & specific evidentiary concerns that resulted in it, while D’Souza ignores those concerns, misrepresents Finkelstein as a minimalist & retreats to an appeal to authority that basically amounts to “I’m right cuz a scholar disagrees.”
Replying to @maklelan
This is the Finkelstein minimalist view which you slavishly adhere to. Amihai Mazar and many others, no less competent than Finkelstein, have a different view. You pretend these are settled issues when they clearly are not.
2
2
76
2,414
Right, you prefer to add just one acknowledgement in response to an unconnected comment so only a tiny fraction of the folks who misled by your disinformation in the past, present & future will ever see the correction, thus preserving the misinformation & also saving face.
Replying to @maklelan
I prefer the old-school solution of correcting these things in writing rather than delete or stealth-edit old posts, just as newspapers publish corrections but don’t necessarily remove the original article.
5
9
131
4,320
D'Souza is decades out of date. For instance, stratigraphic issues, C14 dating & shared pottery assemblages & mason's marks put Megiddo's "Solomonic" layer squarely in the 9th century with the Omrides. D'Souza would have to actually read the scholarship to know this & he won't.
The Bible says King Solomon built fortifications in 4 cities: Jerusalem, Hazor, Megiddo and Gezer. Such fortifications were accompanied by a city gate. Such gates were used for defensive purposes but also for ritualistic ceremonies and juridical practices. City elders sat in judgement at the gates and also heard the pleas of the poor and needy there. In recent decades, archaeologists discovered fortifications and six-chambered city gates at Hazor, Megiddo and Gezer. The eminent Israeli archaeologist Yigael Yadin recognized the fortifications and gates were all constructed in the same way and date to the same period—the period of Solomon. Yadin argued the archaeological evidence supported the biblical record. But what about the Jerusalem gate? In 1986 archaeologists Eilat Mazar and her grandfather Benjamin Mazar uncovered a fourth parallel gate structure in Jerusalem. See below a photograph of the late Eilat Mazar, who spent her distinguished career at Hebrew Univeristy, in front of that gate. The Jerusalem gate matched the construction formula of the others, in some cases to the nearest inch, suggesting a centralized authority in Solomon’s capital with a blueprint for the construction of such fortified structures as far away as northern Israel.
5
14
217
6,738
And yet, rather than delete your posts containing the falsely attributed posts on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram & elsewhere, as Eric has explicitly asked you to do––as well as all the subsequent shares & defenses of them––they're all still actively spreading that misinformation.
I don’t need to take notes. As Dan will acknowledge, a day or two ago I admitted my mistake in inadvertently leaving out a word from an Eric Cline quotation.
5
8
186
6,605
I deleted a response to this where I made a stupid & hasty error & misidentified Joseph Ben Caiaphas as the son of the high priest rather than the high priest himself. Apologies for the very silly mistake. It’s certainly plausible the bones belong to the high priest.
Replying to @maklelan
Two infants. A child roughly 2–5 years old. A teenage boy. An adult woman. A man estimated at about 60 years old. Gee, let’s see. Which one could possibly be Caiaphas the high priest?
9
13
150
25,949
Geez, I did it in the original post, too. That’s embarrassing.
5
6
54
1,867
The ossuary with the name of Caiaphas’ *son* on it contained the bones of *six different people*.
In Jerusalem, a 2,000-year-old burial box was discovered bearing the name Joseph Caiaphas. Inside were the remains of a 60-year-old man. The name, location, and time period all match. Could these be the bones of the high priest who helped send Jesus to the cross?
6
15
247
9,998
You continue to alter this quote to serve your rhetorical goals, Dinesh, after Eric has directly requested you cease. The quote says "an event of the EARLY first millennium BCE." You omitted that word & your question also ignores that he's limiting things only to inscriptions.
6
11
141
5,257
Also, I've already twice provided an example of archaeological data contradicting a biblical narrative from the late first millennium BCE, and both times I provided it, you scurried away without responding, only to reassert the same claim later.
1
2
59
1,219