I asked Google this:
- Thutmose the Overseer / Viceroy of Kush: This individual was a high-ranking government and military official. Historical records and stelae show he managed border regions and suppressed a Nubian rebellion during the 12th year of Akhenaten’s reign. [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
- Crown Prince Thutmose: This prince was Akhenaten’s older brother and the original heir to Amenhotep III. However, he died during his father’s reign and served as a High Priest of Ptah in Memphis, rather than as a frontier overseer. [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
Now, I’m watching this:
Robert said
dansanta2003 said
… But Jesus was not of the tribe of Judah; he was a Galilean, explicitly mentioned in the Bible numerous times. Besides the connection with king David (which, by the way, is avoided by these “scholars”, because historical Jesus doesn’t have any connections to David, David’s lineage as extinct centuries prior Jesus), there is nothing to point Jesus as from the tribe of Judah. …What is the evidence that the David’s lineage went extinct centuries prior to Jesus?
I just had this idea exchange with Bart on the Blog. I c&p-ed it here:
-
Right — it’s the patrilinear descent that would make it important — but there must have been tons who could claim that as well. And I agree with what I take to be the point of your question: I don’t think there’s any way a rural peasant in a small village of Galilee would have any idea what his genealogical line was past his great-grandfather….
—————————————————
I’m thinking they may have known more than just his great-grandfather, but that’s another subject.
It’s rather eye-opening to do a little searching and reading up on the content creator.
How much of what I read is true or made up is open to question.
I imagine it’s true he ** you do not have permission to see this link ** for his godfather. Of course, it is possible.
I think ** you do not have permission to see this link ** must be the case. If so, “Holy Cross Hospital was defrauded of $472,073.” You can’t make this stuff up.
The only thing I can go by is the content of his videos and his “Feel and Grow Rich” course, neither of which gives me much confidence.
Jesus said:
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
-Matthew 5,17-20 NRSV
If this isn’t Jewish, I’m not sure what is.
Robert said
What is the evidence that the David’s lineage went extinct centuries prior to Jesus?
Well, nothing concrete. I know that at least one writer said so, because I read him saying so (can’t remember the book nor the name, but I might find it on my shelf if you are deadly curious). However, look at the evidence of the other side. They have… nothing. Sure, a lot of people claimed davidic descendancy, but who wouldn’t? But they had no support for it and obviously they were claiming it for political power grabbing reasons. The genealogies are not recorded, there’s nothing in writing, they were lost, and 500 years passed since David up until Jesus. A real davidic descendant would’ve had his lineage recorded, won’t you think? Not just Jesus, but anybody. But there isn’t anybody. So why would someone assume that there are any real descendants with zero proof?
Robert said
There’s pretty good evidence that David’s line did not go extinct. The point of my question to Dan was merely to challenge him to see if he could provide any support for his claim.
Incorrect; there is zero evidence that David’s line did not go extinct. Precisely because of this I do believe it went extinct. If it weren’t, then there would be evidence. Remember: people claiming davidic lineage doesn’t make it true. For example, I myself I am a descendant of Napoleon Bonaparte, when he visited Romania, he went to a brothel and he shagged my great-great-grand mother and wouldn’t you know, the condom broke. In fact, people claim this exact story, being bastards of royalty, even today, is quite common. For power grabbing, politics, publicity etc. Historically, we had even kings that were common folk but then pretended to be ancient royalty as a justification for the throne occupying.
Helen Young said
Not just any serious scholar, but any thinking person, and/or any thinking and honest person.
Any person that you didn’t dismissed? Wow, what could’ve been the chances, all the people in your echo room have the same opinion like yours!
Helen Young said
BDEhrman September 8, 2026 at 6:05 pm – ReplyRight — it’s the patrilinear descent that would make it important — but there must have been tons who could claim that as well. And I agree with what I take to be the point of your question: I don’t think there’s any way a rural peasant in a small village of Galilee would have any idea what his genealogical line was past his great-grandfather….
First of all, Jesus being a rural peasant in small village of Galilee – it’s not a scientific statement, it’s an artificial construction by the likes of Bart Ehrman, in regard to the “historical Jesus”, which itself is an artificial shabby construction out of thin air, with zero history support. We have absolutely no historical information how Jesus was. He could’ve been rich; as soon as he started preaching, he could’ve been a millionaire like Joel Osteen types.
Second, a very important genealogy such of that of king David could be easily transmitted orally from father to son; while, indeed, even today, we have no clue who our great-grandfather is, if there was a very important ancestor in the family, we would’ve know of it. For example, the descendants for general Robert Lee. In Romania we have descendants of a very famous writer, from 19th century ago – they don’t know who they great-grandfather is, but they know that at one point, that famous man was their grandfather.
Bart’s lies are very easily to dismiss. If a historical Jesus ever existed, and if Jesus were the descendant of David, very probably Jesus would be aware of it, and He personally would’ve mentioned it in the gospels; but there is no mentioning by him! Sure, Matthew and Luke make genealogies and some people are calling him “son of David”, and what not, but Jesus never has a saying calling himself the son of David! Bart himself says Jesus never claims to be God, so this argument is exactly the same as Bart’s! Sure, me, personally, I do believe that the gospels’ writers were believing that Jesus was Messiah and he was God and in the same time he was the son of David, see Mark 12:35–37, Matthew 22:41–45, Luke 20:41–44, but I’m just showing you how shabby the construction “historical Jesus” is and how primitive Bart’s arguments are.
Helen Young said
Jesus said:
Matthew 5,17-20 NRSV
If this isn’t Jewish, I’m not sure what is.
Jesus talks about the 5 books of Moses, which is the Hebrew law, to his new class of priests, that are about to replace the jewish priest class. Jesus tells them that a) they have to keep the Hebrew law and b) perform as well or even more than the current jewish class that they are replacing. This is what it is.
As I said, you need to clearly differentiate between Hebrew and Jewish. Hebrews were some people who wrote the Mosaic Law; the Jews were some other people, 1000 years ago, who were holding this Law as sacred. In fact, there were groups of people that claim lineage from the original Hebrews, there is a Pauline letter literally named “to Hebrews” – this was not addressed to the Jews, but to the Hebrews. We’re talking about a millennium distance in time. In that time, nations and languages come and go. Was English the language of Americas? Were they Protestant Christians? How about in Europe? Can a modern German understand a german dialect of 1000 years ago? You wouldn’t understand your own English language.
Robert said
Serene said
Steefen said
@Serene
This guy says Jesus went to Petra.
Start at 8:47 when Jesus is 15.
Oh wow, nice find! I’ll ask my AI to sum up his reasoning haha
I know when I first hit upon my Petra hypothesis, I was like no! I want my jesus to be a poor! But you know, being a ‘poetic’ slave in jewish law for being the ‘poetic’ son of a handmaid while being free in other ANE law is a type of woah. i’m so grateful to better systemsThere’s no reason to think Jesus visited Petra. This is a silly video from a silly content creator.
1. Yes, this is a silly video from a silly content creator.
2. No, you haven’t given a reason as to why Jesus wouldn’t be possibly familiar with Petra:
A) Jesus continually escapes to “Beyond the Jordan” — it is now academic consensus that that term, “beyond the Jordan,” is the Transjordan under Nabataean hegemony. The Nabataean capital is Petra.
B) An escape to Petra is exactly what Joesephus links to John the Baptist protesting Herod’s second marriage in Josephus’ Antiquities of the Jews, 18.5 in great detail:
HEROD THE TETRARCH MAKES WAR WITH ARETAS, THE KING OF ARABIA, AND IS BEATEN BY HIM AS ALSO CONCERNING THE DEATH OF JOHN THE BAPTIST.
** you do not have permission to see this link **
Josephus there explains in detail how Herod Antipas, the king of Galilee in the Gospels, had a first wife before his second wife, Herodias (of the John on a Platter fame). And that this first wife finds out about the plans to divorce her for second wife Herodias and so escapes back to Arabia to her father — her father’s home is in Petra.
his wife having discovered the agreement he had made with Herodias, and having learned it before he had notice of her knowledge of the whole design, she desired him to send her to Macherus, which is a place in the borders of the dominions of Aretas and Herod, without informing him of any of her intentions.Accordingly Herod sent her thither, as thinking his wife had not perceived any thing; now she had sent a good while before to Macherus, which was subject to her father and so all things necessary for her journey were made ready for her by the general of Aretas’s army; and by that means she soon came into Arabia, under the conduct of the several generals, who carried her from one to another successively; and she soon came to her father, and told him of Herod’s intentions.So Aretas made this the first occasion of his enmity between him and Herod, who had also some quarrel with him about their limits at the country of Gamalitis. So they raised armies on both sides, and prepared for war, and sent their generals to fight instead of themselves; and when they had joined battle, all Herod’s army was destroyed…
This is the breaking of a marital alliance. Have you not seen your Game of Thrones. The war is won by 36 AD, meaning that the planning for the war bookends two events:
• it starts right before John the Baptist protesting the new marriage, so right before Jesus’ mission start
• and it ends 1-3 years after the crucifixion using the Cambridge dating, which uses the lunar eclipse, of 4/3/33.
Meaning that this war buildup exactly happens during Jesus’ mission.
The Gospels are named after a typical war announcement — Euangelion.
The Gospels should be treated just like scholars already treat Qumran sectarian scrolls where scholars treat The Righteous Teacher and the Wicked Priest as code for two historical figures in a buildup for a war/at war — likely Hyrcanus vs Aristobulus.
Even if it weren’t Hyrcanus 1 but Hyrcanus 2, scholars are still in agreement that the Scribes are encoding proper names with role names for the reason of political sensitivity in a Jewish civil conflict/war.
Josephus wrote about this Hyrcanus vs Aristobolus conflict. He wrote that Aretas III, the Aretas right before Aretas IV of the New Testament,
united the Arabians and the Jews
and goes into great detail discussing how Aretas was joined by the more-peaceful faction of Jews that were pro-Hyrcanus against the rougher faction that were pro-Aristobulus, and that this coalition besieged the Second Temple where Aristobulus had ensconced.
And guess what? Josephus introduces Herodias Head On a Platter by saying that she’s the daughter of Aristobulus 👆. Ie the Qumran Essenes are against her lineage.
Many scholars as well as the Mandaean religion associates John the Baptist with the Essenes, though not the Qumran fortification. Ancient historians gave multiple locations for the Essenes; locations that had different functions.
Jesus claims Davidic lineage, (which most/nearly all ethnic Jews would have by that time but there had been significant conversion in the Hasmonian and Herodian periods.) King David’s administration was the most loudly multi-cultural of the Bible, with maybe the exception of his son Solomon — David’s 30 Mighty Ones under his wartime coalition have tons of Gentile tribes listed, and the theme that unites the Kingdom of Judah, and these Gentiles is, that it’s a Transjordan roll call.
People are so dumb that they take Aretas seeking Paul as Aretas ‘being against the Jesus movement’ when in Acts and in Paul’s own texts, Paul clearly and indisputably said that it was Paul that was against the Jesus movement originally, making Aretas de facto pro the Jesus movement (as if Nabataeans, famous gentle folk that famously supported the peaceful underdogs in the Levant, including peaceful Jewish factions, wasn’t already written about doing so by multiple ancient historians including First Century Josephus and Strabo.
Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod’s army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist
Read: Some of the Jews thought Aretas was on God’s side. The Jews that supported Herod did not think Aretas was on God’s side.
Read: Jews that supported John the Baptist also supported Aretas.
So, you are not supposed to throw your pearls before swine, ie explain wisdom literature to the dumb. They are not supposed to learn how encoding works. The knowledge is gated to those with the appropriate high EQ and high IQ and the correct in-group cultural references to make sense of it.
I have an ancestor who signed the American Declaration of Independence, and another who came over on the Mayflower, (he wasn’t a Puritain however). – – – So that makes me right all the time, no matter what. Right? 🙂
The terms Israeli, Jew, and Hebrew overlap and converge in interesting ways. I’m not sure if I understand it all.
Jesus was definitely called an Israelite. But I’m not sure if that’s in the bible or when the designation was first recorded.
Robert said
John the Baptist was killed by Herod Antipas, not Aretas IV
Wow! That was a brilliant reading of what I wrote, Robert.
Robert said
I have an ancestor, a French noble who had his head chopped off by Cardinal Richelieu, and his family claimed to be descended from Clovis, the first king of the Franks, whom Dan Brown claimed was descended from Jesus and Mary Magdalene. So my claim certainly Trump’s yours.
Serene ** you do not have permission to see this link **
Helen said
I have an ancestor who signed the American Declaration of Independence, and another who came over on the Mayflower, (he wasn’t a Puritain however). – – – So that makes me right all the time, no matter what. Right? 🙂
Serene says
🙂 right. Those of us with ancestors that are Mayflower descendants tend to be impressively educated, whether academically or independently.
After finishing the video in Comment 121, one thing I wanted to ask:
The important distinction
Thutmose III was primarily an empire-builder.
After the death of Hatshepsut, Thutmose III conducted a series of campaigns into the Levant. His first major campaign culminated in the Battle of Megiddo, after which Egypt consolidated control over much of Canaan. He subsequently campaigned repeatedly in Syria and against Mitanni.
His military achievement wasn’t simply winning one famous battle. It was the systematic creation and maintenance of an Egyptian imperial system extending deep into the Levant and south into Nubia.
Ramesses II was primarily an imperial consolidator and monumental king.
Ramesses inherited a powerful but somewhat contested northern empire. His confrontation with the Hittites culminated in the Battle of Kadesh. The battle itself was not the straightforward Egyptian victory that Ramesses’ propaganda suggests; the eventual Egyptian-Hittite peace treaty was the more important diplomatic achievement.
Ramesses then spent decades constructing an extraordinary number of monuments—Abu Simbel, the Ramesseum, additions at Karnak and Luxor, and others—and his extraordinarily long reign helped make his name synonymous with pharaonic greatness.
So who was the greater pharaoh?
I’d divide it this way:
Military commander: 🏆 Thutmose III
Territorial expansion: 🏆 Thutmose III
Imperial administration: 🏆 Thutmose III
Monumental building: 🏆 Ramesses II
Length of reign: 🏆 Ramesses II
Diplomacy: 🏆 Ramesses II, particularly the Hittite treaty
Long-term popular fame: 🏆 Ramesses II
But there is an interesting historical irony: Ramesses II’s title “the Great” is largely a product of his own monumental and propagandistic self-presentation and his extraordinary afterlife in Egyptian memory. Thutmose III’s actual record as a military strategist and empire-builder is arguably more impressive.
Robert said
No, it could sometimes refer to Nabatean kingdom (also referred to as Arabia, or it could refer to Jewish Perea, or it could refer to the Dekapolis
Wait, you mean it was a multi-cultural identity group?
Thanks for correcting me there. Jesus escapes to the multi-cultural Transjordan John 10:39-40
Then they tried to arrest him again, but he escaped from their hands. Then Jesus went back across the Jordan to the place where John had been baptizing in the early days.
“Then they tried to arrest him, but he escaped” — what a rebel, this guy.
The multi-cultural Transjordanites came from both sides to get dipped in the JORDAN.
I wonder what the TRANSJORDANITES had in common?
Could it be the JORDAN?
David Rohl presented:
Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV was one of the most powerful and well-documented pharaohs of Egypt’s 13th Dynasty during the Second Intermediate Period, reigning for approximately 10 years around 1740–1730 BC.
or was Hatshepsut the step-parent?
There is no historical evidence that a Hebrew/Israelite exodus from Egypt occurred during either Hatshepsut’s or Thutmose III’s reign. The dating becomes speculative once we try to connect the biblical Exodus to specific pharaohs.
If you’re asking about the traditional historical reconstruction, however, Hatshepsut and Thutmose III are important because they fall within the period often proposed for an Exodus:
- Hatshepsut: c. 1479–1458 BCE
- Thutmose III: c. 1479–1425 BCE
- Amenhotep II: c. 1427–1401 BCE
Could the Exodus have occurred under Thutmose III?
Some older theories have proposed Thutmose III as the pharaoh of the oppression/exodus, but there are serious chronological problems.
The biblical chronology of 1 Kings 6:1 places the Exodus about 480 years before Solomon’s fourth year, which would put it roughly in the 15th century BCE, around 1450 BCE. That happens to fall near the end of Thutmose III’s reign.
So, purely from that biblical chronological calculation:
Thutmose III is a plausible candidate for an Exodus around 1450 BCE.
But the archaeological and Egyptian evidence does not establish that an Israelite population left Egypt at that time.
And Hatshepsut?
Hatshepsut is even more interesting in some speculative theories because her reign overlaps the beginning of Thutmose III’s independent rule.
There have been attempts to identify Hatshepsut with the “Pharaoh’s daughter” who rescued Moses, but this is not established historically. Likewise, attempts to identify Moses with an Egyptian official named Thutmose are speculative.
The important point is that Hatshepsut’s reign and the early part of Thutmose III’s reign are not supported by Egyptian records as an Exodus period.
One major chronological problem
There is another biblical date that points in a completely different direction.
Exodus 1:11 says the Israelites built the store-cities Pithom and Rameses. If “Rameses” refers to Pi-Ramesses, the major royal city associated with Ramesses II, that would favor a 13th-century BCE setting—roughly the Ramesside period rather than Hatshepsut/Thutmose III.
That is why historians commonly distinguish:
15th-century Exodus
→ based primarily on the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1
versus
13th-century Exodus
→ based on the Ramesses/Pi-Ramesses reference and broader archaeological chronology.
And neither dating has produced archaeological evidence for the biblical Exodus as narrated.
So if you’re asking me to choose between Hatshepsut and Thutmose III as the possible pharaoh during whose reign Hebrews left Egypt, Thutmose III fits the 15th-century biblical chronology better—but there is no evidence that the Exodus actually happened under him.
Ok now i get. Elijah is the most famous Transjordanite.
Elijah ascends to miraculous heaven and then returns from miraculous heaven dressed as an Arab
Elijah in the Guise of an Arab. Elijah appeared to many while they were awake, and this in various ways. He often elected to appear in the guise of an Arab
** you do not have permission to see this link **
He even gives charity like the Arabs do 🤔
I wonder what Jesus would say about Elijah dressing as an Arab after his ascent to miraculous heaven?
“His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns…” [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
- The original meaning: In antiquity, a diadema was not a rigid, metal crown with spikes (which was a stephanos). Instead, it was a royal silk or linen band wrapped around a king’s turban or tiara. It specifically symbolized imperial sovereignty and absolute dominion.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)
With all the wives and concubines that David and Solomon both had, who wasn’t descended from the line of David?
Half of Israel, and a few outsiders as well, must have been descended from David in one way or another.
How far-fetched is it that Jesus could have been descended from David if that was what was required or what people needed to believe?