Відео

There is clearly more than one view of David in the Book of Samuel. There's praise and glorification, and there's criticism. In the past, bible scholars tried to explain the two or more views by saying it was impossible to shut down the criticism when so many people knew about it: either at Solomon's court (when scholars still believed in Solomon's wealth), or after Northerners fled to Judah not to be exiled by Assyrians. Why would Judahites in Babylonian exile tell a story with so many different views, instead of settling on critique or on glorification, like the Chronicler?

Do you know who the historical Uriah the Hittite was? I’m looking to find the true history of the man or at least as accurate as humanly possible. I was thinking that Solomon probably visited the grave of Uriah, the Hittite, and somehow that information will not be lost because he is related to Uriah the Hittite by his brother, who died the son of David and Bathsheba

Love you all so thy love you 😚

Why the need for that disturbing "soundtrack"?

ua-cam.com/channels/bHQ84DcJ_mZG6W4L1S1b2g.htmlabout

Ho letto solo ora il libro, molto interessante.

I can’t find this book anywhere

Español por favor.

Fantastic! Made me want to buy this book right away and read it with my 10 year old son.

Tq

Is this the transvestite one??

Not much to this interview

he is very well spoken

A nice relaxed demeanor considering his hell-raising dad

Hem was a drunken major league ahole.

Letter writing is a lost art.

Have read two books of his " Old man and the sea" the other " Death in afternoon ".

Hemingway was all men/ And none/ A man of self-doubt and lies/ A man of strength and fears/ A man of lustful eyes/ And many men through the years/ And all were woven in prose/ Words of love and death/ Words to kill a heart/ Lovers to meet and rest/ Lovers to die and part/ And death in a bull ring/ And blood in the sand/ Hemingway was many a man/

I thought got loved everyone tho🤔

I think Hemingway turned completely against this particular son of his later in his life. May have been as his mental problems magnified, but I think he had little contact with this son.

Хемингуэй. К 120-летию. Испытание славой.ua-cam.com/video/K9eu0s5Q-9I/v-deo.html

Professional

Great video. Couldn't agree more! This is said as a student who struggled as a child and as a current teacher.

This guy is deceiving you read your Bible google Cain and Abel. Those people he should are Lucifer's flock.

This is the same guy that claims that He found an olderversion of the story when supposedly Barack kills Sisera instead of Jael ,then He says that through out the book of judges that there were stories that were so called "added" to the book of Judges to fit the writer's projects. Well all of that is not true this guy is lying through His teeth, He just doesn't like the fact that our Heavenly Father used women to accomplish Has will. And furthermore this guy must be a meninist or else He would not be lying about the true biblical events of the book of Judges, the website that you will find His lies about the book of Judges in Thetorah.com

Sign me up. Great idea. Great way to know someone

Peheaʻoe e hana ai i kēia kiʻiʻoniʻoni

If you is interested in electronics the greatest results that i've had was with the Gregs Electro Blog (just google it) without a doubt the most incredible info that I have ever tried.

Thanks, I agree that Chronicles, at the end of the Hebrew canonical ordering, thus ends OT Scripture with Israel awaiting a son of David to restore the unity of northern (Samaritans) with southern (Judaeans) Israel. And we see this pan-Israelite ideology of the Chronicler manifesting in the fulfillments depicted in Luke-Acts and John, which show the work of Jesus resulting in unity of all Israel (both Judaeans and Samaritans) before Israel incorporates the nations (according to the messianic reunification paradigm seen throughout the prophets).

you said "God told him to work the fields" then "the moral is God wanted him to not work the fields."

Vol 1? how many volumes? which years?

Thanks Yoram. (I enjoyed your book)

wow.....what a zionist BS!!

Biggest lie.

Great book, easy to read and very well explained. While I don't agree with everything he says, the patterns in the biblical narrative that Hazony draws out make sense. If you read the Bible purely philosophically in the way that Hazony pushes (although I don't think he really thinks this), you miss a lot of the surface narrative, however if you take the Bible as multi-layered, then Hazony's ideas not only make sense, but are compelling. He offers a fresh way of reading passages that draws out deeper meaning. I personally think that a lot of what he says is really interesting. I particularly like the way that he doesn't press his own views, but simply looks at a set of passages, draws links between them, and offers explanations of what they mean when viewed together. I recommend you buy his book, even if you reject everything he says, it'll make you fall in love with scripture again.

Fantastic!

Is she reading?

wouldn't surprise me if it didn't come with a GTX, didn't have a price under $400, and still couldn't play even a flash game like mardek chapter 3 without tanking below 13 FPS. Especially when people are growing a mindset to build high performance PC's which cost under $400 or even dip into the 300's, and even if it's cheap it won't justify it's cheapness if performance bombs

Like all tablets / laptops this must lag like fucking hell on any PC game that requires optimal performance, right? I.E. Deus Ex: HR? Or Skyrim?

Thank you for this presentation - very informative and thoughtful.

First, it's not even proved that what's written in the bible is true. It's been rather proved that it's not true.

It's a lot of nonsense in this video. One can suffer brain damage if it listens too much of these talks. I think it's not true that god of the bible want people to be independent (do things the way they want, make their own choices) and is evidence for that in the bible.

Can absolute simultaneity be restored without abandoning Einstein's 1905 false constant-speed-of-light postulate? Yes - Einsteinians know no limits. Julian Barbour and Lee Smolin have found it profitable to trade the relativity of time for a relativity of size: www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/cross_fac/ias/earlycareer/events/time/programme/julian_barbour.pdf Aspects of Time, Julian Barbour, Warwick, August 24th 2011: "Was Spacetime Glorious Historical Accident? Time will not be fused with space but emerge from the timeless shape dynamics of space. Absolute simultaneity restored!" www.leif.org/EOS/PT-Lee-Smolin-2014.pdf Lee Smolin: "What, then, is one to make of the relativity of simultaneity in special and general relativity? Doesn't the experimental success of relativity imply that time's passage is a chimera, so that all that is real is the whole history of the universe laid out at once? That point of view, the block-universe perspective, led Albert Einstein to declare in a letter to the family of his friend Michele Besso that the "distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion." A reformulation of general relativity called shape dynamics resolves the quandary posed in the previous paragraph. The theory trades in the relativity of time for a relativity of size but does not give up any of the experimental successes of special and general relativity." www.amazon.com/The-Singular-Universe-Reality-Time/dp/1107074061 The Singular Universe and the Reality of Time, Roberto Mangabeira Unger, Harvard Law School, Massachusetts, Lee Smolin, Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, Canada, pp. 386-387: "In general relativity two clocks traveling different paths through spacetime will not stay synchronized. But their sizes will be preserved... (...) But the amazing thing is you can get to general relativity by trading the relativity of time of that theory for a relativity of spacial scale... (...) The resulting theory is called shape dynamics. (...) This means that there is now a physical meaning to the simultaneity of distant events."

Lee Smolin and Roberto Unger may liberate mankind from Einstein's "dead wrong" concept of time (which is a deductive consequence of Einstein's 1905 false constant-speed-of-light postulate) and restore the Newtonian universal time: www.fqxi.org/community/articles/display/148 "Many physicists argue that time is an illusion. Lee Smolin begs to differ. (...) Smolin wishes to hold on to the reality of time. But to do so, he must overcome a major hurdle: General and special relativity seem to imply the opposite. In the classical Newtonian view, physics operated according to the ticking of an invisible universal clock. But Einstein threw out that master clock when, in his theory of special relativity, he argued that no two events are truly simultaneous unless they are causally related. If simultaneity - the notion of "now" - is relative, the universal clock must be a fiction, and time itself a proxy for the movement and change of objects in the universe. Time is literally written out of the equation. Although he has spent much of his career exploring the facets of a "timeless" universe, Smolin has become convinced that this is "deeply wrong," he says. He now believes that time is more than just a useful approximation, that it is as real as our guts tell us it is - more real, in fact, than space itself. The notion of a "real and global time" is the starting hypothesis for Smolin's new work, which he will undertake this year with two graduate students supported by a $47,500 grant from FQXi." www.guardian.co.uk/books/2013/jun/10/time-reborn-farewell-reality-review "And by making the clock's tick relative - what happens simultaneously for one observer might seem sequential to another - Einstein's theory of special relativity not only destroyed any notion of absolute time but made time equivalent to a dimension in space: the future is already out there waiting for us; we just can't see it until we get there. This view is a logical and metaphysical dead end, says Smolin." www.amazon.com/Time-Reborn-Crisis-Physics-Universe/dp/0547511728 "Was Einstein wrong? At least in his understanding of time, Smolin argues, the great theorist of relativity was dead wrong. What is worse, by firmly enshrining his error in scientific orthodoxy, Einstein trapped his successors in insoluble dilemmas..." www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/philosopherszone/4985740 "But our everyday intuitive sense - the Newtonian realist position - still has backers, scientific and philosophical. Enter the philosopher-physicist team of Roberto Unger and Lee Smolin. (...) Along with Lee Smolin, Unger is concentrating on a book with the draft title, The Singular Universe and the Reality of Time. They hope to lob it into the debate sometime next year..."

Sound doesn't seem to be working throughout middle section

Sorry Patrick, you've got a little mixed up there. Oxford is the greater of the two universities by far.

Recently purchased this book on Kindle after reading several of Yoram Hazony's essays. Looking forward to studying it! (Great "trailer", by the way!)

Absolutely meaningless. It's probably fun doing this, but it's still nonsense.

This guy doesn't know the bible at all. The reason why God chose Abel Over Cain is because Abel gave the best of his flock while Cain gave his worst sacrifice. It had nothing to do with occupation. Duh

Here's a suggestion for understanding why God approved of Abel's sacrifice and despised Cain's. Genesis clearly says that Abel offered the "firstlings" and "fat portions" of his flock, while it says Cain offered "fruits of the earth" only. I suggest that the proper contrast is located not in the matter but in the *quality* of the offerings, and hence, the intent of the offerers.