looks like he did cut her off early ~ she seemed to have so much more to say amd he was just like "cool that's enough for me" he really came off as a skeptic the whole time to me
Excellent interview. Elizabeth Schrader is so articulate. She is a great example of how curiosity combined with honest inquiry can lead to great discoveries even by non-experts. That she's gone on to become a formidable expert is quite an inspiration. It seems very likely that the significant role of women in early christianity was increasingly erased over time and that our canonical record does not represent their presence and perhaps equal status among Jesus and his disciples and followers of the first century.
Of course it was. Under roman law women had zero rights. Cows had more rights. Elevating women was a direct challenge to the legal and social system of Rome during the development of the early church. In addition, as the centuries passed, men weren't any too keen on giving women a say in life and, like today, suffer jealousy, fear of loosing power as women gain in status.
Here we have two young, seemly intelligent people, talking about texts being 2000 years old and can even dedicated their whole work time to this topic. Isn't that kinda beautiful that we reached a stage that this is possible? :D and damn interesting interview
Reached a stage where this is possible? There have always been scholars. Ibn Sina wrote his medical treatise when he was 18 for example. St. Jerome moved to Bethlehem to learn better Hebrew to translate the Bible and he spoke Greek, Latin, Hebrew and a little Aramaic.
@@stevenv6463 I suspect they may be referring to the fact that people have not always been free to discuss these discrepancies as the Catholic Church would have them persecuted for heresy. I’m sure many scholars before recognized these things who of course were closer to the time period. But again we’re not free to speak out for fear of their lives
Idk they seem to have a very good friendship or like almost dated in the past just from how familiar they seem to be with their back and forth, in just the way they address eachother(obviously they mention they were in the same school/class at some point, but they seem to be much more than acquaintances)
This is a really fascinating interview. I have long felt that Mary of Bethany and Mary Magdalene were one and the same. My reasoning is this: How many times would Jesus have been anointed as Messiah? Once, by Mary Magdalene. G. of John was written later than Luke's, so John may have known Luke's Gospel. In Luke, when Jesus visits the sisters Mary and Martha, we learn that Mary is a devoted disciple who sits at the master's feet to learn. No Lazarus in the story. It seems John needs to place Mary close to Jerusalem, in Bethany, as Lazarus's sister, so he can tell the story of raising Lazarus from the dead. (And according to this interview, Martha was added later to this story - to downplay Mary's role.) The raising of Lazarus is a huge "sign" (of Jesus being the Messiah, Son of God; John's Gospel is a "signs gospel"), so if it really happened (vs. being a metaphor of raising one who is dead-in-spirit to one who is reborn-in-the-spirit), why is this story of Lazarus not in any of the synoptic Gospels which were earlier? The name Magdalene is important here, too. It may refer to the town of Magdala, but Jesus gave all of his close disciples nicknames: Simon became Kephas/Peter ("Rock"); the sons James and John of Zebedee became the "Sons of Thunder"; the Judas (not Iscariot) became Judas Thomas, or "Judas the Twin" (Toma in Aramaic means twin; possibly a spiritual twin). In Hebrew, Migdal means Tower. Some scholars believe Mary's nickname may have been "Midgal Eder" -- "Tower of the Flock" -- meaning Mary was a prominent, strong leader - guardian/watcher/keeper of the flock - in the early Jesus movement, and indeed she had her own followers after Jesus' crucifixion. Strong evidence for this nickname is from the prophet Micah, who refers to “Migdal Eder” with regard to how the Messiah would be revealed - from the “Tower of the Flock” (Micah 4:8). According to Elizabeth Schraeder, in this interview, she says early church father Tertullian knows that is was Mary, not Martha, who proclaimed Jesus as the Messiah, thus fulfilling Micah's prophecy! This makes Mary hugely important in the very early movement, but later on, many men weren't comfortable with a female leader. So the copyists and scribes who fiddled with the Gospel of John were trying to downplay Mary Magdalene's importance as a leader/teacher in the Church (as well as Judas Thomas's with the apologetic, reactive story of "Doubting Thomas" - refer to interviews with/books by Elaine Pagels). At the same time, John's author was trying to endorse the primacy of Simon Peter as the authoritative leader of the early movement. (Note that James Tabor believes Jesus's brother James was "the beloved disciple"; it was James who became the leader of the movement in Jerusalem following Jesus's death, and Paul calls James and Peter pillars of the church. Other scholars have posited that Mary Magdalene was the beloved disciple, and again, John or redactors, messed with the script to erase Mary's prominence.)
I nomally don't concern myself with religious topics at all. Yet here I am listening to you for 50 minutes. I loved the level of detail on which you picked that apart.
I loved this. As to a lot of people not wanting to see their bible changed... Many of those think English was good enough for Jesus, so they won't let their kids study a second language...
Unrelated to the topic at hand, I think it's so cool that you found a topic that held your interest so strongly that not only did you decide to get a master's but are now in a PhD program.
Absolutely loved this interview. I do wish the question of asserting particular editorial intent was pushed a tad more; I think such assertions are unfortunately a common tool used in textual criticism, a tool that is far too blunt and unwieldy.
Check out Aeon Byte Gnostic Radio: Secret history of Mary Magdalene th-cam.com/video/RFvRF0tADJo/w-d-xo.html The Gnostic Mary Magdalene th-cam.com/video/7wokpIGV994/w-d-xo.html The Gospel of Mary Magdalene. There are more shows on the topic, some better than others and some with better authors than others.
When I read Against Praxeas (Tertullian) i found that in the text I read it was Martha, and not Mary proclaiming. Similarly in the VI book of Origen 24. I also found Martha existent. So while I don't have any wider knowledge about the topic I find Martha at least present in John 11 according to these two authors. Another thing is that, assuming we want to eliminate Martha from the gospel, replacing names would not be enough since there is for example 11,28 which would be pretty senseless then. Eventually I'm a little confused because what I hear seems to me not agreeing to what I read.
Quite excellent discussion. The suppression of Mary Magdalene is very apparent from his work. One note: the lady's voice sometimes drops below a whisper at crucial times, and cannot be heard by slightly deaf people like me. Please remember you are making a recording, not talking to a guy.
Is there any edition of the New Testament where this is corrected? Like a version where in the Gospel of John, Mary Magdalene, Mary of Bethany, and Martha are just written as Mary?
Thank you for this interview. I really enjoyed Elizabeth's research, and especially her perspective; and I would love to hear more. Happily, I have found a few of her TH-cam talks. Unfortunately, her voice comes across very faintly (almost to whisper level), in places (and she has a habit of making a statement sound like a question), so I was happy for the closed captions!
Very good interview. Mary Magdalene is one of the most important persons in the New Testament, and a woman who has been vilified by church leaders. Thank you for analyzing these texts. I hope that Elizabeth Schrader publishes a book on the subject soon.
Dierdre!! I worked with her back in the day; what an exquisite soul. This is great; love this! John exalts MM - so if Martha was redacted in would be consistent with that Joanine MM bent. I am of the school that believes Mary of Bethany refers to MM. There are many reasons to interpret it this way. Luke also changes the anointing story drastically -- Luke was later than John, so I'd be interested in when the redactions of John to include Martha appear. I concur with this woman entirely, and thrilled by the textual research. John was controversial enough without having the heretical authority, MM, to be so very prominent. Go Elizabeth Schrader!!!
Do you have any recommendation for a bible with added commentary taken the modern research into account? The topic interests me, but I am not really able to judge what would be a good book since I am not a a student or scholar of the subject.
This was so much fun to listen to. I loved listening to her tell her story through her own Dunning-Kruger Effect, then moving her career into academia, and ultimately learning how to make a very convincing academic argument. Great interview.
Love that you mentioned Z Man. He was one of my favorite professors at UNC. It’s incredible that the triangle area is a powerhouse of religious (specifically early christian) studies.
Ms. Schrader seems to present this as if Mary and Martha may in fact be the same person, based on the evidence she has encountered in some manuscripts. I am curious if any evidence might point to the possibility of two separate women being named Mary. For example, Mary of sister of Lazarus and Mary Magdalene engaging each other.
Fascinating stuff! Hearing about the importance of the physical objects that are the manuscripts really blew me away. I feel like it might be a bit of a stretch to ascribe too much "intention" to the changes - like trying to deliberately downgrade the importance of Mary - as it seems plausible that an originally simple copying error (ι to θ) could somehow escalate over time. Even though there are a million possible evolutionary paths, the random mutations eventually lead to whatever manuscripts end up being produced.
This is an awesome interview. This actually made me want to go back and re-read the text and I found something interesting. In John 11:2 Mary is described as "the one who who had annointed the Lord with perfume oil and dried his feet with with her hair" as if this incident had happened prior to Lazarus' falling ill and ultimately dying. However this incident isn't described in detail until John 12:3. And in the verses leading up to this anointing in Chapter 12 the event is said to occur 6 days before Passover in Bethany "where Lazarus was whom Jesus had raised from the dead" as if the anointing of the feet took place after Lazarus' resurrection. I also looked at Mary and Martha in Luke and they are mentioned in Luke 10:38-42 and here the name of the village they are from is not mentioned nor do they have a brother. Also Mary is only described as sitting at Jesus' feet listening to him speak while Martha is "burdened with much serving". There is no mention of Mary pouring expensive oil on Jesus' feet. Furthermore the only Lazarus mentioned in Luke is a poor leper in a parable by Jesus about a poor man who dies and goes to heaven while the rich man who neglected to help him goes to Gehenna.
the alleged alterations dilute the role of Mary Magdalene, but since afte it there were multple women, doesn't this strengthen the role of women in general in comparison to the 12 male disciples? 1 important "exceptional" woman vs. multiple "normal" women?
I think the point is not that they were worried about women in general so much at Mary Magdalene herself. Perhaps her prominence was bringing about a cult of personality amongst early Christians which some found worrisome.
@@elfarlaur you mean the feared a situation lik in the Chatolic Church nowadays, where Mary would be worshipped almost as prominently as Jesus himself?
elfarlaur that’s a very good question. At what point in ancient Christianity did the ancient Church venerate Mary Magdalene as “equal to the Apostles?” According to the Orthodox Church, the tradition is because she evangelized to areas of modern day France. When that tradition became popularized can also be a point of research.
I knew that Orthodox Christianity didn't demonise Mary Magdalene but I din't know that it venerated her and put her equal to the Apostles, interesting.
According to the line of argument advanced by Elizabeth, that there is only one sister in John 11, supposedly supported by historical texts, I could now re-create (not having access to it right now) the KJV 1611 first printing as starting from John 11 rather in this fashion: "Now a certain man was sick, named Lazarus, of Bethany, the town of Mary....Therefore she sent unto Him, saying, 'Lord, he whom thou lovest is sick.' When Jesus heard that, he said, 'This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God might be glorified thereby.' Now Jesus loved Mary and Lazarus....Then Mary, as soon as she heard that Jesus was coming, went and met him. Then said Mary unto Jesus, Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died. But I know, that even now, whatsoever thou wilt ask of God, God will give it thee." This all sounds fine on the face of it, but we now have a problem. We have to account for the presence of phrases such as .."Mary and her sister Martha" (v1), "Now Jesus loved Martha and her sister" (v5), "Then Martha, as soon as she heard that Jesus was coming, went and met him: but Mary sat still in the house." (v 20), "she went her way, and called Mary her sister secretly, saying, The Master is come, and calleth for thee." (v 28). Are we to assume that all these phrases in Chapter 11 are fictional constructs invented by scribes? If so that's a real cause for concern. If Martha is really Mary, is she conversing with herself? If not, who is the second woman here? Is she also a Mary? If Elizabeth's idea is valid, that involves a lot of text doctoring. If there really were two sisters at Bethany, one Mary is really outspoken and the other one, also called Mary is quite tacit. But if only one Mary, then if one were to change the identity of Mary of Magdala to solve some perceived emphasis (on her importance), wouldn't it be much simpler to just change Mary's name in the original as described into Martha with a theta and not need to add another wholly invented sister to the narrative at all? That's like a spymaster making up a very imaginative, yet shaky cover story which eventually fails through lack of rigor. And why would the early Christians close to the Apostles even care if Mary was given an important role or not? Jesus Himself said that wherever the gospel would be preached this act of hers would be to her a permanent testimony. Thus she essentially gained His imprimatur. He intended the act to be known in order to demonstrate the value of sacrificial repentance and commitment, so by softening the text, the editors would be going against His word. I also think that some of the linguistic or circumstantial points cited are a tad weak (e.g. the reference to the sudarion, asking "where have they laid him" etc.) or crying at the tomb. Jews mourning would wail and beat their breasts. Once you've got an argument mapped out it's easier to read into the text things that aren't really there. It's perfectly natural for a woman to cry at the tomb of a loved one, so we shouldn't see that as exceptional - it's a human story and entirely expected.
One thought in response to one point you make, or really a question you had ... After Jesus died, the male apostles edged Mary out of her leadership role and then in later centuries the church diminished her role in the Biblical texts and traditions.
Mary is such a common name; it would be important to figure out who the parents are to distinguish the different Mary's, and if Martha was a Mary but her name was changed for clarity.
Alternate possibility: scribe starts out making a copy while looking at two manuscripts. He notices the text doesn't match up for Mary/Martha. He favors one, but is unhappy about the differences. He tells some other scribe about this issue, and the other person says _"Hey, down the road there's a church who has their own copy of the gospel of John. Check what that one says!"._ And that becomes the tie-breaker.
That just displaces the change up the chain though, especially given how the chains of transmission where it is just Mary last for a very long time in many different languages.
About the Bart Ehermann thing. and the most difficult reading. They are connected, but not the same. So the most difficult reading (lectio difficilior) is about the grammatically most difficult version. Now the criteria of ebarresment is about locating stuff that could be considered to be true of the historical Jesus. For example the fact that Jesus was crucified is something that is embarresing or at least inconvenient for the early christians, but they aknowleged it because they couldn't get around it due to the fact that it most likely happend, that is the idea anyway.
Very nice work on the Gospel of John. 1. Is it true that the ‘beloved disciple’, ‘the disciple whom Jesus loved’ was Lazarus? (Lazar, Eleazar in Hebrew) 2. Is it true that the Gospel of John had two major sources: the Apostle John, and Lazarus? 3. That the gospel of john would have been written more rightly by Lazarus, someone who was raised from the dead and would have been more propaganda worthy for the jesus movement. Furthermore, we know or can infer that Lazarus was a rich man and a learned man and would have had the resources and motivation to have the gospel compiled? Lazarus and his family are so well connected in high places that he is able to mingle in and out and witness that would otherwise have been prohibited even to the apostles. 4. Can we infer that Lazarus and his family was so rich and influential, living in Bethany, the near the Essene almshouse and last stop and logical area where Galileans stopped on their way to Jerusalem? 5. Is Simon the Leper (the Potter -in the peshitta) the father of Lazarus? Is he actually Nicodemus? 6. The anointing of Jesus by Mary Magdalene (she would be the sister of Lazarus) happened in Simon the Pharisee’s house because she lived there too? 7. Nicodemus, Joseph of arimathea, Lazarus and Mary Magdalen aside from the Virgin Mary and Salome would be attending the crucifixion simply because according to the Law of Moses, the family of Jesus must take care of the dead, despite the heavy burden of becoming unclean for the Sabbath because that is what the burial laws demanded? So Jesus must be related by family law to these people somehow? 8. The Gospel of Luke being written earlier may have skipped the details on the family of Lazarus to protect these people? While the Gospel of John might have been written after a few decades after the fact that although still only alluding to the Joseph of Arimathea, Lazarus and Mary Magdalen gives enough protection after the Jesus movement would have gathered strenght after a few decades from Christ’s crucifixion?
That's a reasonable argument but it doesn't explain why Martha is also added next to Mary Magdalene in other VERY early Christian documents like the Epistle of the Apostles and Hippolytus' Commentary on the Song of Songs. You can read my Harvard Theological Review article here: dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/handle/10161/18592
Great great information But because I am not As knowledgeable as I wish I was There is much confusion for Me in my mind about who all these Mary's are but in a good way. Thank u
Thanks for that, really. I ask my university teacher about Marie Magdalene and the gospel of John. I didn't find his answer convincing. I thought it was so obvious that the Gospel was the Magdalene gospel in fact. She was the beloved disciple in that gospel. I asked also about the hiero gamos and they wouldn't answer me if there was a link. We don't know if they slept together but they really use the same imagerie I'm sure.
I've been really trying to study the historical context of Christianity for the past couple of years and one of the things I've learned that's really interesting to me is how A. It's very possible Jesus was originally a deciple of John the Baptizer but eventually split B. It's very likely that John the Baptizer was an Essene C. Based on the writings found in Qumran made by who were most likely Essenes, Essenes had a strong anti-woman, no girls allowed, all they do is make you sin, eat hot chip, and lie stance. C. Women were very prominent figures in the early Jesus movement D. This could have been a major factor in the possible fallout between Jesus and the Essenes So it's really funny to me that this book of the Bible had Mary Magdalene as a central figure and they decided to name it John. Out of spite maybe? I dunno I'm not that educated yes
Thx. to both of you. I'd have loved it , to know more about Just " Mary & Jesu ". With all these littel information about her, i found her as a very strong Charackter & beloved Personallity. Lots of sucsses to you both🙏👏😊
Regarding the anger versus compassion upon seeing the leper...If he was angry, the anger may have been directed at the enemy for causing the sickness. We should all be angry at sickness and disease when we see it because it's not of GOD. It's from the enemy.
Jesus's and the New Testament God's Love, compassion, forgiveness, and healing are central to most Christians' descriptions and message of their religion + why everybody should join it (besides the whole damning-your-eternal-soul-convert-for-your-own-good thing). Jesus is supposed to be full of love and wanting to help and heal people like that leper, not get annoyed and angry at such a downtrodden sick person. Perhaps worse, Jesus even ordered the leper to tell nobody and was cross when he couldn't enter the city in peace after the leper ran out and told everybody against Jesus's orders anyway. Jesus not wanting word of him to spread also might quibble the whole proselytizing thing that is a major part of Christianity. Speaking as a former Christian myself, Jesus being so angry with the leper instead of compassionate and eager to help would've left religious-me scratching my head at best and deeply uncomfortable at worst.
@@aste4949 OK I hear that. I feel OK if he was angry here though. You can be angry without lacking love. *If* that were the case, perhaps it was because the leper disobeyed the law in coming close and then Jesus didn't want the news to spread and the leper spread it, disobeying again. I'm not sure what He planned to do in the city but he couldn't because of this. I've seen a strong theme throughout the gospels of Jesus not wanting his fame to be spread or people to know particular things, ordering people to keep things to themselves, etc. Some say it is so the crowds wouldn't become all wrapped up in the miracles and would focus on the message. The opposite of compassion is being indifferent, which would be if he didn't care to help. He (potentially) just wasn't pleased.
I am fascinated by "scribalism" in all religious texts. I am particularly interested in comparative analysis of Quranic texts in classical arabic--alas more complicated by difficulties in accessibility--than early Christian texts. I am confounded by people that subscribe to the notion of orthodoxy--which I see as a political intervention-- for the simple reason that we will probably never find authorial texts in any of the world's major religions. The best we can do is bring our individual conceits to cooperative, comparative study and raise new and interesting questions about what it means to be a "follower."
So "Mary" was the Greeked version of "Mariam", what was the non-greeked version of "Martha"? Could there be scribal confusion betwern two forms that thr scribe of papyrus 66 (or whatever) attempted to resolve by creating two similarly named sisters? [Edit as I was typing that, I heard your interviewee mention that iota looks like theta @47:35 wtaf?]
The ideal thing is to have scriptures that are 100% perfect but do you think that these variations change the overall message that God is trying to convey to mankind?
The conclusion is not, strengthens Maria as a person, but it makes Maria to a prototype of every beliefer, who goes the way of Mary until the resurrection of Christ
![The Religion and War Feedback Loop? [Interview feat. Dr. Joe Henrich]](/img/n.gif)
Nooo! Don’t stop. Keep going. She’s fascinating.
I could listen to this all day
looks like he did cut her off early ~ she seemed to have so much more to say amd he was just like "cool that's enough for me"
he really came off as a skeptic the whole time to me
@@the-birbo I sensed the skepticism too but at I thought he was just playing the devil's advocate
@@lcbizzy2607 I don't think he was playing the devil's advocate, I think he was unsurprisingly a bit confused.
Excellent interview. Elizabeth Schrader is so articulate. She is a great example of how curiosity combined with honest inquiry can lead to great discoveries even by non-experts. That she's gone on to become a formidable expert is quite an inspiration. It seems very likely that the significant role of women in early christianity was increasingly erased over time and that our canonical record does not represent their presence and perhaps equal status among Jesus and his disciples and followers of the first century.
Of course it was. Under roman law women had zero rights. Cows had more rights. Elevating women was a direct challenge to the legal and social system of Rome during the development of the early church. In addition, as the centuries passed, men weren't any too keen on giving women a say in life and, like today, suffer jealousy, fear of loosing power as women gain in status.
I love the style of content you’re going with lately. 10ish min video as a synopsis with a full interview for those who want more. Great work
You were predestined to be different(Romans 8:29), he who has an ear to hear, let him hear(Mark 4:9).
HALLELUYAH!(PRAISE YE YAH!)
Loving the two versions and this format.
Here we have two young, seemly intelligent people, talking about texts being 2000 years old and can even dedicated their whole work time to this topic.
Isn't that kinda beautiful that we reached a stage that this is possible? :D and damn interesting interview
Reached a stage where this is possible? There have always been scholars. Ibn Sina wrote his medical treatise when he was 18 for example. St. Jerome moved to Bethlehem to learn better Hebrew to translate the Bible and he spoke Greek, Latin, Hebrew and a little Aramaic.
@@stevenv6463 I suspect they may be referring to the fact that people have not always been free to discuss these discrepancies as the Catholic Church would have them persecuted for heresy. I’m sure many scholars before recognized these things who of course were closer to the time period. But again we’re not free to speak out for fear of their lives
Idk they seem to have a very good friendship or like almost dated in the past just from how familiar they seem to be with their back and forth, in just the way they address eachother(obviously they mention they were in the same school/class at some point, but they seem to be much more than acquaintances)
This is a really fascinating interview. I have long felt that Mary of Bethany and Mary Magdalene were one and the same. My reasoning is this: How many times would Jesus have been anointed as Messiah? Once, by Mary Magdalene. G. of John was written later than Luke's, so John may have known Luke's Gospel. In Luke, when Jesus visits the sisters Mary and Martha, we learn that Mary is a devoted disciple who sits at the master's feet to learn. No Lazarus in the story. It seems John needs to place Mary close to Jerusalem, in Bethany, as Lazarus's sister, so he can tell the story of raising Lazarus from the dead. (And according to this interview, Martha was added later to this story - to downplay Mary's role.) The raising of Lazarus is a huge "sign" (of Jesus being the Messiah, Son of God; John's Gospel is a "signs gospel"), so if it really happened (vs. being a metaphor of raising one who is dead-in-spirit to one who is reborn-in-the-spirit), why is this story of Lazarus not in any of the synoptic Gospels which were earlier? The name Magdalene is important here, too. It may refer to the town of Magdala, but Jesus gave all of his close disciples nicknames: Simon became Kephas/Peter ("Rock"); the sons James and John of Zebedee became the "Sons of Thunder"; the Judas (not Iscariot) became Judas Thomas, or "Judas the Twin" (Toma in Aramaic means twin; possibly a spiritual twin). In Hebrew, Migdal means Tower. Some scholars believe Mary's nickname may have been "Midgal Eder" -- "Tower of the Flock" -- meaning Mary was a prominent, strong leader - guardian/watcher/keeper of the flock - in the early Jesus movement, and indeed she had her own followers after Jesus' crucifixion. Strong evidence for this nickname is from the prophet Micah, who refers to “Migdal Eder” with regard to how the Messiah would be revealed - from the “Tower of the Flock” (Micah 4:8). According to Elizabeth Schraeder, in this interview, she says early church father Tertullian knows that is was Mary, not Martha, who proclaimed Jesus as the Messiah, thus fulfilling Micah's prophecy! This makes Mary hugely important in the very early movement, but later on, many men weren't comfortable with a female leader. So the copyists and scribes who fiddled with the Gospel of John were trying to downplay Mary Magdalene's importance as a leader/teacher in the Church (as well as Judas Thomas's with the apologetic, reactive story of "Doubting Thomas" - refer to interviews with/books by Elaine Pagels). At the same time, John's author was trying to endorse the primacy of Simon Peter as the authoritative leader of the early movement. (Note that James Tabor believes Jesus's brother James was "the beloved disciple"; it was James who became the leader of the movement in Jerusalem following Jesus's death, and Paul calls James and Peter pillars of the church. Other scholars have posited that Mary Magdalene was the beloved disciple, and again, John or redactors, messed with the script to erase Mary's prominence.)
This is wildly fascinating, and completely changes the way that I look at the Bible, as a historical text. Thanks!
Michael Heiser's works will also change it
It's not an historical text. It's a collection of mythic tales.
@@johnsteiner3417 No one dies for mythic tales!
@@paulofrade2552 Yes they do. All the time.
@Shameless Papist I did, and that's why I believe religions.
I nomally don't concern myself with religious topics at all. Yet here I am listening to you for 50 minutes. I loved the level of detail on which you picked that apart.
Andrew, given a bit of time and more research, I would love to see a follow up to this video! Thanks to you both!
suggestion: name this channel ReligionForBrunch c:
We don't want to lose the Tolkien reference!
@@jarviswilliams5492 Luncheon? That'd be delightfully devilish.
I loved this. As to a lot of people not wanting to see their bible changed... Many of those think English was good enough for Jesus, so they won't let their kids study a second language...
I would pay to listen you and Elizabeth talk about these things the whole day!
Unrelated to the topic at hand, I think it's so cool that you found a topic that held your interest so strongly that not only did you decide to get a master's but are now in a PhD program.
So she did a version of going down the rabbit hole on the Internet by writing the song and wanting more information Mary. Good woman.
Absolutely fascinating! I could listen to Elizabeth talk about this all day.
Yeah, she should do a podcast
Another great channel, Andrew. Your interviews are up there with the best. Don't change anything. Thanks for your hard work and dedication!
Absolutely loved this interview. I do wish the question of asserting particular editorial intent was pushed a tad more; I think such assertions are unfortunately a common tool used in textual criticism, a tool that is far too blunt and unwieldy.
Stunning interview. All the changes speak for itself. Thank you both.
I am so thankful that religion for breakfast turned me onto this channel. This is such a wonderful content.
this interview has me HUNGRY for a similarly themed podcast
Check out Aeon Byte Gnostic Radio: Secret history of Mary Magdalene th-cam.com/video/RFvRF0tADJo/w-d-xo.html The Gnostic Mary Magdalene th-cam.com/video/7wokpIGV994/w-d-xo.html The Gospel of Mary Magdalene.
There are more shows on the topic, some better than others and some with better authors than others.
well done, thank you! One tiny correction: the term "Vorlage" (4:44) is German and not pronounced "Vorlash" but "Vor-la-ge" (g as in goat)
Her excitement about the topic is infectious and inspiring.
This was soooooooo good. I could listen to this for another three hours. How fascinating! Thank you for this 🙏🏻
When I read Against Praxeas (Tertullian) i found that in the text I read it was Martha, and not Mary proclaiming. Similarly in the VI book of Origen 24. I also found Martha existent. So while I don't have any wider knowledge about the topic I find Martha at least present in John 11 according to these two authors.
Another thing is that, assuming we want to eliminate Martha from the gospel, replacing names would not be enough since there is for example 11,28 which would be pretty senseless then.
Eventually I'm a little confused because what I hear seems to me not agreeing to what I read.
Religion for second Breakfast? My hobbit heart is happy!
What about 'Religion for Brunch' (not my idea)
Quite excellent discussion. The suppression of Mary Magdalene is very apparent from his work. One note: the lady's voice sometimes drops below a whisper at crucial times, and cannot be heard by slightly deaf people like me. Please remember you are making a recording, not talking to a guy.
there is a caption function on TH-cam so you can read subtitles wherever the audio isn't so audible
Do you have a video talking about which are the oldest manuscripts found?
For people reading this now, Useful Charts has such a video here.
I really enjoyed listening to this interview. Fascinating content!
Extremely fascinating.
I was skeptical at first but she won me over at the end. I'm convinced now.
Is there any edition of the New Testament where this is corrected? Like a version where in the Gospel of John, Mary Magdalene, Mary of Bethany, and Martha are just written as Mary?
By far one of the most interesting videos on this channel. Great interview, and I look forward to learning more about this scholar's work.
What a precious find ❤️ FA-BU-LOUS. Thank you so much 🤸♀️ 😁
Excellent exposition because it shows how research works. Things get overlooked...there's still more to uncover!
I was hooked from start to end! Amazing work!
Thank you for this interview. I really enjoyed Elizabeth's research, and especially her perspective; and I would love to hear more. Happily, I have found a few of her TH-cam talks. Unfortunately, her voice comes across very faintly (almost to whisper level), in places (and she has a habit of making a statement sound like a question), so I was happy for the closed captions!
This was an amazing interview. Thank you!
Very good interview. Mary Magdalene is one of the most important persons in the New Testament, and a woman who has been vilified by church leaders. Thank you for analyzing these texts. I hope that Elizabeth Schrader publishes a book on the subject soon.
Vilified by Church leaders... making her a Saint. Ok coomer.
Dierdre!! I worked with her back in the day; what an exquisite soul. This is great; love this! John exalts MM - so if Martha was redacted in would be consistent with that Joanine MM bent. I am of the school that believes Mary of Bethany refers to MM. There are many reasons to interpret it this way. Luke also changes the anointing story drastically -- Luke was later than John, so I'd be interested in when the redactions of John to include Martha appear. I concur with this woman entirely, and thrilled by the textual research. John was controversial enough without having the heretical authority, MM, to be so very prominent. Go Elizabeth Schrader!!!
Do you have any recommendation for a bible with added commentary taken the modern research into account? The topic interests me, but I am not really able to judge what would be a good book since I am not a a student or scholar of the subject.
I would recommend just going to biblehub.com, because you can bring up every verse or chapter and there's commentary on the passage below it.
This was so much fun to listen to. I loved listening to her tell her story through her own Dunning-Kruger Effect, then moving her career into academia, and ultimately learning how to make a very convincing academic argument.
Great interview.
Love that you mentioned Z Man. He was one of my favorite professors at UNC. It’s incredible that the triangle area is a powerhouse of religious (specifically early christian) studies.
i wish i knew people thati could share this with. outstanding work, both of you.
Ms. Schrader seems to present this as if Mary and Martha may in fact be the same person, based on the evidence she has encountered in some manuscripts. I am curious if any evidence might point to the possibility of two separate women being named Mary. For example, Mary of sister of Lazarus and Mary Magdalene engaging each other.
Mary Magdalene was the sister of Lazarus. Great work Elizabeth Schrader; keep going.
Fascinating stuff! Hearing about the importance of the physical objects that are the manuscripts really blew me away. I feel like it might be a bit of a stretch to ascribe too much "intention" to the changes - like trying to deliberately downgrade the importance of Mary - as it seems plausible that an originally simple copying error (ι to θ) could somehow escalate over time. Even though there are a million possible evolutionary paths, the random mutations eventually lead to whatever manuscripts end up being produced.
Love this this! I’ll be signing up for patreon today!
Wow first time I’d fully absorbed the fact you have 3 first names
This is a very strong theory to me, I love it so much!
Do you think scribes make changes or were told make changes ?
This is an awesome interview. This actually made me want to go back and re-read the text and I found something interesting. In John 11:2 Mary is described as "the one who who had annointed the Lord with perfume oil and dried his feet with with her hair" as if this incident had happened prior to Lazarus' falling ill and ultimately dying. However this incident isn't described in detail until John 12:3. And in the verses leading up to this anointing in Chapter 12 the event is said to occur 6 days before Passover in Bethany "where Lazarus was whom Jesus had raised from the dead" as if the anointing of the feet took place after Lazarus' resurrection.
I also looked at Mary and Martha in Luke and they are mentioned in Luke 10:38-42 and here the name of the village they are from is not mentioned nor do they have a brother. Also Mary is only described as sitting at Jesus' feet listening to him speak while Martha is "burdened with much serving". There is no mention of Mary pouring expensive oil on Jesus' feet. Furthermore the only Lazarus mentioned in Luke is a poor leper in a parable by Jesus about a poor man who dies and goes to heaven while the rich man who neglected to help him goes to Gehenna.
What an amazingly interesting conversation. Please do a follow up. I would love to see more
the alleged alterations dilute the role of Mary Magdalene, but since afte it there were multple women, doesn't this strengthen the role of women in general in comparison to the 12 male disciples? 1 important "exceptional" woman vs. multiple "normal" women?
I think the point is not that they were worried about women in general so much at Mary Magdalene herself. Perhaps her prominence was bringing about a cult of personality amongst early Christians which some found worrisome.
@@elfarlaur you mean the feared a situation lik in the Chatolic Church nowadays, where Mary would be worshipped almost as prominently as Jesus himself?
@@SuperTantePeter exactly
elfarlaur well I guess they failed then 😅
i love how when she gets more passionate she gets quieter, demanding more attention.
The Orthodox Church venerates Mary Magdalene and calls her “equal to the Apostles.” Not sure if that fits the whole suppression hypothesis.
Their views today does not mean there wasn't controversy in early christianity. The idea of her equality may have arisen later on.
my point exactly
elfarlaur that’s a very good question. At what point in ancient Christianity did the ancient Church venerate Mary Magdalene as “equal to the Apostles?” According to the Orthodox Church, the tradition is because she evangelized to areas of modern day France. When that tradition became popularized can also be a point of research.
I knew that Orthodox Christianity didn't demonise Mary Magdalene but I din't know that it venerated her and put her equal to the Apostles, interesting.
This is awesome info, thank you for sharing!
That was a really long wait for the Gospel of Thomas reference.
You are a rare gem in a sea of pepples
Wow! This is fascinating. Thank you for this interview.
Excellent and fascinating interview!
Great interview!
According to the line of argument advanced by Elizabeth, that there is only one sister in John 11, supposedly supported by historical texts, I could now re-create (not having access to it right now) the KJV 1611 first printing as starting from John 11 rather in this fashion: "Now a certain man was sick, named Lazarus, of Bethany, the town of Mary....Therefore she sent unto Him, saying, 'Lord, he whom thou lovest is sick.' When Jesus heard that, he said, 'This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God might be glorified thereby.' Now Jesus loved Mary and Lazarus....Then Mary, as soon as she heard that Jesus was coming, went and met him. Then said Mary unto Jesus, Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died. But I know, that even now, whatsoever thou wilt ask of God, God will give it thee."
This all sounds fine on the face of it, but we now have a problem. We have to account for the presence of phrases such as .."Mary and her sister Martha" (v1), "Now Jesus loved Martha and her sister" (v5), "Then Martha, as soon as she heard that Jesus was coming, went and met him: but Mary sat still in the house." (v 20), "she went her way, and called Mary her sister secretly, saying, The Master is come, and calleth for thee." (v 28). Are we to assume that all these phrases in Chapter 11 are fictional constructs invented by scribes? If so that's a real cause for concern. If Martha is really Mary, is she conversing with herself? If not, who is the second woman here? Is she also a Mary? If Elizabeth's idea is valid, that involves a lot of text doctoring. If there really were two sisters at Bethany, one Mary is really outspoken and the other one, also called Mary is quite tacit. But if only one Mary, then if one were to change the identity of Mary of Magdala to solve some perceived emphasis (on her importance), wouldn't it be much simpler to just change Mary's name in the original as described into Martha with a theta and not need to add another wholly invented sister to the narrative at all? That's like a spymaster making up a very imaginative, yet shaky cover story which eventually fails through lack of rigor. And why would the early Christians close to the Apostles even care if Mary was given an important role or not? Jesus Himself said that wherever the gospel would be preached this act of hers would be to her a permanent testimony. Thus she essentially gained His imprimatur. He intended the act to be known in order to demonstrate the value of sacrificial repentance and commitment, so by softening the text, the editors would be going against His word.
I also think that some of the linguistic or circumstantial points cited are a tad weak (e.g. the reference to the sudarion, asking "where have they laid him" etc.) or crying at the tomb. Jews mourning would wail and beat their breasts. Once you've got an argument mapped out it's easier to read into the text things that aren't really there. It's perfectly natural for a woman to cry at the tomb of a loved one, so we shouldn't see that as exceptional - it's a human story and entirely expected.
That's a good observation.
One thought in response to one point you make, or really a question you had ... After Jesus died, the male apostles edged Mary out of her leadership role and then in later centuries the church diminished her role in the Biblical texts and traditions.
Great content! Keep up the good work darlin & God bless!!
Wow.. I'm amazed by her research and discovery.. so we need to recover the story of Mary Magdalene in John Gospel.. 😘😘😘
How do I buy her journal report - or her thesis ? I want to get it!
This was awesome thank you very much.
Anyone know of any other channels like this? Like, academic religious and/or biblical studies channels?
This is a super cool theory. Thanks for the content.
Mary is such a common name; it would be important to figure out who the parents are to distinguish the different Mary's, and if Martha was a Mary but her name was changed for clarity.
Ok this is epic. thank you
Awesome. Glad you like it!
Alternate possibility: scribe starts out making a copy while looking at two manuscripts. He notices the text doesn't match up for Mary/Martha. He favors one, but is unhappy about the differences. He tells some other scribe about this issue, and the other person says _"Hey, down the road there's a church who has their own copy of the gospel of John. Check what that one says!"._ And that becomes the tie-breaker.
That just displaces the change up the chain though, especially given how the chains of transmission where it is just Mary last for a very long time in many different languages.
About the Bart Ehermann thing. and the most difficult reading. They are connected, but not the same. So the most difficult reading (lectio difficilior) is about the grammatically most difficult version. Now the criteria of ebarresment is about locating stuff that could be considered to be true of the historical Jesus. For example the fact that Jesus was crucified is something that is embarresing or at least inconvenient for the early christians, but they aknowleged it because they couldn't get around it due to the fact that it most likely happend, that is the idea anyway.
Very nice work on the Gospel of John.
1. Is it true that the ‘beloved disciple’, ‘the disciple whom Jesus loved’ was Lazarus? (Lazar, Eleazar in Hebrew)
2. Is it true that the Gospel of John had two major sources: the Apostle John, and Lazarus?
3. That the gospel of john would have been written more rightly by Lazarus, someone who was raised from the dead and would have been more propaganda worthy for the jesus movement. Furthermore, we know or can infer that Lazarus was a rich man and a learned man and would have had the resources and motivation to have the gospel compiled? Lazarus and his family are so well connected in high places that he is able to mingle in and out and witness that would otherwise have been prohibited even to the apostles.
4. Can we infer that Lazarus and his family was so rich and influential, living in Bethany, the near the Essene almshouse and last stop and logical area where Galileans stopped on their way to Jerusalem?
5. Is Simon the Leper (the Potter -in the peshitta) the father of Lazarus? Is he actually Nicodemus?
6. The anointing of Jesus by Mary Magdalene (she would be the sister of Lazarus) happened in Simon the Pharisee’s house because she lived there too?
7. Nicodemus, Joseph of arimathea, Lazarus and Mary Magdalen aside from the Virgin Mary and Salome would be attending the crucifixion simply because according to the Law of Moses, the family of Jesus must take care of the dead, despite the heavy burden of becoming unclean for the Sabbath because that is what the burial laws demanded? So Jesus must be related by family law to these people somehow?
8. The Gospel of Luke being written earlier may have skipped the details on the family of Lazarus to protect these people? While the Gospel of John might have been written after a few decades after the fact that although still only alluding to the Joseph of Arimathea, Lazarus and Mary Magdalen gives enough protection after the Jesus movement would have gathered strenght after a few decades from Christ’s crucifixion?
She's amazing
can you please leave a link on where to buy Elizabeth Schrader's book please.
Hi! I don't have a book out yet but you can read my Harvard Theological Review article here: hdl.handle.net/10161/18592 :)
@@elizabethschrader9106 Thank you!
maybe the intent was not to limit the role of Mary Magdalene but to generalise it in accordance to the Gosple of Luke?
That's a reasonable argument but it doesn't explain why Martha is also added next to Mary Magdalene in other VERY early Christian documents like the Epistle of the Apostles and Hippolytus' Commentary on the Song of Songs. You can read my Harvard Theological Review article here: dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/handle/10161/18592
This is great. Thanks so much.
Came for the Gospel, stayed for the pop music
Great great information
But because I am not
As knowledgeable as I wish I was
There is much confusion for
Me in my mind about who all these
Mary's are but in a good way.
Thank u
Thanks for that, really. I ask my university teacher about Marie Magdalene and the gospel of John. I didn't find his answer convincing. I thought it was so obvious that the Gospel was the Magdalene gospel in fact. She was the beloved disciple in that gospel. I asked also about the hiero gamos and they wouldn't answer me if there was a link. We don't know if they slept together but they really use the same imagerie I'm sure.
Excellent video. So fascinating. Best wishes to her. 👏👏
You briefly talked about that Women cought in adultery story is added later. Any existing article or youtube film about it?
Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. Stuttgart, Germany: 2001, Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft. pp. 187-189.
Wondering if Magdala which can be translated as the tower can also be translated as a witness.
Love this. Thank you so much.
I've been really trying to study the historical context of Christianity for the past couple of years and one of the things I've learned that's really interesting to me is how
A. It's very possible Jesus was originally a deciple of John the Baptizer but eventually split
B. It's very likely that John the Baptizer was an Essene
C. Based on the writings found in Qumran made by who were most likely Essenes, Essenes had a strong anti-woman, no girls allowed, all they do is make you sin, eat hot chip, and lie stance.
C. Women were very prominent figures in the early Jesus movement
D. This could have been a major factor in the possible fallout between Jesus and the Essenes
So it's really funny to me that this book of the Bible had Mary Magdalene as a central figure and they decided to name it John. Out of spite maybe? I dunno I'm not that educated yes
Thx. to both of you. I'd have loved it , to know more about Just " Mary & Jesu ". With all these littel information about her, i found her as a very strong Charackter & beloved Personallity. Lots of sucsses to you both🙏👏😊
Plot twist: Martha is actually being erased to make Mary more prominent.
I really enjoyed this video.
Regarding the anger versus compassion upon seeing the leper...If he was angry, the anger may have been directed at the enemy for causing the sickness. We should all be angry at sickness and disease when we see it because it's not of GOD. It's from the enemy.
Many texts say Jesus was "moved with compassion" but what's wrong if the text had said Jesus was angry?
I don't see an issue there worth changing
Jesus's and the New Testament God's Love, compassion, forgiveness, and healing are central to most Christians' descriptions and message of their religion + why everybody should join it (besides the whole damning-your-eternal-soul-convert-for-your-own-good thing). Jesus is supposed to be full of love and wanting to help and heal people like that leper, not get annoyed and angry at such a downtrodden sick person. Perhaps worse, Jesus even ordered the leper to tell nobody and was cross when he couldn't enter the city in peace after the leper ran out and told everybody against Jesus's orders anyway. Jesus not wanting word of him to spread also might quibble the whole proselytizing thing that is a major part of Christianity. Speaking as a former Christian myself, Jesus being so angry with the leper instead of compassionate and eager to help would've left religious-me scratching my head at best and deeply uncomfortable at worst.
@@aste4949 OK I hear that.
I feel OK if he was angry here though. You can be angry without lacking love.
*If* that were the case, perhaps it was because the leper disobeyed the law in coming close and then Jesus didn't want the news to spread and the leper spread it, disobeying again. I'm not sure what He planned to do in the city but he couldn't because of this.
I've seen a strong theme throughout the gospels of Jesus not wanting his fame to be spread or people to know particular things, ordering people to keep things to themselves, etc. Some say it is so the crowds wouldn't become all wrapped up in the miracles and would focus on the message.
The opposite of compassion is being indifferent, which would be if he didn't care to help. He (potentially) just wasn't pleased.
I am fascinated by "scribalism" in all religious texts. I am particularly interested in comparative analysis of Quranic texts in classical arabic--alas more complicated by difficulties in accessibility--than early Christian texts. I am confounded by people that subscribe to the notion of orthodoxy--which I see as a political intervention-- for the simple reason that we will probably never find authorial texts in any of the world's major religions. The best we can do is bring our individual conceits to cooperative, comparative study and raise new and interesting questions about what it means to be a "follower."
Follow up to this?
So "Mary" was the Greeked version of "Mariam", what was the non-greeked version of "Martha"? Could there be scribal confusion betwern two forms that thr scribe of papyrus 66 (or whatever) attempted to resolve by creating two similarly named sisters? [Edit as I was typing that, I heard your interviewee mention that iota looks like theta @47:35 wtaf?]
I am going to get fat with a 2nd breakfast.
as yeshua said; be full up
The ideal thing is to have scriptures that are 100% perfect but do you think that these variations change the overall message that God is trying to convey to mankind?
GREAT CONTENT
Could you please do a video on syzygy in religion/ early Christianity ie syzygy of Christ. Also the book/manuscript pistis Sophia
The conclusion is not, strengthens Maria as a person, but it makes Maria to a prototype of every beliefer, who goes the way of Mary until the resurrection of Christ
anyone have that johannes website link? i tried finding it with no luck!
Κύριε Ἰησοῦ Χριστέ, Υἱέ τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἐλέησόν με τὸν ἁμαρτωλόν☦
5:30 maybe he was angry about the treatment or situation of the leper and had compassion on him?
Ok.It looks like She (M.Magdalene: from Magdalia) was the 2nd Pope after 1st, James of the Church; the 3rd was only then Peter. Who against?