Gad Barnea

uh people uh in in the in the region and um and they said okay we're going to apply this approach there the the the greeks are applying this to their own corpus we're going to apply it to our corpus and so they were able to to get uh texts from various sources and apply these methodologies and compose new texts in many cases as well and to compose the glue between different texts

uh people uh in in the in the region and um and they said okay we're going to apply this approach there the the the greeks are applying this to their own corpus we're going to apply it to our corpus and so they were able to to get uh texts from various sources and apply these methodologies and compose new texts in many cases as well and to compose the glue between different texts

To put them together and also imagine, in the case of the Torah specifically, imagine all kinds of answers to the Greek view that we mentioned earlier about the leprosy and all of these other things that they were concerned with.

To put them together and also imagine, in the case of the Torah specifically, imagine all kinds of answers to the Greek view that we mentioned earlier about the leprosy and all of these other things that they were concerned with.

To put them together and also imagine, in the case of the Torah specifically, imagine all kinds of answers to the Greek view that we mentioned earlier about the leprosy and all of these other things that they were concerned with.

And so this enterprise that happened – started in the third century before the common era to collect, edit, redact, compose, harmonize and really kind of put together a more authoritative version of –

And so this enterprise that happened – started in the third century before the common era to collect, edit, redact, compose, harmonize and really kind of put together a more authoritative version of –

And so this enterprise that happened – started in the third century before the common era to collect, edit, redact, compose, harmonize and really kind of put together a more authoritative version of –

of the uh of the authoritative corpus uh yeah of history theology ideology and all of that i mean they didn't think of history the way we think of history today of course that's not a that wasn't a concern at that at that time they really weren't concerned about precise history really No, no. I mean, even Herodotus, that's not history the way we do today.

of the uh of the authoritative corpus uh yeah of history theology ideology and all of that i mean they didn't think of history the way we think of history today of course that's not a that wasn't a concern at that at that time they really weren't concerned about precise history really No, no. I mean, even Herodotus, that's not history the way we do today.

of the uh of the authoritative corpus uh yeah of history theology ideology and all of that i mean they didn't think of history the way we think of history today of course that's not a that wasn't a concern at that at that time they really weren't concerned about precise history really No, no. I mean, even Herodotus, that's not history the way we do today.

I mean, he basically walks around, asks people about certain elements of their culture and writes it down, often through a translator. So it's often even lost in translation. And so he writes it down and just goes with it. And he doesn't necessarily, sometimes he has critical, sometimes he's more reserved, sometimes he's just, you know, runs with whatever he's been told.

I mean, he basically walks around, asks people about certain elements of their culture and writes it down, often through a translator. So it's often even lost in translation. And so he writes it down and just goes with it. And he doesn't necessarily, sometimes he has critical, sometimes he's more reserved, sometimes he's just, you know, runs with whatever he's been told.

I mean, he basically walks around, asks people about certain elements of their culture and writes it down, often through a translator. So it's often even lost in translation. And so he writes it down and just goes with it. And he doesn't necessarily, sometimes he has critical, sometimes he's more reserved, sometimes he's just, you know, runs with whatever he's been told.

So even Herodotus is not really, he's considered to be the father of history. To Cadetus, who came after him, called him the father of lies because of so many inconsistencies that he has in Herodotus. But Herodotus is certainly an important source, and he is kind of pseudo-historical in many ways. We certainly have to use him as a source, but always with a grain of salt in our research.

So even Herodotus is not really, he's considered to be the father of history. To Cadetus, who came after him, called him the father of lies because of so many inconsistencies that he has in Herodotus. But Herodotus is certainly an important source, and he is kind of pseudo-historical in many ways. We certainly have to use him as a source, but always with a grain of salt in our research.

So even Herodotus is not really, he's considered to be the father of history. To Cadetus, who came after him, called him the father of lies because of so many inconsistencies that he has in Herodotus. But Herodotus is certainly an important source, and he is kind of pseudo-historical in many ways. We certainly have to use him as a source, but always with a grain of salt in our research.

But again, in antiquity, history wasn't really a science per se. It was people writing things that they've heard, sometimes asking questions, sometimes doubting. But it wasn't really a main concern. In the case of the Bible, it was more about identity. It was about building identity. about establishing their own kind of cocoon, ideological cocoon, in parallel to the Greek one.

But again, in antiquity, history wasn't really a science per se. It was people writing things that they've heard, sometimes asking questions, sometimes doubting. But it wasn't really a main concern. In the case of the Bible, it was more about identity. It was about building identity. about establishing their own kind of cocoon, ideological cocoon, in parallel to the Greek one.

But again, in antiquity, history wasn't really a science per se. It was people writing things that they've heard, sometimes asking questions, sometimes doubting. But it wasn't really a main concern. In the case of the Bible, it was more about identity. It was about building identity. about establishing their own kind of cocoon, ideological cocoon, in parallel to the Greek one.