Today I listened to Bart’s podcast on Morton Smith and the Secret Gospel of Mark, and I couldn’t help but think about Dr. Ammon Hill and his take on the gospels from the perspective of neglected classical Greek medical texts.
Is anyone here familiar with Hill? If you set aside his rather creepy and cocky demeanor, he has an interesting (sensationalist?) take on the historical Jesus, one that I am unqualified to assess. If I recall correctly, he thinks certain parts of the gospels are better understood when read in light of ancient cultic drug and prostitution/pedophilic practices.
Should Hill’s perspective be taken seriously? Could it have some bearing on the Secret Gospel of Mark (as in gnosis via drugs/intercourse)? Do you think Bart would have Hill on as a guest for something a little wilder than the norm?
For reference:
1. Ancient Language Expert: Jesus Christ Used Children as Drugs | Ammon Hillman – ( ** you do not have permission to see this link ** )
2. Was A Secret Gospel of Mark Discovered? – ( ** you do not have permission to see this link ** )
Thanks.
Robert, thanks for the welcome!
Why do you think Bart would dismiss Hill? Making claims outside his domain of classical medical texts? Lack of credentials? Particular arguments? Personality?
I’m not saying Bart should take him seriously. Rather I’m looking to understand whether or not Hill’s claims about what he reads in medical texts could have any bearing on the gospels or the earliest Christian practices. The Secret Gospel of Mark seems to raise questions that rhyme with Hill’s work.
One thing Hill brings up repeatedly is his opinion that there is too much siloing among classicists and Bible scholars and that, at least in this area (neglected medical texts), Bible scholars are missing out on some critical cultural context because of it (healers, use of drugs, cultic ritual). Do you think there may be some truth to that claim?
Welcome!
It’s Ammon Hillman.
Surely he doesn’t imagine he thought up the idea that the early Christians were stoners. An oldie but goodie from 1970 –
** you do not have permission to see this link ** by John M Allegro.
I heard of Hillman in another context. He thinks that the Septuagint is the original and the Hebrew scriptures are a translation from the Greek. Yep, no foolin’.
“It’s Ammon Hillman.” – Stephen
Brainfart! Yes, thanks.
“Surely he doesn’t imagine he thought up the idea…”
Not my impression at all. His focus is translating obscure pharmacological texts, something that may provide him interesting insight, or unfortunate bias, when it comes to the gospels. Which is why I’m bringing it up here.
“He thinks that the Septuagint is the original and the Hebrew scriptures are a translation *from* the Greek.”
I noticed that. He had his linguistic arguments, but not particularly relevant to his claims about the gospels except maybe in regard to his overall judgment.
I wasn’t really sure anyone here would be familiar with Hillman as he’s a bit off the beaten path, but hopefully he’ll be an interesting perspective to hash out.
One thing Hill [sic] brings up repeatedly is his opinion that there is too much siloing among classicists and Bible scholars…
Well that at least is a legitimate point, one also brought up by Robyn Faith Walsh in her writings, but she doesn’t use it as an excuse to support wacky fringe theories. If you come out with the one about the Hebrew scriptures being a translation from the Septuagint at an SBL conference you’re going to get laughed at.
“I’d have to see his claims fleshed out more to begin to assess their relevance.” – Robert
His more interesting claims are regarding the gospels. In the interview he focuses on a few terms with potentially different meanings.
1. Christos – not simply a messianic “anointed one,” but multiple meanings including applications of medicine from healers and of drugs in rituals (and a particular drug meant to bring “death” and “resurrection”).
2. Leistes – thief, rebel, trafficker (Jesus with young male followers accused of being a trafficker?).
This article summarizes the ideas presented in the earlier video fairly well.
Ammon Hillman is Unstoppable – ( ** you do not have permission to see this link ** )
I have had many opportunities to catch Hillman in some of his interviews or online discussions. He comes from a classics background and not many of them have an understanding of the ancient Greek with relation to the OT and NT. Where Hillman comes in is the fact that he does bring his classical views into the NT. He has an interesting book that you can get online for free and has talks with another youtuber who Bart has also had conversations with on YouTube. His name is Gnostic Informant. Bart is not on any discussions with all 3 of them present, but Gnostic Informant has discussions with both in separate videos. I highly suggest listening or watching them. Bart stays on a narrow historical path that puts everything in perspective. Hillman throws a curveball into all of this because his interpretations of many of the original Greek NT has words or translations that have other meanings in the Ancient Greek culture. He often refers to the naked boy wearing nothing but a linen in Marks gospel. The word used for linen in Greek was a bandage that was often wrapped with medicine to heal a wound. He is relating the story in Marks gospel at the garden when Jesus is arrested at which Hillman claims in the middle of the night with a young boy in the garden wearing nothing but a linen. He insists that Jesus is performing sexual acts with the boy during the baptism in which Hillman describes is part of an ancient ritual that involves things I don’t feel comfortable repeating on here. He grabs this claim as reassurance from the secret gospel of Mark in which this idea is thrown around about Jesus spending the night with the young boy. There is also question that it is indeed a young boy, but according to Hillman there is no Greek word for teenager in which he insists most of if not all of Jesus followers early on (disciples) were all young boys between the ages of 13-16. It was common for a Rabbi to take on a following of young men (teenagers) as in the Jewissh religion you become a young man around the age of 13 I believe. Hillman also insists that it was common during the time of Jesus for men to take on young boys to “teach them to become a man” by also in favor exchanging sexual acts with the older man. It was also something that happened in Roman culture, but Hillman brings more context from a classicist standpoint. I am not sure how much really ties in if at all, but we do know early denominations of Christianity did have some questionable rituals early on that Hillman can be possibly getting his evidence or theory on Christianity as a whole. I would love to hear a conversation with him and Bart, but I know Hillman can be a different kind of conversation that many respected scholars simply will ignore. It is worth having still in my opinion because there is so much that we could learn from these types of conversations. It is not like there wasn’t any questionable Christian beliefs throughout its history. I am curious to hear people’s thoughts on Hillman and why they think it’s just not worth paying attention to or if they find the conversation interesting.
I came into wanting to learn more about Christianity at a time about 6 months ago when a friend of mine became a born-again Christian. Everything about what they were saying lead me to Bart and I have listened to all of the podcast, read almost all the books, heard all of his online content, and listened to all of his lectures on Audible (which are free I believe) countless hours in order to get a better understanding of it all. I couldn’t have gotten a better guide honestly and it followed with people like gnostic and hillman as well as others. I didn’t realize the divide within all the denominations that I have debates with for simply understanding more. Bart makes it clear for me without even telling you what to think which has been great and helped me when I have conversations with people deep in the faith, but people like Hillman are fun conversations to have because it is difficult to prove him wrong completely. There’s much more to him and what he’s said online in many different interviews/videos. Interested in having conversations further about what he has to stay.
Kgrimm7, welcome.
I only heard of Hillman because of his claim that the texts of the Hebrew scriptures were translated from the Greek. I don’t deny Hillman’s credentials but that is fringe!
I’m afraid by his claims Hillman is providing an example of what’s called “academic on holiday”, a euphemism for speaking outside your speciality.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert