Jesus Before the Gospels | Dr. Bart D. Ehrman
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 พ.ค. 2024
- ➡📚Get his book! amzn.to/3Uqqk9o
📌Thumbnail by James G. Riley, TELENIKON on TH-cam.
The bestselling author of Misquoting Jesus, one of the most renowned and controversial Bible scholars in the world today examines oral tradition and its role in shaping the stories about Jesus we encounter in the New Testament-and ultimately in our understanding of Christianity.
Throughout much of human history, our most important stories were passed down orally-including the stories about Jesus before they became written down in the Gospels. In this fascinating and deeply researched work, leading Bible scholar Bart D. Erhman investigates the role oral history has played in the New Testament-how the telling of these stories not only spread Jesus’ message but helped shape it.
A master explainer of Christian history, texts, and traditions, Ehrman draws on a range of disciplines, including psychology and anthropology, to examine the role of memory in the creation of the Gospels. Explaining how oral tradition evolves based on the latest scientific research, he demonstrates how the act of telling and retelling impacts the story, the storyteller, and the listener-crucial insights that challenge our typical historical understanding of the silent period between when Jesus lived and died and when his stories began to be written down.
As he did in his previous books on religious scholarship, debates on New Testament authorship, and the existence of Jesus of Nazareth, Ehrman combines his deep knowledge and meticulous scholarship in a compelling and eye-opening narrative that will change the way we read and think about these sacred texts.
👉Sign up for Dr. Bart D. Ehrman's course on The Genius of the Gospel Of Matthew - What Scholars Say About the First Gospel!
historyvalley--ehrman.thrivec...
👉Sign up and join Dr. Jodi Magness on an enthralling archaeological journey through Jesus' world!
historyvalley--ehrman.thrivec...
👉Sign up for Dr. Bart D. Ehrman's course on the scribal corruption of scripture!
historyvalley--ehrman.thrivec...
👉Sign up for Dr. James D. Tabors course on Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls!
historyvalley--pursuit4knowle...
👉Sign up for Dr. Robyn Faith Walsh's course on Paul The Apostle!
historyvalley--pursuit4knowle...
👉Sign up for Dr. Kipp Davis's course on the Real Israelite Religions!
historyvalley--pursuit4knowle...
👉Sign up for Dr. James D. Tabors course on the Gospel of Mark!
historyvalley--pursuit4knowle...
👉Sign up for Dr. Dennis MacDonald's course on the Gospels and Greek Poetry!
historyvalley--pursuit4knowle...
👉Sign up for Dr. M. David Litwa's course on Mystery Cults!
historyvalley--pursuit4knowle...
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @history-valley
Twitter: @Jacob56723278
📧Email: jacobberman553@gmail.com
┃🔴www.patreon.com/HistoryValley...
✅PayPal Link www.paypal.com/paypalme/Jacob...
✅Centurions For Paul Facebook Group / 957292477950756
✅History Valley Facebook group / 639724514390191
🌐Historical Jesus, higher criticism and Second Temple Judaism / 1038530526485151
Would you like a sophisticated yet simple apparatus to be able to easily Stream from your Desktop, Laptop or iPhone? Look no further, Streamyard is easy to use and you can stream to several platforms all at once!
Check out StreamYard: streamyard.com/pal/d/48025327...
👉Sign up for Dr. Bart D. Ehrman's course on The Genius of the Gospel Of Matthew - What Scholars Say About the First Gospel!
historyvalley--ehrman.thrivecart.com/matthew/
Why
I signed up but haven’t gotten the thrive cart text.
religion = hate
It’s very evident to me that Christianism was a power tool for Paul. His rhetoric is oddly insidious and manipulative. He was a very educated and smart man taking advantage of less educated and even illiterate people. Always remembering others how he’s so benevolent for sharing his gospel. And how he saved them and let them meet god. And the next moment he’s checking on you. Reminding you of how he’s the only guardian of truth, reminding you of how much you need him, of how much you depend on him, reminding you of his divine authority, and how he’s so benevolent for not using it, calls you brother, says he’s a children just like you, but the next line he says stuff like I’m like your mother, I’m like your father, disobeying what I tell you is disobeying god himself.
It’s extremely evident what he’s doing.
He was a tool of the Roman Emperor.
What is there to say but that he was Christian? It is baked in right from the start.
Well. . . Maybe. Personally I don't find Paul very interesting, but that's just my own historical interests and biases speaking.
The problem with what you are saying is that Christianity was not an accepted religion in the Roman Empire at the time he was writing. So talking about power-seeking in an effectively underground religion is a little tricky.
It feels like an alcoholic parent
Paul witnessed the attraction of both Judaism and the Jewish sect lead by Jesus , but since both were closed minded to non Israelites ( it was a difficult religion and tribe/club to enter to ) Paul realized this so he decided to open the cates of following Jesus to non Jews , without Paul Christianity as an independent religion would not exist it would be and remain a Jewish sect that would vanish and indeed it vanished , while Jesus was a nativist Jew and a Jewish rabbi , Paul on the other hand was globalist saying there is neither Jew nor Greek, for ye are all one in Christ Jesus by contrast Jesus looked down on non Israelites calling them dogs and bigs, and he never side There is neither Jew nor Greek . the founder of Protestant Christianity considered Christians to be dogs of Jews because this is what Jesus side and what Jesus believed in as a Jewish man and the Jewish culture of that time believed that non Israelites are dogs and bigs .
A tour-de-force of biblical exposition by Dr Ehrman, even if I dont agree with everything he says. Thank you.
Yup. I may not agree with his conclusions but he is a great scholar and seems like a kind soul. I hope he comes back to Christ. A beautiful soul.
He's smart yet so stupid and stubborn.@@GrantStraks
@@mannysspumps9924 agree with this too. he sometimes comes off bitter it seems
"We have _tons_ of evidence. _Tons!_ " Which we never hear any of.
@@GrantStraksOn the contrary, I'm glad he's reached the point or realising that all religion is superstition.
LOVE Dr. Ehrman - thanks for having him on your show!!!
Great conversation, thank you!
Conversation? The host was absentee in this interview
At Baylor University in a required Bible class I learned about what they called The Priestly Writers (a stage of the Biblical recording writing process) so I am guessing this is when Scripture was being written down from oral accounts which had circulated for years prior. It must have been then that kind of formulaic accounts were recorded as he is indicating: therefore their similarity.
Given all these debates one can see why the Fundamentalists want to just take anything written in the most simple and basic translation and say, “That’s it and don’t question it!”. It truth it is like digging through a random historical Middle Eastern/Israeli trash dump and trying to cobble all the disparate elements together into a consistent narrative as well as trying to link it all to the Old Testament.
Uh, dear sister Sharon, let us not be too hasty and judgmental about the efforts of serious scholars in their effort to reconstruct a real picture of the man called Jesus which you arrogantly dismiss as trash unless you are also willing to treat archaelogical diggings and serious historical research as trashy efforts to improve knowledge or to sell books?
Since the gospels are visibly composed as wholesale fictions decades after the events they claim to describe, we have no logical reason to believe any single thing in them actually happened. We know, anyway, that Mark got everything he had _his_ Jesus say by rewording Paul's opinions, and got his plot elements (in text-order) from Homer and septuagint. Later gospels contradict Mark for obviously doctrinal reasons, so they also treated the material as fictional.
@@conradbulos6164 That is NOT what she said... You misunderstood her comment. Historical "trash dumps" or "holes" are where all kinds of important archeological items have - and continue to be - found. Ironic that you were so condescending when you actually didn't even understand the comment...
".....such things are allegory." - Paul -
"Come, let us leave behind the doctrines and principles of Christ and move on to perfection." - Paul -
I enjoy Dr Ehrmans podcasts, very historic. I really find the information on the people in antiquity, how they lived, their concerns in those times and the fact that most of them were illiterate. For me it all started with Dr Ehrmans book Forgery.
Thank you both, great questions. The more I listen to him and read his books, the more convinced I become that Dr. Ehrman is the rock of reason in this whole discussion, and I hope that he will be returning to the channel soon.
I like Crossan as well.
can one daisy chain routers to increase network capacity
What are Routers and extenders.
Paul was probably schizophreni. He had delusions and hallucinations ( his only contact with Jesus) however, God can work through anybody. It all turned out alright in the end; look at the belief in Jesus today.
@@camilleespinas2898 Paul pushed his misogyny on the early church. Jesus depended on a group of wealthy women to find His ministry. They became leaders in the early church. Most of the meetings in the very early church were held in homes where women were not charge. As more people joined the movement they began to move to churches where men were in charge. Then came Paul. As Christianity grew, it grew more and more anti women. In the early Celtic church women were important. An Abbess was equal to an Abbot. Early monasteries were co ed. Nuns and monks married, had children, and raised them in the faith. The Synod of Whitby in 664 not only marked the beginning of the end, for the Celtic church but for Irish women. Before Roman influence, Irish women had rights, owned property, were welcome in the law schools and medical schools, were warriors. As Roman ideas took over the country, women lost their rights. It reminds me a lot of what is happening in this country today.
Great 👍
I love people who watch TH-cam talks and believe they know more than scholars who have spent their lives studying this stuff, including in the original languages. If y’all got some new information that’s legit it shouldn’t be difficult to get it published and approved by a PHD program.
How does that differ from any other group of people who want to learn something they don't already know?
Ditto.
@@kopp1948...the difference is determined based upon whether they post an intelligent question...or they make a pronouncement that comes from one of their own cherished beliefs which are not based upon any depth of prior education at all.
It's not about thinking you know more than the scholar or even, "presenting some new information". Despite being a truly gifted textual critic Bart is NOT a trained historian, he is human & capable of making mistakes. The real issue is the logic of a particular argument & the evidence. I am no trained scholar but I often disagree with Bart, mostly around statements pertaining to the historicity of Jesus. I have often heard Bart claim that Cephas (Peter) could not have written the canonical epistle, 1 Peter because he was illiterate. I don't know whether he did or not but without elaborating further Bart's claim is very weak. We only learn of Peter's illiteracy through Mark, there is no sign of any early church leaders illiteracy in any earlier christian texts, especially not in the 7 authentic epistles of Paul. On other occasions, when it suits him, Bart claims that Matthew & Luke are independent sources to Mark on such issues but they are not! Matthew & Luke are both redactions of Mark's gospel and any trained historian will tell you that being a redaction disqualifies a text from being considered independent. Bart, on occasions goes even further and cites the theoretical sources L,M & Q as independent attestation for gospel claims! Historians would not concur with this. Further to this Mark invents many, many things in his gospel for purely symbolic or allegorical reasons and Bart would need to explain how he has determined that Mark did not invent Peter's illiteracy for purely literary reasons.
@@ghostriders_1 Paul was not an original apostle so it makes sense that he would or could be literate. We do know that an educated fisherman would not be likely. It’s pretty straightforward with that information alone to say that he didn’t write it. There are many many reasons to believe he didn’t write it. You’re cherry picking one…
Interesting view .
I tend to agree with him .
There are strong evidence about Jesus oral traditions narratives ….. that’s how stories spread and multiply and evolve into something totally fantastic.
It happened to all human religions.
Well researched I enjoyed it
Much obliged for posting these interviews.
People are talking about taking notes while Jesus talked. That would have been harder than we usually think. You didn't have the quick-drying inks that we have today. So, if you are writing in ink you need somewhere for the page to dry . That eats up desk space quickly.
There are other ways to write of course, but they're generally less durable than ink. More durable methods are probably too slow to keep up with a speech.
I think people would be writing later doing their best to remember what was said.
There is a lot between writing it down as he speaks, and waiting for decades to write down indirect oral stories. Like reporters now also oftentimes report immediately after an event, that would have been entirely possible.
Not that that would have risen to the level of sufficient evidence for miracles, to me, but we don't even have that.
I think so too. Have you read the book: Bulgakov: Tha Master and Margarita? It’s about Jesus (besides other things) and in the book Matthew appears and he was caught by Pontius Pilate who in the book is also a believer of Jesus. In the book Pilate is the one who gets Judas murdered and when he meets Matthew he tells him that. And asks Matthew if he could help him. And Matthew says: give me a paper or pergamen
@@anikomattison7568 Pergamen. I need to look that up.
They carried an IamPad. 😆
@@Philusteen I guess that gave them the advantage over the pagans with their Baalpoint pens.
I think Goodacre's definition of Q is better, because it does not assume there was a source: Q is that material that Mathew and Luke have in common, and which is not in Mark.
Of course, by that definition, one of either Matthew or Luke could itself BE Q, if the source for one of the two Gospel authors was the other one's Gospel.
@@UryvichkQ scholars assume a Lucan Q, because it is better structured.
@@UryvichkMark was written first so that would be nearest in time so logically would it not be nearest to a Q than other gospels, if not Q?
We cannot cite details from a text we don't have, that most likely did not exist. We have four anonymous authors already; inventing a fifth to make up text for them to copy from solves no problems. The four could make up whatever they needed all by themselves.
@@sciptick Scripture is a bugbear and distraction. Either Christ is alive to you here and now or He is not. Hagiographies from 2000 years ago are fun but will never make you Christian ... if that is what you want to be.
This a great episode
I have consulted the Sibylline Oracles and the answer was "Outlook not good."
Within Pentecostalism; this is understood as essentially a full kind of Holy Spirit fire indwelling the people of the world; sort of like God indwelling his temple; in glory. In this sense we are his temple. His glory is sort of purging us of sin and ego; making us new in spirit. (Renew in me a clean heart) (stones in a spiritual temple)
Your writing is incoherent.
@@ems4884 its in the book of acts
Exactly!!
This is why the Urantia book is so important
You might as well believe in Scientology. ;-)
It appears as if you are speaking to us from a lovely cabin.😊
You are seeing the puppet. What you are NOT seeing is the puppeteer.
Love the timber work. I wonder how that'd come up varnished rosewood?
Hahahaha I'm 25 years old and this is exactly how my dad talks, made me smile 😂
5000 people at the Mt and not one writer about him feeding the crowd, 500 people seeing him in the clouds and not one written account.
well because those stories are unlikley to have happened, if not impossible.
Obviously if you believe them or have faith in them that's fine.
But in any case it lines up with Ehrman's explanation
HERE'S THE FAILED PROPHECY
JESUS
Matthew 16:28 Verily I say unto you, THERE ARE SOME STANDING HERE, WHICH SHALL NOT TASTE DEATH, TILL THEY SEE THE SON OF MAN COMING IN HIS KINGDOM.
13:26 and then ye shall see the son of man coming in the CLOUDS
14:62 and Jesus said, "I am: and YE SHALL SEE THE SON OF MAN SITTING ON THE RIGHT HAND OF POWER, AND COMING IN THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN"
PAUL
I Thesolonians
4:14 WE WHICH ARE ALIVE, AND REMAIN UNTO THE COMING OF THE LORD
4:17 then we the living, who remain over, shall, together with them, be caught away in the CLOUDS
THE "RETURN" OF JESUS
Revelations 1:7 Behold he cometh on CLOUDS
14:14 And I looked and behold a white CLOUD, and upon the CLOUD, one sat like unto the son of man.
FLYING ON "CLOUDS"
Definitely NOT a UFO cult 😉
Exodus 16:10 YHWH appeared in the CLOUD
Numbers 11:25 YHWH came down in a CLOUD
Leviticus 16:2I will appear in the CLOUD upon my mercy seat (even comes equipped with a captain's chair)
24:18 Moses went into the midst of the CLOUD and gat him up into the mount
II Kings 2:1 YHWH would take Elijah up into heaven by a whirlwind
2:11 And there appeared a chariot of fire... and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven
Psalms 104:3 Maketh the CLOUDS his chariot, who walketh upon the wings of the wind
68:17 The chariots of God are twenty thousand
Ezekiel 8:3 The spirit lifted me up between heaven and earth and brought me... Jerusalem
Psalms 18:10 He rode upon a cherub and he did fly, yea he did fly upon the wings of the wind
Luke 9:34 There came a CLOUD and overshadowed them, and they feared as they entered into the CLOUD
Acts 10:11 Saw heaven opened and a certain vessel descending unto him
10:16 And the vessel was received up again
11:5 A certain vessel descend... and it came unto me
11:10 Drawn up again into heaven
Zechariah
5:1 And I turned and lifted up mine eyes, and behold a flying roll.
5:2 And he said unto me, 'what seest thou?' And I answered 'I see a flying roll: the length thereof is twenty cubits, and the breadth thereof ten cubits
5:3 He said unto me 'this is the curse that goeth forth over the face of the earth'
5:5 "Lift up now thine eyes and see what is this that goeth forth?"
5:6 And I said "what is it?" "This is an ephah that goeth forth" He said moreover "this is there resemblance through all the earth"
5:7(ISV) Look, a sound lead cover was being lifted, and there was a woman seated inside.
5:9 Then lifted I up mine eyes, and looked, and behold, there came out two women...and they lifted up the ephah between the earth and the heaven
5:10 Then said I to the angel that talked with me "whither do these bear the ephah?"
5:10 And he said unto me "to build an house in the land of Shinar: and it shall be established, and set upon her own base."
6:1 And I turned and lifted up mine eyes and looked, and behold, there came (emerged) four chariots from between two mountains, and the mountains were mountains of brass
Acts 1:9 He was taken up, and a CLOUD received him out of their sight
1:11 Jesus, which was taken up from you into heaven shall so come in the like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven
Legend of the Jews 1&2 by Rabbi Ginsburg
pg 521
"All the children of Israel were transported thither on CLOUDS, and after they had eaten of the sacrifice, they were carried back to Egypt in the same way
I think you missed the point. There may not have been 1 in 500 people among those Jesus encountered in his lifetime who COULD write, let alone would do so in a fashion that survived to the present day.
@@ji8044so God sent a “redeemer” to people who couldn’t document what they saw or heard. Good plan! And if you simply question or doubt your are condemned to hell forever. Very loving! I love and care for my own children a thousand times better than that “god.”
Only few people could write or read at that time. And even fewer could afford to have writing material. And if they could have it, it was not easy to write on papyrus to be able to transcribe it as he was talking live. That's why he used parables and analogies, so illetarate people can remember what he said.
Interesting
Hi Bart! Nice to see you listen to music too. Some good equipment I can see in the background!!!
What do you see? I don’t see squat!
Maybe I see some sort of Amazon speaker. Man!
Comment on the stoics at that time 140 to 159 in Rome and thier opinions on Christianity ✝️ .
That would be interesting . 🧐
Random comments by random people who are here trying to discredit a scholar of textual criticism. Someone that had a PHD ya know. It just shows how crazy times we live in.
And crazy like your scholar .
Actually, the " scholar " is the bias one. It's what he thinks.
The title of the book summarizes everything.
A good book title points evocatively to what's written inside. But it can never summarize
Ehrman is everywhere. He's on a mission!
Bart Herman is the hardest working man in New Testament scholarship! He's damn near everywhere!
everybody wants to hear Bart Ehrman!
This is great.
What is
@@user-rk1by5cf3b The whole thing.
isn't it amazing all these miracles performed by JC only appear in the bible? if I see someone walk on water I will bot keep it a secret.
You’d think somebody might have noticed the miracles, especially Lazarus rising from the dead. You’d think it would have spread all over the place.
Outside sources of historians cited Jesus as a man that manifested the supernatural, and they also wrote about rumors of his resurrection.
Names like Phlegon, Celsus, Thallus, Josephus and the Talmud. These historians only cited Jesus because of his fame. The rumors really spread as we have at least nine outside sources citing Jesus as he's depicted in the gospels.
@@michelferreira9695none are contemporary, which is the point of this argument.
(*Josephus caveat/but controversial authenticity)
@@SKILLIUSCAESAR And my point was: we have historical claims from hostile sources about Jesus supernaturality. You criteria for needing to be contemporary doesn't invalidate the claims. Jesus was known from his healings and signs.
In the end, the testimony of the gospels should suffice, since the witnesses lived with Jesus and they gave their lives to testify about what they saw.
We have archeological evidence, we have historical evidence, we have contemporary testimonial evidence, we have people denying their own families, denying their own heritage to die for their claims. They all make a case that demand a final verdict.
It doesn't matter how many of those evidences some people have at their disposal, they might still refuse God because they don't like Him. It's not a intelectual issue, it's a heart issue.
Besides, what most of Christians don't tell you about Christianity is that we also have proof WHILE being Christian, during our relationship with God, when He answers our prayers and questions, when He gives us dreams about the unknown, visions, "coincidences" and repentance.
It's a relationship that first started with thrust in the unseen based in the evidence that was given.
It's not like you have something to lose, but everything to gain, because the gift of the gospels are for free and requires a faith as big as the mustard seed.
Hebrews 11:1
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
@@michelferreira9695 Josephus was the only one of those writing in the same century, but fully six decades after the purported fact. And even his mentions were very transparently inserted by Eusebius in the early 4th century.
whichever was written first, Paul's letters or the 4 Gospels ?
Paul's letters. Galatians about 50-55 C.E. Gospels start at 70 C.E.
Papias of Hierapolis "wrote" Mark, or rather he collated stuff from a Mark collection having the same structure as the Gospel of Thomas - that is no structure, no order, just a list of sayings - but being composed of early sayings and not late additions. He also interviewed late relations to the apostles, and perhaps integrated that stuff into "Mark" too. That's my guess, and I also speculate that this Mark-Gospel was first called "the Memoirs of the Apostles".
This makes no sense. Papias is known even in his own time as a fool and chaser after rumors, wholly incapable of composing such a coherent text as Mark. 'Mark' had his Jesus say Paul's opinions as found in his letters, no need or room for any "early sayings".
Who really wrote the Gospels... this is like the question, "Who really wrote the Shakespeare plays," they're obviously done by rich kids, the elite.
:)
Shakespeare was a pseudonym for Edward de vere
Obviously both the Bible and the works of Shakespeare were written by 500 monkeys hitting keys ay random on 500 typewriters.
@@1JohnChapter4No evidence at all for this crackpot conspiracy theory.
False. Shakespeare was a middle class son of a merchant commoner. I don’t know of any evidence the Gospels were written by wealthy elites, either.
EDIT: Well, there’s egg on my face. Right after I wrote that, Ehrman explained why the Gospel authors probably were rich elites. The point about Shakespeare stands, though.
Apparently you never read all his books. I assure you they all stand alone in what they cover.
I’m working on How Jesus Became God right now, having just read Misquoting Jesus. Which should I read next?
@@WeesloYT the historical Jesus, followed by the New Testament. You’ll like them.
@@chriswilliams5982 are these books by Dr Ehrman or are you saying I should read the Bible?
@@WeesloYT they are books. He also has a lecture series on “Wonderium”. It’s like taking on line college courses. You pay a one time $100.00 and you can take courses from Bart, and other great professors on every course you can think of. Well worth the price for a year.
Assumption smuggling at the 4-minute mark; saying there were written accounts in circulation prior to Paul’s epistles.
Couple questions:
1. How do we know the original new testament manuscripts were written in Greek? Could the earliest Greek manuscripts we have today be translations of even older manuscripts in a different language?
2. Did Jesus think that you must keep the Jewish law in order to enter the kingdom of God?
1) anything can be believed if you ignore all evidence. The evidence that the new testament was written in Greek is overwhelming.
2. We are not under the law. Jesus declared all foods clean and worked on the Sabbath. When asked what someone should do to do the works of God, Jesus responded to believe in him.
Regarding the Greek. Others can address this in more detail than me. However, there was once a debate about whether or not it was written in Aramaic or Greek. Textual analysis of the grammar and style of early manuscripts in both languages revealed that the Greek manuscripts were the earlier ones.
The research boils down to very fine points of grammar, syntax and vocabulary. One manuscript in Greek, for example, was found to have markers of a foreign speaker of Greek writing in that language.
If you are interested in this topic, I would recommend you be prepared for some heavily detailed textual analysis. You can find bibliographies of this research online or perhaps in the bibliographies at the end of Ehrman's books.
I cannot address your second question. It's never been one that interested me so I have not paid any attention to it. It speaks to a specific theological interest of Nicean Christians. My interests are purely historical.
@@notusedexer If we are not under the law, then theft, coveting the neighbor's wife and even murder are perfectly OK with god now? I kind of doubt that Jesus would have agreed with that.
@@schmetterling4477 the law was just a schoolmaster. You know to do good. You don't need a law to tell you this.
@@notusedexer Judaic law was not a prescription for the common good. Not even close.
Hello Jacob,
What is your view on professor Ehrman saying that the gospel writers didn't know the letters of Paul?
Imo it's incredible that a scholar still holds on to this view.
All I’ll say is that I respectfully disagree with him and that I think the Gospels knew Paul’s epistles.
Mark pretty clearly knew of Paul's epistles and thoroughly modeled his gospel in accordance. It really is quite shocking he would deny this.
@@TysonFuryTheGOAT makes you wonder how credible any of his claims are...
Yes, it is extremely wacky. It just calls attention to his ignorance of current scholarship. He seems just not interested in facts.
@@jimiberman3464imo he is stuck in a rut.
The Q source, the oral traditions in the gospels. Claiming that the gospels are 4 independent sources
There is just not a shred of evidence for his claims.
Where in the Tanakh, does it say that Messiah will die and be resurrected for the salvation of sinners? What I read was that Hashem said there is no other G-d or savior, only Him.
Everything is fsntasy fan fiction, including the Pentateuch. Get over it.
You're right and that's why so much of the New Testament is quoting the Old Testament: it's retroactively fitting Jesus into a role that was never meant for him.
You need to understand a phenomenon called "pesher logic". Scriptures were mined, in all seriousness, for prophecies that had nothing to do with the text's original intent. And they relied on books not considered canon today, such as Enoch.
Isaiah said it. Right after he said there was only one God, he said God and his spirit sent the one who just said he was the one and only God.
How the host manages to completely ignore or fail to acknowledge the answers of his guests, instead just going to the next, completely independent question, is incomprehensible to me.
He’s neurodivergent. I am fascinated by him
Oh thank you, I wasn't aware!
Baptism by fire is a radical renewal and purging of the old self and being totally renewed by the Holy Spirit filling you. It is kind of like a full internal renewal. This fire is a good thing. Spiritual cleaning.
_["purging of the old self"]_
_["This fire is a good thing."]_
How is the destruction of who you are a good thing?
@@Kyeudo the Holy Spirit is total joy peace love renewal. That is the whole idea isn’t it? Do we want to be full of fear hate anxiety anger? No or course not.
@@lovetwentyfourseven7428
_["the Holy Spirit is total joy peace love renewal."]_
"The Holy Spirit" is a label for an ecstatic state brought on by religious practice. You can get the same thing from a drug trip, such as that from psilocybin. It isn't supernatural. It doesn't last.
It also doesn't answer the question that I asked. How is the destruction of who you are a good thing? You would have to be suicidal before that would make any sense.
_["Do we want to be full of fear hate anxiety anger?"]_
Your god is full of fear, hate, anxiety, and anger. It's written in bold strokes across your holy books.
_["No or course not."]_
If the price of getting rid of anxiety and fear was being transformed into someone else, I'm keeping my fears and my anxieties.
Luckily for us, modern medicine has some pretty good medications for treating depression and anxiety. They actually work reliably, unlike religious claims.
Holy Mackerel..are their suggestions that Bart is pontificating @ 68? I've found the odd mistake favouring his viewpoint
as scholars often do. Schweitzer noted that all books on the historical Jesus were based in personal fantasy..save his own.
Learn English
Learn to express your thoughts in English if you can. "Learn English" is not an appropriate response.
So Bart only Gives his opinion about the authentic tomb of Jesus. He doesn’t say why, he only says that he stands behind the archaeologists. What does his opinion matter if he does not tell why. Why do we care about his opinion if he cannot explain why?
Amber, your only hurting yourself. If you believe Jesus's divinity why turn to turn to Bart Erhman.
You know what he has to say and it's not anything you need.
Play it safe go back to where it's nice and cozy and your life has purpose.and meaning.
Once you start down this rabbit hole, there will be no way back.
Go back to Jesus.
He loves you.
Maybe.
You're looking for a reason to give as to why you disagree with Ehrman.
Perhaps because he's not an archaeologist and leaves it to the experts and the orthodoxy in their own field ? Seems like the right thing to do is not to venture too far out of one's expertise... He might not be convinced by a minority opinion, but not having all the knowledge and techniques required to appropriately judge its validity, he prefers trusting the people whose speciality it is. I'd say that's basic academic integrity -- and respect for his peers.
Because maybe Dr Erhman cannot answer every possible question in one short interview. Especially when so many are just pure myth.
Well, he did say that he sees no real evidence to believe the tomb belonged to Jesus.
Baptism by fire surely mean burning romans
The superchatter at the end asked where mark got his stories? Unfortunately bart's response is excessively dismissive. Does anyone know if he or anyone else discusses this in more depth somewhere else? It's an important question, particularly for someone like goodacre who thinks q is bunk...
Are you commenters lost, asleep or just not paying attention, the gospels jesus character is saying things completely opposite to what paul is writing, paul is writing opposite and with more authority than the jesus and even the yahweh-jehovah, its his new paulianity cult hes starting, its all right there in front of you geeez wake up.
Mark is mostly parroting Paul. The rest are substituting their own opinions, so differ some.
Seems clear that gospels were supporting sides of James/Peter vs Paul. Over time it gets smoothed over in order to form a single message.
Is it possible that what Papias refers to as Mathew is Q, before Q was expanded to be merged with Mark?
I think lots of people say it seems as good an explanation as any.
"Possible" is how we got to biblical scholarship wholly dominated by fond speculation. Historians use a higher standard.
@@sciptick That's very true. Yet part of any scientific investigation is to look at what the possible hypotheses are. And the Q-folks all seem to agree that the author of Matthew at minimum had Q and Mark available to him. It is not at all outside how traditions work that Q was what was sourced by oral tradition as coming from the tax collector Matthew, and that the gospel retained that moniker after it became embedded within Mark's narrative with some additional oral traditions added. Something like that had to have happened anyways so long as Q was a real document, regardless of what Q was called or who it was attributed to prior to the full gospel of Matthew being written down.
@@benjaminclegg7109 We don't have any Q, so cannot say what is or is not in it. We don't have even a hint of a scrap of evidence there was a Q, or any oral traditions to put in it if there were one. You cannot cite what we don't have.
What we do have is Mark, obviously wholesale fiction, with its Jesus quotes just Paul's opinions reworded, and plot supplied by Homer and tales from the LXX (in text order!), cleverly importing sky-Jesus to Judea. Then we have Matthew, obviously cribbed from Mark and changed wherever 'Matthew' liked his own ideas better. Then we have Luke cribbed from both, freely changing anything he liked, and finally John rewriting with an eye on all three, discarding anything meant for Jews, and changing whatever he liked. Positing a Q provides exactly nothing: anything copied from Q would need to have been made up by a fifth anonymous author, but the four we have are plenty.
All four of them obviously considered their literary Jesus wholly fictional, but if not purely cynical they must have believed in Paul's sky-Jesus, and meant initiates to be briefed on the real story after fully committing to the cult, as we see in the contemporaneous, competing Osiris mystery cult. At some point that step was abandoned as unnecessary.
1:42:49
Interesting.
Boilerplate healing miracles.
“The story you are about to read is true. Names have been changed to protect the innocent.”
Reading the comments -- seems like a lot of people believe they are scholars of history and the bible, and they are inclined to contradict or discredit Dr. Bart Ehrman.
They're morons.😊
So, why other scholars of the bible disagree with him?
@@michelferreira9695 because they're vested.
There's going to be a mix of people listening to Ehrman. I'm an art historian and listening in simply to keep up to date on scholarship in an area that I don't research. B I'm definitely not going to argue with him, but I know enough other scholarship that I could engage with various points he is making.
I would also expect that there are quite a few graduate students of religious studies here. They might debate a bit - and they should.
As for everyone else. Theology students, priests and pastors, nuns and monks and people I like to call the "knowledge-hungry devout." I am sure Dr. Ehrman has them in mind when speaking in public like this. They might resist some of Ehrman's points, but they are wrestling with them too - and we can all respect that
The last set of people - the evangelicals who approach everything in Christianity and the world with prejudice and bias ... I know Dr. Ehrman expects them to show up too. And they behave exactly as we all expect them to - irrationally and emotionally at being confronted with ideas that challenge their convictions and preconceptions.
@@ems4884 Thanks for all this. I should have put "scholars" in quotes, because I was mostly referring to your last set -- people who are not scholars but act like they are in declaring what is or is not correct about early history of Christianity.
1:53:40
Why doesn't anyone say that additions were made to the document after the 2nd century?
Far more was omitted than added.
@@HeartFireSessions Document falsification is rather redundant.
If Marcion's Luke is short and the current one is long, then the longer one is falsified.
@@komaichan99 Or the current one is longer because Marcion cut out the bits he didn't like. You cannot say without evidence we don't have.
@@komaichan99it's much easier to drop them to add passages. You have to willfully go against God to add passages. And then hope nobody else burns you on the stake.
please tell how can Bart be so sure they functioned by quote 'a oral tradition' ? also Bart keeps on speaking of HIS 'pet' theory WITHOUT a shred of historical evidence that the gospels were written down from memory via oral tradition; What NO historical evidence omg what ever next!!
that the gospels were written from memory its just bad scholarship: I postulate the converse to Bart that the mysterious Q manuscript? was actually written by a recorder, one of the disciples at the end of the day when everything was quiet.. ALSO that the disciples were HIGHLY literate and NOT as Bart PRESUMES again WITHOUT a single bit of historical evidence: so nop total nonsense to keep going on about 'the oral tradition' is that because Bart actually spent time studying into how 'oral traditions' work like Bart can only see things through this lens BECAUSE omg he has actually studied oral traditions .. so its his 'pet' theory which it fact equates to poor scholarship at best I am not academically trained neither would I ever wish to be brainwashed in such a way....Bart is a pedlar of total made up fantasy trying to pass it off as scholarship
so you think fishermen in the 1st century were HIGHLY literate? where's your historical evidence for that and how can you logically say that?
Great point... you've done no scholarship on the subject, know nothing about the scholarship on the subject, haven't read Ehrman's scholarship on the subject, but you disagree with him so therefore he's wrong. Your comment is intellectually devastating to Ehrman's argument.
Weird bro. Very weird response.
These positions are very standard elements of NT scholarship and are accepted by almost all serious scholars. They are not new clams by Bart.
I think for the future it might be a good idea to maybe be a bit more amicable with the guests between questions sometimes. It was a brilliant interview but it felt a little at times like he was being used like the chatgpt bot. But again I really enjoyed the interview
Yes. There was no _"Thank you",_ no _"Interesting",_ no _"Hmm...",_ just blank, dull-eyed, cold, emotionless, Jason Voorhees, Michael Myers staring silence.
I wonder what's up with the host? Spectrum?
{o:O:}
@@ansfridaeyowulfsdottir8095 I think you could have said that in a much kinder way
@@pebystroll
*_"I think you could have said that in a much kinder way"_*
Perhaps, but I was accurate. I've watched this channel many, many times and I have never seen him even smile. In fact, I find it quite, quite creepy. It's almost enough to make me stop watching.
Of course, I don't watch for him, I watch for the guests and the subject matter. Sometimes he has a co-host who is able to interact as a human being. I'm sure he can learn to fake-smile and fake-interact. But that would require that he recognised the issue, which probably requires someone telling him there's an issue to recognise.
He won't see this, anyway. I've never seen him answer a comment.
{:o:O:}
@ansfridaeyowulfsdottir8095 hahahaha the last lines made me laugh out loud, haha fair enough man, I see your point
@@ansfridaeyowulfsdottir8095 I prefer these type of no nonsense interviews. Jacob is not a morning news anchor. He is himself and I think he is charming and sincere in his own way. Let's be kind to other humans. If you want a bubbly charming interview watch Bart get interviewed by Meagan.
41:24 I don't know much about the calibre of UNC students, but I did pretty poorly in my Classics degree at Cambridge and I reckon I could write something like the Gospel of John in Koine Greek. Not saying that St John the Apostle necessarily could've, mind. But I think if I were one of Dr Ehrmann's students I'd be kind of annoyed if I heard him say that about me.
Cambridge and UNC are pretty far apart as far as the caliber of students.
Yes, you could, and anybody who knows koine Greek could immediately tell that it's a modern fake. ;-)
Biblical scholarship needs to be conducted alongside Judeo-Christian Theology if it is to contribute to human wellbeing. From the entirety of the humanly-authored Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek ancient documents we call 'scripture', it should have been apparent that the Creator God recognised by the Hebrew Peoples 'works' in an evolutionary way; moving from pantheism to monotheism, despising child-sacrifice, working through prophetic, Davidic and Messianic expectation, through Jesus of Nazareth and the Church, to the present day. Increasingly science has also been a contributor: but, we either believe in a Creator; or we do not. We all sense the same phenomena, including human relationships: but we reach different conclusions. Within such a context, the writings of current scholars and theologians do not pose a threat to 'belief'; unless your belief is entirely based on 'scriptural literalism', or fundamentalism. Indeed, my own readings in Christology are serving to 'recover' the 'human-ness' of the young male Jew who is the locus of how I would describe the Creator. God bless scholars and theologians.
The Infinite God nor his son, Jesus Christ called, spoke to or authorized "scholars" because scholars are pessimists, doubters, scrupulous and self serving.
I think that many of the Gospel stories were adopted from other religions. Jesus is the Jewish version of so many other religious heroes?
😂😂. That's funny. You can't really be that stupid. Jesus was an Orthodox Jew. Not a single Gospel story was adopted from other religions. The Gospels are 100 percent within the Jewish Scriptures and tradition
You are incorrect.
@@chitzkoi Well you need to say more than "you are incorrect." How are they incorrect?
@larrypicard8802 just search mythicism debunked and watch the various videos with ehrman in them, mythicism is massively overelaborate house of cards of bollocks 🙄
They made a positive claim and produced 0 evidence. "no" is all they get.@@larrypicard8802
Listen to Bart E talk about Christianity is like listening to a Proud driver talk about Indy Car racing.
Who is the driver - Jesus or Paul?
His views are largely in line with those of most academic Biblical scholars. If you disagree, you’re arguing not just with him, but with the experts of an entire field. Which is your right, but you seem to think you can dismiss these facts and interpretations with a snarky poke at one person. History and textual analysis are not a religion - the orthodoxy doesn’t depend on one person or one text.
How about getting Erhman and Einhorn together? Messianic movement has strong Egyptian ties with god/man ressurection but Greeks likely introduced redemption. Alexandria had the highest population of Hellenistic Jews. Of course, Roman imperialism eradicated any vestage of that connection...just too close to the first generation messianic cultists that rebelled against Rome in the Jewish Wars.
Since Ehrman missed the "baptism by fire" question - see 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." There were religions that did child -sacrifice by fire. That may be the basis of the Christian doctrine where their father god sacrificed his son Jesus because Christians were trying to emulate the pagan cults.
I don't know of any archeology in the Near East or Mediterranean which supports your claim that there were religions who performed child sacrifice by fire. The Carthiginians seem to have performed some version of ritual child sacrifice, so by extension perhaps the Phonecians did. But I dont recall that involving fire
If any archeologists read this, could you chime in?
I think Paul was someone who hijacked a Jesus movement for his own personal ambitions . I don't think he cared much about Jesus at all. For him, it was a power-trip
Paul essentially used Jesus's name and likeness to create a myth that he was the Messiah, and thus the key to "heaven" and eternal life.
Christians are followers of Paul and his gospel. Paul never met Jesus, unless you take his word for his encounter. Paul openly murdered the followers of Christ. He had very little association with the apostles or their teachings.
In his own words.
Galatians 1:11
But I make known to you, brethren, the gospel that was preached by me, that is not according to man;
1:12 for NEITHER RECEIVED I IT FROM MAN, NOR WAS I TAUGHT IT, BUT THROUGH A REVELATION OF CHRIST.
Romans 3:7 for if the truth of God has, THROUGH MY LIE, become more abundant for his glory, why am I still judged as a sinner?
2 Corinthians 12:16... I am crafty, and caught you all by trickery
Acts 12:23 and behold the hand of the LORD is upon thee, and thou SHALT BE BLIND, not seeing the sun for a season.
Jesus healed the blind, while Paul caused a guy to go blind.
Acts 20:9 and a young man... who sat in a window... as Paul discoursed...fell down from the third story, and was taken up dead🤔
20:10 but Paul went down, and fell upon him and embracing him said: be not troubled; for his life is in him.
20:12 and they brought the young man alive.(WOW, an "accidental" death, and resurrection "miracle" at the hands of Paul)
Acts 22:3... being a zealot for God, as all of you are this day,
Acts 22:24 I persecuted this way even to the death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and women
Acts 20:26 I solemnly affirm to you this day that I am clean from the blood of all.
1 Corinthians 9:20 I became to the Jews as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews, to those under law as under law, NOT BEING MYSELF UNDER LAW, that I might gain these under law.
9:21 to those without law, as without law, not being without law to God, but under law to Christ, that I might gain those without law.
9:22 to the weak I became weak, that I might gain the weak: TO ALL I BECAME ALL THINGS, THAT BY ALL MEANS, I might save some.
20:23 AND ALL THINGS I DO FOR THE SAKE OF THE GOSPEL.
Romans 3:7 for if the "truth" of God has, THROUGH MY LIE, become more abundant for his glory, why am I still judged a sinner?
2 Corinthians 12:16 NEVERTHELESS, I AM CRAFTY, AND CAUGHT YOU ALL BY TRICKERY
The guy is admittedly a murderer, liar, deceiver, telling people what they want to hear, causing harm to others, clean of the blood of any wrong doing, while preaching to everyone that are going to reap what they sow. Claiming his gospel is inspired by God, and not by those who were personally with Christ on a daily basis.
PAUL'S GOSPEL
5:28The hour is coming, in which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice.
5:29 and shall come forth, they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life, and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of death
Dan 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall wake, some to everlasting life, some to everlasting contempt.
2 Peter 3:4 where is the promise of his coming? Since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were.
I Thesolonians 4:13 concerning them which are asleep
4:14 even so also them which sleep in christ.
4:15 WE WHICH ARE ALIVE AND REMAIN UNTO THE COMING OF THE LORD shall not prevent them which are asleep
4:16 and the dead in Christ shall rise first.
CANNIBALISM FOR IMMORTALITY
John 6:53
Jesus said.. Except ye eat the flesh of the son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
6:54
Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up on the last day.
6:55
For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
CHILD SACRIFICE FOR IMMORTALITY
John 3:16
For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him shall not perish but have everlasting life.
Romans 3:25
God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of the blood-to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness.😂
HERE'S YOUR FAILED PROPHECY
Matthew 16:28 Verily I say unto you, THERE ARE SOME STANDING HERE, WHICH SHALL NOT TASTE DEATH, TILL THEY SEE THE SON OF MAN COMING IN HIS KINGDOM.
PAUL
I Thesolonians 4:14 WE WHICH ARE ALIVE, AND REMAIN UNTO THE COMING OF THE LORD
THE RETURN OF JESUS
Revelations 1:7 Behold he cometh on clouds
14:14 And I looked and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud, one sat like unto the son of man.
2:18 These things saith the son of God
2:23 And I will KILL HER CHILDREN WITH DEATH
8:9 The third of the creatures which were in the sea, and have life, died
11:6 Power over the waters to turn them into blood, and smite the earth with all plagues (bioweapons) as often as they will.
16:3 Poured out his vial upon the sea, and it became as the blood of a dead man: and every living soul in the sea died.
WOW, WORSHIPPING GUYS THAT FLY AROUND ON "CLOUDS" MURDERING CHILDREN, FISH, AND SPREADING BIOWEAPONS.
FLYING ON "CLOUDS"
Exodus 16:10 YHWH appeared in the cloud
Numbers 11:25 YHWH came down in a cloud
Leviticus 16:2I will appear in the cloud upon my mercy seat
24:18 Moses went into the midst of the cloud and gat him up into the mount
II Kings 2:1 YHWH would take Elijah up into heaven by a whirlwind
2:11 And there appeared a chariot of fire... and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven
Psalms 104:3 Maketh the clouds his chariot, who walketh upon the wings of the wind
68:17 The chariots of God are twenty thousand
Ezekiel 8:3 The spirit lifted me up between heaven and earth and brought me... Jerusalem
Psalms 18:10 He rode upon a cherub and he did fly, yea he did fly upon the wings of the wind
Luke 9:34 There came a cloud and overshadowed them, and they feared as they entered into the cloud
Acts 10:11 Saw heaven opened and a certain vessel descending unto him
10:16 And the vessel was received up again
11:5 A certain vessel descend... and it came unto me
11:10 Drawn up again into heaven
Zechariah 5:1 And I turned and lifted up mine eyes, and behold a flying roll.
5:2 And he said unto me, 'what seest thou?'
And I answered 'I see a flying roll: the length thereof is twenty cubits, and the breadth thereof ten cubits
5:3 He said unto me 'this is the curse that goeth forth over the face of the earth'
5:5 "Lift up now thine eyes and see what is this that goeth forth?"
5:6 And I said "what is it?" "This is an ephah that goeth forth" He said moreover "this is there resemblance through all the earth"
5:7(ISV) Look, a sound lead cover was being lifted, and there was a woman seated inside.
5:9 Then lifted I up mine eyes, and looked, and behold, there came out two women...and they lifted up the ephah between the earth and the heaven
5:10 Then said I to the angel that talked with me "whither do these bear the ephah?"
5:10 And he said unto me "to build an house in the land of Shinar: and it shall be established, and set upon her own base."
6:1 And I turned and lifted up mine eyes and looked, and behold, there came (emerged) four chariots from between two mountains, and the mountains were mountains of brass
Acts 1:9 He was taken up, and a cloud received him out of their sight
1:11 Jesus, which was taken up from you into heaven shall so come in the like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven
Legend of the Jews 1&2
by Rabbi Louis Ginsburg
Pg 521
"All the children of Israel were TRANSPORTED thither on clouds, and after they had eaten of the sacrifice, they were carried back to Egypt in the same way."
JESUS S(L)AVES
I Peter 2:18
Slaves, in reverent fear of God submit yourselves to your masters, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh
I Timothy 6:1
All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that God's name, and our teaching may not be slandered.
Colossians 3:22
Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything...
Ephesians 6:5
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart...
Titus 2:9
Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them.
I loathe Paul. He was the source of misogyny in Christianity. The Jesus movement was financed by a group of wealthy widows. Women were instrumental in the very early church. Paul was a total, arrogant jerk. He was far more focused on himself than Jesus.
Poor analysis.
@@kronos01ful Why? Maybe a poor choice of words but Paul was quite concerned with his image. His reactions to criticisms proves the point.
He constantly feels the need to spout out his credentials as if to prove he is worthy of being the front man for a cause. That indicates an individual who seeks justification for his perceived position within the movement and validation for his arguments.
He commits numerous logical fallacies the most egregious one being appealing to apostolic authority as the foundation for the validity of his theological system and rational argumentation.
@failyourwaytothetop937 What was pauls ambition? What did he benefit from Romans chapter 2 for example? What was the ambition to write that chapter?
Did did Paul created a new religion and became the center of it like Muhammad and denied Jesus?
Bart Ehrman changed his terminology in this interview. Calling the land “Israel” . There was no land called Israel in ancient world . Historians should not be affected by political stance.
That's BS. There was no Palestine in history.
Did I mention Palestine ? Blindness is in the heart not in the eyes. Go look to the origin of Philiistines and where they lived.
@@sasamoal
*_"There was no land called Israel in ancient world"_*
There was Israel, and there was Judah.
{:o:O:}
There was no land called Israel. Facts will not change by a lie.
@@sasamoal
*_"There was no land called Israel. Facts will not change by a lie."_*
So stop doing it.
First, there was Canaan.
Then there was Israel and Judah. Then they were united for a while.
Israel was destroyed around 720 BC by the Neo-Assyrian Empire.
Eretz Yisrael.
{:o:O:}
Where in the old testament does it say that jesus will come twice?
When Bart refers to Jesus’ death, is he talking about the first death from which he came back to life or his second death? If Jesus was recognized as the Messiah by this point why did people not follow him around and record what happened to him for the remainder of his life? Or did he die again very quickly after? What do the historical records say about this?
He went into heaven.
No I mean what physically happened to the man? Why was it not documented? You can’t just disappear in a puff of smoke.
@@ritcha02
It's written in the gospels.
He jumped into heaven on the Mount Olives.
@@koppite9600 Ummm, we might have to agree to disagree on that one.
@@ritcha02
My reasoning is:
Daniel, when he was in heaven, says he saw Thrones being set. Thrones as opposed to Throne.
Then he saw The Ancient One crowning One Like a Son of Man.
What is he meaning? God sits on how Many thrones? Another God being crowned?
2. David in Psalms 110 says
And The LORD said to my Lord.. David has two Lords. Two Gods? More than one God?
How do you see it?
Edit.
Then in the New York John in Revelation 22 says he was in heaven and he saw Two thrones. The throne of the Father and the throne of Son. The Holy Spirit passed between them.
He backs Daniel without intending to.
14:51 no in a certain way. The original followers of Jesus were still Torah Orthodox and did not believe Jesus died for the sins of anyone. That's all Pauline Christology. I like Ehrman but his scholarship is too conservative and consensus driven.
If they thought he appeared to them after his death then they thought he resurrected.
That must have changed their views about him?
But not that he dies for our sins no.
I agree that Ehrman is too conservative.
Stuck in a rut.
@@petermullenberg_worldchampion yeah and also the resurrection is more like an apotheosis than the body being revived like in the Gospels. They surely believed God had exhalted him into a higher status like other biblical figures (Moses, Elijah, Enoch, etc.), but that his death was for atonement of sins was not what the original Jerusalem movement led by James believed. The evidence does not point in that direction.
@@vikingdemonprwhat is it the original Jerusalem movement lead by james believed ?
@@vikingdemonpr I agree with that.
It could be that they though he was the messiah and that he would come back
The letter of James points to that.
@@petermullenberg_worldchampion yes. That's what I was gonna say to the other person who asked what the Jerusalem Church believed. You can even see that in documents like the Didache that dates from around the late 1st Century to early 2nd Century.
Is Bart being interviewed by a ROBOT?
Its Nick Cage lol
This is all pretty standard New Testament scholarship. Most non-fundamentalist scholars accept it.
@FinalFantasy 8911 : what is recorded is not that Jesus said the world would end, but that some of those then alive would not taste death until they had seen the coming of the new order - this could be a personal revelation before they died, individually. Some of them did die. I don't know about the rest, some people say they were immortal and never died, but I doubt that
That's a nice apologetic but it doesn't fit with the meaning used throughout that gospel.
This dude’s gotta be one of the worst hosts I’ve seen. The way he keeps exhaling after every answer given by Bart is just ridiculous. He looks and sounds annoyed with his guest as if Bart forced him to have him on the show! And boy is Bart a saint for putting up with this and giving long, detailed answers with his usual passion and humor!
The guy is neurodivergent. Probably on the spectrum. I think you have to hold him to a different standard. I find him pleasant
Benny hinn, peter popoff, john hagee, jim bakker, oral roberts and all those guys they know the truths and secrets because they're gifted anointed apostles...LOL
Bible scholars are also in that group.
Is the gospel of the holy twelve true gospel?
None of the disciples of Jesus wrote a gospel to the extent we can ever know.
What gospel of the holy 12?
I would love to hear Bart's thoughts on Marcion?
He knows no more about Marcion than anybody else. Everything reliable written about him was torched. Torching things they disagreed with was the favorite activity of early Christians, second only to making things up.
Then watch the video! He talks about him several times
Love hearing Bart talk! ❤
Is that a question?
What's up with the host between answers? There was no _"Thank you",_ no _"Interesting",_ no _"Hmm...",_ just blank, dull-eyed, cold, emotionless, Michael Myers staring silence.
{o:O:}
He’s AI
Dear interviewer… you are allowed to smile and have a personality.
😂😂😂 yeah its not proper to make this bitter face while talking about Jesus 😅 (at least)
Actually the interviewer is loaded with personality but on a different level entirely seems to me.
Such a frivolous comment
Get a life
👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
1:18
This host is SOOO boring
Occasionally, you need to ignore the un-entertaining side of an interview but rather focus on the informative side. Just like reading a math book.
@@sasamoal he drags it out so im done.
I agree. But i think it’s his personality.
@@sasamoal WHAT personality?
Leave the guy lone. He Might not be able to change . 😊
Jesus is the only way. You can twist, think, speculate, fantasin but Jesus still gonna be the one who you gonna turn to just because IF...
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
What about the other religions?
That's not true. And today's gospels were not written by the apostles.
You came to the wrong channel to be posting something so idiotically arrogant and insipid as this empty threat.
IF your momma say so…THEN…
do you really have to put a ad every 5 minutes? jeez
Where did the beatitudes come from?
From a rather deranged mind, I dare say. A psychologically normal person will not spout such nonsense.
It has been said mr. Ehrman wrote one book and then wrote it again and again. It is similar with these interviews, he covers much of the same ground over and over again.
And he does not bother to keep up on current scholarship, on any topic he is not writing a peer-reviewed paper about. So he _doesn't know,_ as we now do, that Mark cribbed plotlines (in text order!) from the Pentateuch and Homer. He doesn't know that most of what Mark has his Jesus say is just opinions extracted from Paul's letters. He still thinks there were "oral traditions" and "Q" despite there being not the slightest shred of evidence for either. It is not hard to see why he doesn't bother: you don't need to know about any of it to do what he does now.
@@sciptickI agree with you for 100% and made the same points in my comments.
The man is stuck in a rut..
That can be said about almost just any scholar, mutatis mutandis.
@sciptick i have heard him in interviews speaking of the things you have mentioned, he mentioned that in the misquoting Jesus series,
@@sciptickwell the first gospel accounts would have resembled the hypothesized Q Source as Papias mentions a logia by Matthew and he wrote a commentary on the sayings of the Lord which would have been similar to the Gospel of Peter as a list of sayings by Jesus. Dr. Ehrman has probably researched well enough to maintain that sentiment against newer unsubstantial hypothesis's. The Gospel of Mark tells more about actions of Jesus rather than sayings thereof, so it probably summarizes the sayings into actions, like 'Jesus preached about' rather than quoting verbatim what he preached at times.
The idea that Jesus's followers did not write things down after his resurrection is absurd. If there were hundreds of followers, someone would know how to write. Even in an "oral" tradition, there was a written language and some people knew how to use it. Why do we insult the entire group and say that *none* of them could write? And if they believed they had known the Messiah, who had risen, they could have found somebody who could write.
considering how popular Jesus was during his ministry, it is also likely that educated persons took notes as he was speaking.
Agreed with both of you. I'm glad to see some thoughtful folks in the comments sections here.
As you rightly pointed out, if such an insanely drastic event took place, it would have IMMEDIATELY been documented... I'd argue that there'd be no shortage of it!
Jeffrey Erwin's point is also spot on, imho.
(As for point one on historical documentation-I.e., lack thereof-Dr. Ataie has the most complete expositions of it... one such video is "The Crucifixion and The Qur'an" by Zaytuna College.
That video discusses the historical evidence we have, all of it, as well as what was thrown out, as well as things like "substitution theory," "swoon theory," Rabbinical Aramaic Midrash, and so much more gems of knowledge.
You don't know me, and I don't know you. Idk if you're even reading this far by now, but I'd HIGHLY recommend that vid for sincere seekers and questioners.
Peace.
what has logic and common sense to do with it? just believe what some unknown dudes wrote a few centuries after the event and say it must be true because they had the "Holy Spirit" in them!
@@snakejuce Thanks for suggestion. It was easy to read your entire comment. The video, at 2 hrs, will be a bit more challenging. I'll watch at least some of it.
Dr Ehrman's fundamental flaw in his analysis is the sense of "no one would". Attributing psychological and sociological certainty, whether by saying, "All his followers were poor and uneducated, no one could write" or "No one would have made up a Messiah who died", the argument from embarrassment. It is attributing a perfect homogeneity to behavior in the first century CE which we clearly see is missing today. And it is asserting a level of certainty which would be a mistake in historical analysis.
The way of Edenic law, was based in the sabbath. And Noahide law; was based in communion with God. Noah had communion with God and was not circumcised. So the Torah itself implies the first establishment of the spirit of the Torah is to be circumcised in heart as Adam and Eve were and guard the way of the tree of life.
_["The way of Edenic law, was based in the sabbath"]_
The Garden of Eden demonstrably did not exist.
_[" Noah had communion with God"]_
Noah demonstrably did not exist.
_["as Adam and Eve were and guard the way of the tree of life."]_
Adam and Eve demonstrably did not exist.
@@Kyeudo I tend to consider that these were the first homo erectus ancestors; those first ones that had a spiritual level of communication and beliefs. Noah being the father of the Homo sapiens Neanderthals and homo erectus, those same ancient ancestors of all people living today; are in a sense the original Adam and Eve. They named their surroundings with sounds. Named the animals. (As described in Eden) they had a simple soul and mind; untainted by the complexity of modern civilization. A pure soul.
@@lovetwentyfourseven7428
_[" I tend to consider that these were the first homo erectus ancestors; those first ones that had a spiritual level of communication and beliefs. "]_
Homo erectus emerged two million years ago. Because of how evolution works, there never was a "first" homo erectus. There was a breeding population that developed traits that eventually was recognized as distinct from their ancestor population. In other words, trying to push Adam and Eve back to homo erectus just makes you more wrong. There was never a two-person genetic bottleneck.
_["Noah being the father of the Homo sapiens Neanderthals and homo erectus,"]_
A world-wide flood never happened and couldn't happen, two things separate things which are independently verifiable. There never was an ark containing all the species on the planet. There was never a five-person genetic bottleneck. All of this means there is no individual that could possibly be identified as Noah.
The creation story was written like 1000 years after it happened, Noah & the ark story was written 500 years after it happened. The story of jesus was written like 40- 50 yrs after jesus death meaning there were people in that generation who could verify whether what they had written occured.
Oh dear lord... this story is such a puzzle... oy!
Bilbo Baggins before the hobbit
Some keys to solving any personal confusion about Jesus are a combination of:-
1. The Old Testament prophecies that He fulfilled.
2. The prophecies attributed to Jesus Himself such as Matthew 24 and Luke 21.
3. The Book of Revelation.
4. Personal experience of faith in Jesus.
Dude, just because some people who knew the OT prophecies projected them on Jesus doesn't mean that he fulfilled any of them. And what's that thing about your "personal faith experience with Jesus". You never met the man. You read a lot of nonsense that people wrote about him who hadn't met him, either. ;-)
@@lepidoptera9337 Lol. I guarantee you I have met Him. Before I volunteered to come here and have to put up with Pharisees, haters, know-it-alls, etc. He told me I would need to be born again because this place confers spiritual death on all who are here except Jesus.
Our DNA is so corrupt, it needs to be rewritten by the Truth.
But you carry on with your know-it-all attitude and see where it gets you.
I know in whom I have believed and He is able to perfect that which concerns me.
Good luck.
@@simongarribaldi9267 Who else did you meet? Elvis? The ghost of Winston Churchill? The Loch Ness monster? Dude, you need to grow up. ;-)
@@lepidoptera9337 Don't be so facetious. It's disrespectful to mankind.
@@simongarribaldi9267 No, kid, what religious people do is disrespectful to honesty. :-)
Who the heck was Paul writing the letters to? Because if he wrote the letters in 40 A.D., that a mere 7 years after Jesus' purported death and resurrection, there wouldn't have been time for the Apostles to travel to all those places, convert the populations, and have a quarrel among themselves.
Paul wrote in the 50s, after spending years establishing churches in various places. "The Apostles" founding various churches in various places are largely myths, as the apostles vanish from anything approaching reliable history in the early chapters of Acts.
Pass on this other gospel.
Don’t believe in asking follow-up questions, do you?
Don't we know the source of Luk's gospels to be Luke the Physician who got the information form Apostles?? and wrote it down in the year 40--50.?? Is that correct?
The gospel of Luke comes from the late 80’s or early 90’s, long after the apostles were gone.
@@nbenefiel
John died in late 90s
@@koppite9600 John the evangelist wrote around 100 CE.
@@nbenefiel
You said they were long gone
@@koppite9600 You’re the only person I’ve ever heard claim John the apostle lived into the 90’s. Nowhere, in early Christian literature, have I seen such a claim. We know that the gospel attributed to John was written at the end of the first or the beginning of the second century. If John the apostle survived into the 90’s it’s odd that he had so little influence on the early Jesus movement.
58:25 DIDST NOT YOU SEE THE EXPRESSION ON BERT'S FACE❓️👀. AND HOW'D SAIDST IT WITH SUCH AN STRONG EMPHASIS ALSO IN HIS HAND GESTURES 👀👍
People would take notes using wax tablets.
Knotty pine.
New, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, why Would You Pl., Jesus closing down the temple at the beginning of his ministry. Where Matthew and Mark have Jesus closing down the temple right before he was arrested. And maybe this was the fact the incident that provoked the Jewish leader ship to arrest Jesus in the first place?
English is a difficult language, isn't it?
Papias said Matthew wrote down the sayings of Jesus in Hebrew… Perhaps his Matthew is Q, then that name was slapped onto the gospel incorporating those logia? 🤔
Don't Matthew and Luke have word for word identical material from Q in their gospels? If Q was written in Hebrew or Aramaic would it be likely that they would have translated much of it to Greek exactly the same?
There are older writings in Tibetan monasteries discovered by Nicolas Notovitch. He wrote the book The Unknown Life of Jesus Christ. Also some so called Gnostic books from closer to the apostles. Only two books in the NT are from an apostle or followers of the apostles.
22 books are from the Roman Paul. Funny how Jesus chose twelve and the Roman emperor and Catholic Bishops threw most of those labeled as occult and kept all of a romans writings from a man that Jesus did not meet in his natural life.
jew saul who identified as roman paul
No consensus on the dating of the gospels. 1 Cor 15th 1-4 scholars say is a hymn. This includes the basic view of Jesus (he died for sin, and he was resurrected from out of death on the third day). This goes to within 3 years of Pentecost.
No, it goes to "before Paul wrote his letters", making it within twenty years of the crucifixion.
58:25 DIDST NOT YOU SEE THE EXPRESSION ON BERT'S FACE ❓️👀 AND HOW'D HE SAIDST IT WITH SUCH AN STRONG EMPHASIS ALSO IN HIS HANDS GESTURES 👀👍
What?
@@ems4884WHAT?
And here we have people trying to reach a conclusion on something they know nothing about. Satan is obviously guiding them and all they can do is follow.
Bart's comments are very standard NT scholarship taught in most mainline seminaries and divinity schools.
If Satan exists, then your god is evil.