Plato And The Creation of the Hebrew Bible - Russell E. Gmirkin

#RussellGmirkin

In this episode, Russel E. Gmirkin joins me on the History Valley podcast for the first time to discuss his book Plato and the Creation of the Hebrew Bible. His book claims that the Pentateuch (the Torah) utilized the works of Plato's dialogues.

Plato and the Creation of the Hebrew Bible for the first time compares the ancient law collections of the Ancient Near East, the Greeks and the Pentateuch to determine the legal antecedents for the biblical laws. Following on from his 2006 work, Berossus and Genesis, Manetho and Exodus, Gmirkin takes up his theory that the Pentateuch was written around 270 BCE using Greek sources found at the Great Library of Alexandria, and applies this to an examination of the biblical law codes. A striking number of legal parallels are found between the Pentateuch and Athenian laws, and specifically with those found in Plato's Laws of ca. 350 BCE. Constitutional features in biblical law, Athenian law, and Plato's Laws also contain close correspondences. Several genres of biblical law, including the Decalogue, are shown to have striking parallels with Greek legal collections, and the synthesis of narrative and legal content is shown to be compatible with Greek literature.

All this evidence points to direct influence from Greek writings, especially Plato's Laws, on the biblical legal tradition. Finally, it is argued that the creation of the Hebrew Bible took place according to the program found in Plato's Laws for creating a legally authorized national ethical literature, reinforcing the importance of this specific Greek text to the authors of the Torah and Hebrew Bible in the early Hellenistic Era. This study offers a fascinating analysis of the background to the Pentateuch, and will be of interest not only to biblical scholars, but also to students of Plato, ancient law, and Hellenistic literary traditions.

👉Sign up for Dr. Amy-Jill Levine's Course! The Parables of Jesus

👉Sign up for Dr. Joshua Bowen's course! Myths Borrowed By The Old Testament

👉Sign up for Dr. Bart D. Ehrman's course! Bible and the Quran: Comparing Their Historical Problems!

👉Sign up for Dr. Bart D. Ehrman's course on Did Matthew, Mark, Luke and John Actually Write Matthew, Mark, Luke and John!

👉Sign up for Dr. Bart D. Ehrman's course on The Genius of the Gospel Of Matthew - What Scholars Say About the First Gospel!

👉Sign up and join Dr. Jodi Magness on an enthralling archaeological journey through Jesus' world!

👉Sign up for Dr. Bart D. Ehrman's course on the scribal corruption of scripture!

👉Sign up for Dr. James D. Tabors course on Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls!

👉Sign up for Dr. Robyn Faith Walsh's course on Paul The Apostle!

👉Sign up for Dr. Kipp Davis's course on the Real Israelite Religions!

👉Sign up for Dr. James D. Tabors course on the Gospel of Mark!

👉Sign up for Dr. Dennis MacDonald's course on the Gospels and Greek Poetry!

👉Sign up for Dr. M. David Litwa's course on Mystery Cults!

Join this channel to get access to perks:

(c) 2024, by speakers, distributed under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 international license.

𝕏Twitter: @Jacob56723278

[MGmirkin]

If anyone wants to go back and rewatch Russell's earlier interviews (in chronological order), there's a playlist for that:


Enjoy!

Also, Russell's books, should anyone care to go track them down:

Berossus & Genesis, Manetho & Exodus [...] (Library of Hebrew Bible & Old Testament Studies, 2006)
Plato and the Creation of the Hebrew Bible (Routledge, 2017)
Plato's Timaeus and the Biblical Creation Accounts [...] (Routledge, 2022)

He's also written several scholarly journal and other articles over the years...

[justinlevy]

Gmirkin is always one of my favorite interviews. Great stuff.

[henkvandergaast]

I am glad the good fellow can finally talk without losing his voice... always interesting

[skellingtonmeteoryballoon]

Plato was most definitely good friends with yacov rambsel. They probably did arithmetic together too

[RealUvane]

Indeed the Hyxos Phrygians are the original Judaists.

[helorumtheknightsofmambrin]

In Maccabees IV I can definitely see the influence of Plato:
Maccabees IV (ΜΑΚΑΒΑΙΩΝ Δ) (100 BC - 99 AD), Chapter 1:1-6
1 As I am going to demonstrate a most philosophical proposition, namely, that religious reasoning is absolute master of the passions, I would willingly advise you to give the utmost heed to philosophy. Φιλοσοφώτατον λόγον ἐπιδείκνυσθαι μέλλων, εἰ αὐτοδέσποτός ἐστι τῶν παθῶν ὁ εὐσεβὴς λογισμός, συμβουλεύσαιμ’ ἂν ὑμῖν ὀρθῶς, ὅπως προθύμως προσέχητε τῇ φιλοσοφίᾳ. 2 For reason is necessary to every one as a step to science: and more especially does it embrace the praise of prudence, the highest virtue. καὶ γὰρ ἀναγκαῖος εἰς ἐπιστήμην παντὶ ὁ λόγος καὶ ἄλλως τῆς μεγίστης ἀρετῆς, λέγω δὴ φρονήσεως, περιέχει ἔπαινον. 3 If, then, reasoning appears to hold the mastery over the passions which stand in the way of temperance, such as gluttony and lust, εἰ ἄρα τῶν σωφροσύνης κωλυτικῶν παθῶν ὁ λογισμὸς φαίνεται ἐπικρατεῖν, γαστριμαργίας τε καὶ ἐπιθυμίας, 4 it surely also and manifestly has the rule over the affections which are contrary to justice, such as malice; and of those which are hindrances to manliness, as wrath, and pain, and fear. ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν τῆς δικαιοσύνης ἐμποδιστικῶν παθῶν κυριεύειν ἀναφαίνεται, οἷον κακοηθείας, καὶ τῶν τῆς ἀνδρείας ἐμποδιστικῶν παθῶν, θυμοῦ τε καὶ πόνου καὶ φόβου. 5 How, then, is it, perhaps some may say, that reasoning, if it rule the affections, is not also master of forgetfulness and ignorance? They attempt a ridiculous argument. πῶς οὖν, ἴσως εἴποιεν ἄν τινες, εἰ τῶν παθῶν ὁ λογισμὸς κρατεῖ, λήθης καὶ ἀγνοίας οὐ δεσπόζει; γελοῖον ἐπιχειροῦντες λέγειν· 6 For reasoning (λογισμὸς) does not rule over its own affections, but over such as are contrary to justice (δικαιοσύνης), and manliness (ἀνδρείας = courage) and temperance (σωφροσύνης), and prudence (φρονήσεως); and yet over these, so as to withstand, without destroying them. οὐ γὰρ τῶν ἑαυτοῦ παθῶν ὁ λογισμὸς κρατεῖ, ἀλλὰ τῶν τῆς δικαιοσύνης καὶ ἀνδρείας καὶ σωφροσύνης καὶ φρονήσεως ἐναντίων, καὶ τούτων οὐχ ὥστε αὐτὰ καταλῦσαι, ἀλλ’ ὥστε αὐτοῖς μὴ εἶξαι.

[izzykhach]

I'd like to push back on one aspect of Gmirkin's presentation. The fact that God is portrayed in Genesis as asking Adam, "where are you? " does not imply the existence of a feeble, lesser god who is not all knowing or all capable. And there's no need either to resort to the gnostic belief in a higher and lower god. There are always two ideas in relation to God that are in constant tension, His transcendent and immanent natures. The God who created the universe and is beyond comprehension can still converse intimately with humans in a manner that they can relate to. Rabbinic literature has commented on this passage that this is how you engage someone in a conversation.

[bardoface]

Read Plato’s Laws, Nietzsche and Marx to discover how we all ended up in these thought cages.

[YenkammaNe]

WHAT IS SPECIAL ABOUT BEING A HINDU?
By Francois Gautier.
*Diversity in Divinity and Unity in Spirituality.* Be Your Own Messiah.
1) Believe in God ! - Aastik - Accepted
2) Don't believe in God ! - You're accepted as Nastik
3) You want to worship idols - please go ahead. You are a murti pujak.
4) You dont want to worship idols - no problem. You can focus on Nirguna Brahman.
5) You want to criticise something in our religion. Come forward. We are logical. Nyaya, Tarka etc. are core Hindu schools.
6) You want to accept beliefs as it is. Most welcome. Please go ahead with it.
7) You want to start your journey by reading Bhagvad Gita - Sure !
8) You want to start your journey by reading Upanishads - Go ahead.
9) You want to start your journey by reading Purana - Be my guest.
10) You just don't like reading Puranas or other books. No problem my dear. Go by Bhakti tradition . ( bhakti- devotion)
11) You don't like idea of Bhakti ! No problem. Do your Karma. Be a karmayogi.
12) You want to enjoy life. Very good. No problem at all. This is Charvaka Philosophy.
13) You want to abstain from all the enjoyment of life & find God - jai ho ! Be a Sadhu, an ascetic !
14) You don't like the concept of God. You believe in Nature only - Welcome. (Trees are our friends and Prakriti or nature is worthy of worship).
15) You believe in one God or Supreme Energy. Superb! Follow Advaita philosophy
16) You want a Guru. Go ahead. Receive gyaan.
17) You don't want a Guru.. Help yourself ! Meditate, Study !
18) You believe in Female energy ! Shakti is worshipped.
19) You believe that every human being is equal. Yeah! You're awesome, come on let's celebrate Hinduism!
"Vasudhaiva kutumbakam" (the world is a family)
20) You don't have time to celebrate the festival.
Don't worry. One more festival is coming! There are multiple festivals every single day of the year.
21) You are a working person. Don't have time for religion. Its okay. You will still be a Hindu.
22) You like to go to temples. Devotion is loved.
23) You don't like to go to temples - no problem. You are still a Hindu!
24) You know that Hinduism is a way of life, with considerable freedom.
25) You believe that everything has God in it. So you worship your mother, father, guru, tree, River, Prani-matra, Earth, Universe!
26) And If you don't believe that everything has GOD in it - No problems. Respect your viewpoint.
27) "Sarve jana sukhino bhavantu " (May you all live happily)
You represent this! You're free to choose, my dear Hindu!
This is exactly the essence of Hinduism, all inclusive .. That is why it has withstood the test of time inspite of repeated onslaught both from within and outside, and assimilated every good aspects from everything . That is why it is eternal !!!
There is a saying in Rigveda, the first book ever known to mankind which depicts the Hinduism philosophy in a Nutshell -" Ano bhadrah Krathavo Yanthu Vishwathah"- Let the knowledge come to us from every direction.

[carminefragione]

Jews figured the Messiah was a warrior Lion King of Judah, while Christians figured a true wise man was not a predator or a beast image, but more like the "Lamb" rather than the Lion. Lamb is Clean, you can eat the Lamb without the threat of a beast biting you back. Lions, Bears, Wild Pigs, Dogs, Wolves, Snakes, Birds, usually are UNCLEAN creatures. So in the Greek mindset, based on Plato, the Wise Man who is Messiah must be a Pacifist who might only indulge in self defense at the last choice , but has a bed side manner as a Doctor, who is willing to risk his life to save others. So the Greco Roman world was game to accept Jesus , as what John the Baptist said of him " Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world". Obviously the theme played perfectly into the Greek Model of a Wise Man who is a Doctor in Practice. It was in the Hippocratic Oath, that Doctors would only try to preserve life, and not perform abortions. So while the Jews wanted a heathen warrior Lion King who might destroy the world to give it to the Jews, the Jewish idea of a Lion King is undesirable to the Greek Mind Set, since that was too familiar with the status quo. If not for the theme of a passive gentle Lamb of God, fit for human consumption, but is not a threat to humanity, since man is partly a predator creature already, then the God of Israel would never have attracted the Greeks. This is an issue of the pacifist priest who practices religion according to the Hippocratic Oath.

[BenjaminLove_Modern_composer]

The significance of 12 actually went back to the ancient Sumerians and the way they counted on there fingers.Sounds odd but true, if you count finger parts on one finger excluding the thumb you get 12

[lh]

Sorry but i find unnecessarily misleading the comment (around min 15:52) that the being questioning Adam and Cain was not omniscient. God also said "the blood of Abel cries out to me..." so He knew what had happened. The questioning was rethorical. Thanks,

[nobodyhere]

I’m here for facts not what someone just thinks 😢

[eretzproject]

nice .. however 2 issues her
1. the bible was still being written during platos time so those autors might just were influenced by plato
2. for this to be true you have to ignore a lot of things ... like the jewish law being similar to hamurabis code and many more thinga

[nobodyhere]

Just think about before the scrolls were found, who did the people worship than! I’m afraid I think to much but I want the

[readyfireaim]

The vocalization Molek occurs eight times in the Masoretic Text, predominantly (five times) in Leviticus:

Leviticus 18:21 "And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the LORD."

* I am the Yahweh
* thy seed (🤨)

Leviticus 20:2: "Again, thou shalt say to the children of Israel, Whosoever he be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn in Israel, that giveth any of his seed unto Molech; he shall surely be put to death: the people of the land shall stone him with stones."

* his seed (🤔)

Leviticus 20:3: "And I will set my face against that man, and will cut him off from among his people; because he hath given of his seed unto Molech, to defile my sanctuary, and to profane my holy name."

* his seed (😕)

Leviticus 20:4: "And if the people of the land do any ways hide their eyes from the man, when he giveth of his seed unto Molech, and kill him not"

* his seed (😬)

Leviticus 20:5: "Then I will set my face against that man, and against his family, and will cut him off, and all that go a whoring after him, to commit whoredom with Molech, from among their people."

Two further occurrences connect the practice with Tophet, a place of sacrifice in the Valley of Hinnom (Gehenna, which later acquired the connotation of "Hell"):

2 Kings 23:10: "And he (King Josiah of Judah) defiled Topheth, which is in the valley of the children of Hinnom, that no man might make his son or his daughter to pass through the fire to Molech."

* his son or his daughter (🤢)

Jeremiah 32:35: "And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin."

* their sons/their daughters (🤮)
* neither came it into my mind (🥸)

The practice of "passing through fire" (`abar ba-'esh עָבַר בָּאֵשׁ⁠‎) associated with the name Moloch in the citations above also occurs without reference to Moloch in Deuteronomy 18:10–13, 2 Kings 16:3 and 21:6 and Ezekiel 20:26, 31 and 23:37.

Isaiah 30:33 has the vocalization melek ("king"), but this is widely accepted as an omission of the Masoretic correctors: "For Tophet is ordained of old; yea, for the king it is prepared; he hath made it deep and large: the pile thereof is fire and much wood; the breath of the LORD, like a stream of brimstone, doth kindle it."

*(LORD = YHWH = Yahweh, not God, see Yahwism)

On the other hand, while 1 Kings 11:7 has the vocalization Molek, in "Molech, the abomination of the children of Ammon", this is widely accepted as an error for Malkam (Milcom), the specifically Ammonite idol.

[nobodyhere]

I’m on a journey for the truth so I’m subbing for more information on the topic.❤ Seek and you shall find ( I’m seeking) looking into everything available to make sure I don’t worship another false god. I know christianity is puluted with paganism but I am really convinced iesus was a true character but I am struggling with who he really was, because of all the lies in religious corporations. May we all find the truth and be able to handle the truth! I struggle with the sacrificing of animals and babies any kind of god needing blood 🩸 is odd and cold to me. I’m sorry but true God I don’t believe would require such a thing.😢

[janosch]

Fascinating!
Does anybody else have a problem playing the video (keeps getting stuck in a loading loop) or is this a problem on my end?

[juiceytee]

Guest’s audio isn’t good. Great content ❤

[mikekash]

Plato didn’t know how to read Ancient Hebrew or Aramaic the Old Testament got translated way after Plato’s death