Interesting??? You must not read. He’s talking about nothing new at all! Only thing he has done is send chills down any scholars back. In other words there are much more both wiser and more intelligent scholars than mr. bart
I first heard Bart ehrman's name from Dr. Zakir naik....... then I start searching him more and more, now, this 4 hours are the most incredble time I think I have spent on youtube.....thank you sir ehrman and derek........love to be your subscriber.....
Derek is my hero, he's highly professional, highly intelligent, very passionate, extremely attentive to his guests, experienced, a great interviewer, engages the guests in such a personal way as well. mythvision is definitely the premier channel for this type of content!
Thank you Dr. Eherman for your scholarship, and thank you Derek for your continuous production and search for truth. We are all happy to come along for the ride.🤝🏼
Bart claims that jesus was crucified because he was claiming to be the king of the jews not because of claiming to be the son of god and blasphemy, thats historical wrong. We know from the bible that he was crucified because he claimed to be the son of god.
@@Horvat04if I might observe Josephus was writing in Rome a few generations later. So this may have been the case: or may not. Why do scholars have so much trouble saying they don't know. I feel they need spend time at Coroners courts to hear how often Open verdicts are recorded. At best you can say this might have been the case but we can never know.
@@russellmiles2861 even josephus got his agenda, political aspect you know...not moral or religious...there are other manuscripts where its claimed that josephus said something according to his own josephus scriptures but we dont have it. So they claim it never existed but truth is we dont have it for example. I say probably we dont have everything...things get lost its normal. But to simply claim it never existed or fake is stupid. Bart also claims alot of things..
Derek is geeking-out. Good for him. To be able to talk about something you love with a world renowned expert is a priceless experience. Much Love & Blessings.
Myth Vision really stepping up with great scholars and Bart D. Ehrman is definitely one of the ten great scholars in his field....this is a treat for those applying modern skepticism towards the biblical texts....and those just wanting to learn. Thanks to everyone involved.
Bart claims that jesus was crucified because he was claiming to be the king of the jews not because of claiming to be the son of god and blasphemy, thats historical wrong. We know from the bible and from josephus flavius that he was crucified because he claimed to be the son of god.
@Raydensheraj How is he such when he makes such a mess with Mark 2:26 ?? How can Dr Bart Ehrman be trusted to correctly explain all of the new testament when he is unable to get Mark 2:26 correct?? ● the following is my reason for the critique. Dr Bart Ehrman shows his stupidity, in the scriptures, when he claims that Jesus is incorrect, when Jesus states, that David went into the house of God, in the days of Abiathar, the high priest; because it is Ahimelech, his father, who was the high priest, when David went there. [ this shows clearly that Dr Bart Ehrman does not understand what he has read concerning this verse. ] Jesus did not say that David went into the house of God to Abiathar, the high priest, he did not say that David went into the house of God, and did what he did, when Abiathar was the high priest, what he said is that David went there, in the days of Abiathar, the high priest. What David did, what he provided, and the events which transpired after he went into the house of God, to Ahimelech, continued after the death of Ahimelech. The days of Abiathar, who became the high priest after his father, encompasses the entire time line, of the events, which Jesus used, in his answer, to the question posed by the Pharisees. The days of Ahimelech does not encompass the same time line. Therefore he cannot be used as the reference point. He was killed by Saul, before other events, which are covered, in this highlighted time line, occurred. One of these events being, this interaction, between David and Abiathar: 1 Samuel 22:20-23 And one of the sons of Ahimelech the son of Ahitub, named Abiathar, escaped, and fled after David. [21] And Abiathar shewed David that Saul had slain the Lord's priests. [22] And David said unto Abiathar, I knew it that day, when Doeg the Edomite was there, that he would surely tell Saul: I have occasioned the death of all the persons of thy father's house. [23] Abide thou with me, fear not: for he that seeketh my life seeketh thy life: but with me thou shalt be in safeguard. And, also, this interaction, between king Solomon and Abiathar, the high priest. 1 Kings 2:23-24,26 Then king Solomon sware by the Lord, saying, God do so to me, and more also, if Adonijah have not spoken this word against his own life. [24] Now therefore, as the Lord liveth, which hath established me, and set me on the throne of David my father, and who hath made me an house, as he promised, Adonijah shall be put to death this day. [26] And unto Abiathar the priest said the king, Get thee to Anathoth, unto thine own fields; for thou art worthy of death: but I will not at this time put thee to death, because thou barest the ark of the Lord God before David my father, and because thou hast been afflicted in all wherein my father was afflicted. Jesus, by using the highest status that Abiathar attained to in life, to identify him, and starting with an event which took place with David, bookends the time line, in which can be found, the example, that provides substance to his answer. The Pharisees question to Jesus is: Mark 2:24 [24]And the Pharisees said unto him, Behold, why do they on the sabbath day that which is not lawful? He, at the beginning of his response, points them to an act of David which by the Law is also adjudged unlawful. Mark 2:26 [26]How he went into the house of God in the days of Abiathar the high priest, and did eat the shewbread, which is not lawful to eat but for the priests, and gave also to them which were with him? Yet, David was provided protection from death, and through him protection for those under him. He provided protection for a priest who was innocent. 1 Samuel 22:22-23 And David said unto Abiathar, I knew it that day, when Doeg the Edomite was there, that he would surely tell Saul: I have occasioned the death of all the persons of thy father's house. [23] Abide thou with me, fear not: for he that seeketh my life seeketh thy life: but with me thou shalt be in safeguard. And David, even though he had died, provided protection, from death, for a high priest who was guilty of death. 1 Kings 2:26-27 And unto Abiathar the priest said the king, Get thee to Anathoth, unto thine own fields; for thou art worthy of death: but I will not at this time put thee to death, because thou barest the ark of the Lord God before David my father, and because thou hast been afflicted in all wherein my father was afflicted. [27] So Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being priest unto the Lord ; that he might fulfil the word of the Lord, which he spake concerning the house of Eli in Shiloh. The like protection, from death, that Jesus offered him disciples, he being Lord of the sabbath: of which he witnessed; Mark 2:27-28 [27]And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath: [28]Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath. And the protection, from death, which he was going to provide, for a world, that was guilty of death, by what he was going to do, though his death. John 3:14-16 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: [15] That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. [16] For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For Jesus speaks of what he knows; he speaks of what he has seen. John 3:11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness. JESUS SPOKE ACCORDING TO THE LAW AND TO THE TESTIMONY. Isaiah 8:14-16,20 And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both the houses of Israel, for a gin and for a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem. [15] And many among them shall stumble, and fall, and be broken, and be snared, and be taken. [16] Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples. [20] To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. ●● from where does Dr Bart Ehrman speak? From where is he authorized? Whose counsel is he giving? Dr Bart Ehrman shows that he was stupid to this passage of scripture (Mark 2:24-28) many years ago, and continues to show, that he is still stupid to it, this many years since. ● This question is therefore asked of, and concerning, Dr Bart Ehrman: Job 38:2 Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge? ●●● To write 35 pages that document and highlight your stupidity, means that you are very much taken by it. To get an A for what you have written, means that you had a poor teacher or you were purposely set up.
I don't know what level of scholar he is or isn't. His gift, described by him and obvious when one watches or listens to him, is talking in a way regular people can understand.
I canceled my ticket to see Spider Man: Across the Multi-verse when I saw this was a 4 hour interview! I can’t think of a better way to spend a Sunday morning than watching Derek discuss the New Testament with Dr. Ehrman!
Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him said any Jew or Christian who hears about me and then dies without believing In the message with which I have been sent but he will be from the dwellers of the hellfire. Sahih Muslim. Chapter 240 of the Book of. Faith, Vol.1
The spirit of humanity, enthusiasm for life, and generosity is so evident with these two. Listening to Derek's podcasts has become my favorite pastime!
Dr. Bart Ehrman is a very good scholar and I listen to most of his debates and interviews. I have learned a lot from him and will continue to learn from him. Thanks Dr. Ehrman
Derek, there is nothing "infamous" about ANYONE searching for the truth about ANY subject. Bart has devoted his academic lifetime to reading and studying ancient manuscripts. What I've learned from him has caused me to question everything I've learned in my lifetime. However, if all the many stoties in the Old Testament and New Testament are nothing more than creative writing exercises, I believe we're still left with questions about the origin and creation of the universe we're living in. I believe that's the ultimate question the authors of the ancient manuscripts were trying to answer with some very interesting stories.😇
What are you trying to do? Strip from yourself all your chance of believing in the only thing that can save you from your own sins with clever worded arguments? I love you and I don’t want this for you, don’t bring destruction on yourself to justify your wrongdoing.
@Trustinjesuschrist777 I've never sinned. Ever. To have sinned, I'd need to believe in sin, which requires to believe in someone to sin against, which requires a deity, and I don't believe in any deities. So I cannot sin. Besides, should I trust in JC as your screen name indicates, who will come in Armageddon along with the beings who have been prepared for the time and day of destruction to kill most of humanity? For what? Oh, I see... trust him to save me from the mythological threats that he/they are making upon the soul I don't have... so I go to the heaven/paradise that I don't believe in and - what? Serve the god of genocide, abuse, war, bloodthirsty, and destruction, Yahweh? Nah. Thanks.
@@Trustinjesuschrist777And you don't know me. Don't know my life. You're assuming there's wrongdoing in my life because... I listen to good arguments about a subject I enjoy? Proverbs 14:15, one of my favorite biblical citations, says: "The gullible believe anything they're told; the prudent sift and weigh every word."
@@bortiz11 Why are you wasting your time on arguments against what you do not believe then? And why do you need outside input on this subject in a 3 hour video by a scholar on the New Testament in order to deny it if it’s so clearly wrong? It sounds like you made your decision far before watching this video, yet you still needed more reasons. How many reasons do you look for to disprove Hinduism?
@Trustinjesuschrist777 your set of questions is good, minus the word "wasting." I like to have information and reasons for my beliefs and most opinions. This team here presents doctoral opinions and summarize evidence in an easy format to understand. I also have watched arguments by theists explaining their reasons for believing, and if at any point someone proves sufficiently that there's a deity, I'll be a believer. I have looked into Buddhism - that's what I think you tried to refer to - and many other religions as well. Again, you assume and infer a lot, but you don't know me at all, Daniel. And yes, I made my decision before watching this video. Yet, my deconversion journey took 10 years, my deconstruction took another 10, and reassembling myself (my ethical and moral principles, definitions of love and caring, meaning of sacrifice and passion, etc) has taken another 10 years and is still ongoing. All that, plus I'm an atheist who likes to think through most matters and find their root, married to a Jehovah's Witness who is taught the basics of the bible to be kept in the cult and under their control, avoiding critical thinking and especially negative thinking of any kind against their organization. That, and Christian nationalists controlling our government, push me to learn and keep learning about this mythos and its effects on humanity, because it affects me daily. Now you know me a bit more. :)
GOLDWIN SMITH, Professor of Modern History at Oxford, wrote in Nineteenth Century, October 1881 "They alone regard their race as superior to humanity, and looks forward not to its ultimate union with other races, but to its triumph over them all, and to its final ascendancy under the leadership of a "tribal Messiah."
Why u think the bible refers it to the God of Israel, if this is the God who created everything it should be the God of everyone, this is very clear under Babylonian exile they became hostile to other races
@@youtubeaccount3230 Why do I think the bible refers to the God of Israel? Interestingly, I can answer that for you. Only if you're religious, yourself, you'll be completely blind to this (just as you're supposed to be). This is why the religious have all become the enemy against the rest of us, on earth, today. If we want to expose these elites, and their plans of complete global control, we must first expose their creation, (that's known as religion). Because it seems undeniable, that it was these elites who created religion, and religion has always been their long term plan to gain full global control, (through their made up religions, they invented, they wrote, and they influenced globally). We can even prove so much of this today, yet nobody ever does, or ever wants too. So, just how bizarre, and extraordinarily strange, is that? In fact, how dangerous is that? But just ask yourselves? Q1. Who wrote Genesis (the Old Testament)? Most agree it was the Israelites, hence those people, we may not name. Q2. What people have been named and shamed throughout history, by many of the world's most intelligent and influential people, as being liars, cheats, manipulators, and thieves? Q3. What people have been thrown out of every European country at various times? Q4. What people have always insisted that they're God's chosen people? Q5. What people have always been seen as looking for full global control and overall dominance? So, tell me, what better way of achieving complete global control, than through religion, (with its billions of followers)? The length of deceit these particular people will go to, and have gone to, all throughout history (to achieve their aims), is unlimited, and only understanding this, before anything else, are you then be able to see everything clearly. These people already do hold so much power today, and It's not in governments (as we see so many people wrongly thinking today). No, we're looking much higher than that, it's already in our towns, in our cities, even in our villages! The Churches, the Temples, the Synagogues, and the Mosques are all controlled and run by the 1% (elites). They are the controllers of all monies, and their own made up, and created religions, (that billions follow), is their Empire. They own more land and property in this world today, than anyone, or anything else, they've the most powerful, the most wealthy, and the most widely spanned Empire in history. We know they own all our banks, our chain stores, our energy companies, IT industries, our water boards, our gold, silver, & diamond mines, our doctors surgeries, our hospitals, our schools, our military manufactures, and many more of our other vital enterprises. They also control everything we read and watch, (therefore, think, and learn), they own over 90% of the world's media. Yet oddly, nobody ever asks why? The religious people really are only the slaves of these people's overall attempt at complete global control. When, oh when, will this reality ever start to hit home? If ever? Christianity is rooted in, and comes from, the Second Temple of Judaism, but the two religions diverged in the first centuries of the Christian era. When Christianity diverged from Judaism, when we study that divergence, we find that many of the highest rabbis converted from Judaism, to the Christian faith. (Learn all about Saint Peter) Then, just as interestingly, when we see Islam arrive, 350-400 years later, we see, that once again, many of the highest rabbis also converted from Judaism to the Islamic faith. Why? Because these religions, (they invented, they created, they wrote, and they influenced throughout the world) is how they've been planning total world control, and total world domination all along. They have already accumulated huge and influential material wealth. Wealth, they used to take control of the world's media. Wealth, they used to, stir up revolutions in various parts of the globe. We know they stood behind, not only the French Revolution, but also the Communist Revolution and, in fact, most of the revolutions we do know about. They've formed secret organizations, such as the Freemasons, Rotary Clubs, and the Lions, which they're using to continue spreading their Zionist beliefs around the world today. And all in order to destroy societies, and to carry out their long planned Zionist interests. We know they stood behind World War I, and they formed the League of Nations, (through which they believed they could begin to rule the world). They were behind World War II, through which they made huge, massive financial gains. There is no war going on anywhere, without them having their finger in it. The religious people, really are, only the slaves of these elites, and their non-stop attempt to gain complete global control. Only they're all so engrossed believing in a religious fantasy (just like they're supposed to), they're all completely blind to it. We can even start to predict what comes next? In fact, I'd say that within the next 20/40 years, we're going to hear about some amazing discovery in Israel. Probably in a cave somewhere (again), and it will more than likely be, some scrolls, (again). Only this time, well this time, miraculously, they'll contain so-called ''proof'' that God, did, indeed, reward them with the ''promised land''. And of course, all the Churches, Temples, Synagogues, Mosques and so-called, ''experts'' will all verify it.
@@youtubeaccount3230 We've much more proof of this being the reality of religion, than we have of any religion being real, but the religious are all blind to it. Genesis is a book of books, that sees the reader believing that a certain people (we may no longer name), were the harshly treated, were the hated and were the hard done by, who were even slaves of Ancient Egypt! The truth, however, is just so different. Today we do know, the Israelites, were not slaves at any time in Egypt, no, they were in fact, many of the better-paid scribes, masons, and artists. We actually do know this for sure, as we can go and look around these uncovered, discovered, Israelite worker villages today. They were also able, to build their own tombs, (we can go and look in their tombs today), they'd steal the colours they needed to decorate their own tombs, (as colours of all kinds, were extremely expensive) from the Pharaoh's tomb, they were decorating. Egypt's chief archaeologist, Zahi Hawass, told reporters at the site, that the find sheds much more light on the lifestyle and the origins of the pyramid builders. Most importantly, he said, the workers were not recruited from slaves, but they were a paid work force hired by the Pharaoh. We also know they went on strike, when the Pharaoh was late delivering their grain, only, slaves don't strike?. This kills the story of Moses, as does there, being no mention of Moses anywhere throughout all Ancient Egypt, yet we know they recorded everything, from ever war and battle they were involved in, even the wars and battles they lost are recorded, only they'd record false battle scenes to make it seem like an Egyptian victory. We see this many times in Ancient Egypt, yet we see and find nothing about Moses at all, or even any Israelite unrest. That's proof of religion's very beginning being nothing more than a fabricated myth. These people, make these things up, It's what they've always done all throughout history, and it's done, to gain sympathy, but sympathy, they then use, to gain more power. We have an entire history proving this to all of us. We know of many other things they've done throughout history, there are so many, I'll give a couple of well known examples. Like... We know they took over Russia during the Revolution of 1917. And we know they used the "Pale Of Settlement" as their alibi to prove they had no involvement in the revolution, claiming they were all pushed out to Belarus, Lithuania, Moldova and much of present-day Ukraine (looking for sympathy). Only the reality, we now know today, is, they did indeed, take over Russia in the revolution. We also know they financed all sides of WW2, including the Nazi's, massively increasing their own wealth, and therefore attaining much more power, power they then used to make their erroneous claims, against the Nazi, (looking for sympathy). You have to give it to them, they're very consistent, they're extremely persistent, and they're utterly determined to gain full control. Yet, we've much more proof of the Ukrainian nationalists committing a mass genocide, than we have of any others doing so. In fact, the Red Cross themselves, came out and said so, after their own global census of world population, showed and proved there were nothing like 6 million of them missing. And just look what the Red Cross went through for merely saying so? From the most respected organization in the world, to the very worst organization in the world, (at the drop of a hat), as they used their new power and the sympathy they'd created, to pile on the pressure to get the Red Cross to change what they found. In those examples above, it sees each claim they made, (look like they were being persecuted, abused, beaten, or even killed). Only, as always, with all their claims, they're always looking for sympathy, they're always seen using to gain more power. It's the same thing, over and over again, just dressed up differently, yet still people believe it.
@@youtubeaccount3230 Still today, many have not figured out that Genesis is only a book of books, that are simply retells of many much older myths. And we also know that all records of those much older myths, had been gathered together, then buried, and hidden, (for what turned out to be a couple of thousand years). I wonder who it was that gathered them all together, and buried them? Why has nobody ever asked this question? They were rediscovered in what is today Iran. The Akkadian text of the Epic of Gilgamesh, was first discovered in 1849 AD by the English archaeologist Austen Henry Layard. And what they show us very clearly, is, that the "Book of Genesis" (where nearly every modern day religion stems from) is just a book of books, containing retells of these rediscovered much older myths. For example, Noah and the flood story in Genesis, is the same story we find in Ancient mythology, long before Genesis, with the Epic of Gilgamesh story. Gilgamesh was a myth that came from Babylon - hundreds of years before the Bible was written. Everything people think they know about the life of Jesus Christ? Are, again, just many parts from much older myths put together, to create the myth of Jesus Christ, for example... 1. Asklepios healed the sick, raised the dead, and was known as the saviour and redeemer. 2. Hercules was born of a divine father and mortal mother, and was known as the saviour of the world. 3. Dionysus was literally the “Son of God”, was born of a woman who had not had sex with a man, and was depicted riding a donkey. He was a travelling teacher who performed miracles, and was killed and resurrected, after which time he became immortal. 4. Osiris did the same things. He was born of a virgin, was considered the first true king of the people, and when he died he rose from the grave and went to heaven. 5. Osiris’s son, Horus, was known as the “light of the world”, “The good shepherd”, and “the lamb”. He was also referred to as, “The way, the truth, and the life.” His symbol was a cross-like symbol. 6. Mithra’s birthday was celebrated on the 25th of December, and his birth (from a rock) was witnessed by local shepherds who brought him gifts, he had 12 disciples, and when he was done on earth he had a final meal before going up to heaven. On judgment day, he’ll return to pass judgment on the living and the dead. The good will go to heaven, and the evil will die in a giant fire. His holiday is on Sunday (he’s the Sun God). His followers called themselves “brothers”, and their leaders “fathers”. They had baptism and a meal ritual where symbolic flesh and blood were eaten. Heaven was in the sky, and hell was below with demons and sinners. 7. Krishna had a miraculous conception that wise men were able to come to because they were guided by a star. After he was born, an area ruler tried to have him found and killed. His parents were warned by a divine messenger, however, and they escaped and were met by shepherds. The boy grew up to be the mediator between God and man. 8. Buddha’s mother was told by an angel that she’d give birth to a holy child destined to be a saviour. As a child, he teaches the priests in his temple about religion, while his parents were looking for him. He starts his religious career at roughly 30 years of age, and is said to have spoken to 12 disciples on his deathbed. One of the disciples is his favourite, and another is a traitor. He and his disciples abstain from wealth and travel around, speaking in parables and metaphors. He called himself “the son of man” and was referred to as, “prophet”, “master”, and “Lord”. He healed the sick, cured the blind and deaf, and he walked on water. One of his disciples tried to walk on water as well, but sunk, because his faith wasn’t strong enough. 9. Apollonius of Tyana (a contemporary of Jesus) performed countless miracles (healing sick and crippled, restored sight, cast out demons, etc.). His birth was of a virgin mother, foretold by an angel. He knew scripture really well as a child. He was crucified, rose from the dead and appeared to his disciples to prove his power before going to heaven to sit at the right hand of the father. He was known as, “The Son of God”. The problem, of course, is, that these previous narratives existed hundreds to thousands of years before Jesus did.
@@youtubeaccount3230 The bible claims, that God, sent his own son, (born to a virgin mother), to earth, to prove and to educate mankind of the existence of his father God, and the bible claims that those people from over 2000 years ago, saw him perform his miracles, proving the existence of his father God. Yet, do you know, (and this is truly amazing), but do you know, that not a single one of those people from over 2000+ years ago, even thought to make any records of such incredible wonders? Not a single one? But they did make notes, and they did keep records about really mundane, boring things, (like how many loaves of bread they were able to bake in a day). But the miracles of Jesus Christ, himself ... Nothing? - no records - no notes - no drawings - no carvings - no statues - or even any references mentioning him, from anyone of the time? Now, isn't that simply remarkable? So, we have to be honest, and say, that rather than teaching mankind of the existence of his father God, he's gone out of his way, to hide, and to make damn sure, he left absolutely no evidence of even his very own existence, let alone any evidence of his father, God? Nothing? Not a single thing? Zip! Nada! Nowt!. So, really, could we not also consider to be another miracle? No, I guess not, as maybe, just maybe, he could have just changed his mind? LOL. So, the reality is, that for a great God, who sent his own son, (born to a virgin mother), to teach us, and to prove to all of us, the existence of his father, God? We must be honest, and say, he sure did a miraculous job of hiding every single last detail of proof, that he existed, right?. LOL. Two whole thousand years, (and more), later, and after many of mankind's greatest minds, have studied, have researched, have looked for something, anything at all, to prove this myth, and yet all of them, every single one of them, have come up with absolutely nothing! Not a thing, zero, squat, nada, nowt? Tell me… where is all this love, all this forgiveness and compassion for your fellow man? It's literally driven many people mad, driven many people round the twist, looking for something, anything at all, just something, to prove this myth. 2000+ years!! Man? And NOTHING!! LOL!
Bart claims that jesus was crucified because he was claiming to be the king of the jews not because of claiming to be the son of god and blasphemy, thats historical wrong. We know from the bible and from josephus flavius that he was crucified because he claimed to be the son of god.
@@Horvat04 He was put to death because claiming to be the king of the jews, was in direct conflict with the roman emperor. The jews wanted him dead because he was claiming to be the son of god and that was blasphemous but in their traditions they could not sentence people to death so they had a roman do it. that is why on his tombstone it reads "the king of the jews" and the pharisee wanted it to read "he said he was the king of the jews" and by saying he was the king of the jews, to the jewish people that meant he was god, to the romans that meant he was in rebellion. He was convicted of treason. What youre saying is actually hiistorically wrong. lmfao.
Thanks for the intellectual stimulation. Bart's 'off the cuff' answers to Derek's often complex questions reflect a comprehensive grasp of a gigantic subject. The good doctor has a wonderful way of answering the questions while simultaneously putting them in an understandable context.
I had no idea how many feathers Bart had ruffled, and how badly. I went to look up some of his books and there are a ton of “ responses.” That’s fine, but it’s also interesting how much those people fear Bart, his ideas, and his research.
When one of the best Biblical scholars around deconverts, becomes an atheist, and continues his Biblical scholarship that knocks down fundamentalist ideas about the Bible, and then curb stomps those ideas to death, people tend to get upset.
@@MCXM111I disagree you underestimate the NEED of simple people to rationalize their existence, Christianity gives them an easy out I studied the Bible 25 years before declaring “I’m not a Christian” but several years later now after stripping away all the magic and foolishness I do agree with the message and teachings of Christ it’s very close to the Buddha and while a probable myth I love the tale of Jesus in India being chased away by the Hindu for intellectual destruction of their cast system…. And there is a deeper level of teaching in these books which is ancient and powerful just my humble opinion 🙏
Alex and Bart do not disappoint. When I first saw the length of this video I was skeptical that there would be enough fresh insight to fill an hour plus. Well let me tell you this was absolutely riveting. What an excellent effort. Alex really knows how to bring out the most complete information in an interview and keep his guest on track.
I have it in English and French... hosted study groups with it and metaphysical text. It's very Seventh-Day Adventist...as we're the Sadlers and Kelloggs. Although the book is a beautiful compilation of man-made thoughts...key there is "man-made." No one in their right mind would believe that divine beings took almost 40 years to write a book that is 19th-century science. The Osaphe Bible is another manmade wonder... however, it is not as well written. The Urantia Book is written in 19th century Chicago academia style...again...Sadler and Kellogg... along with the forum and Christie...were Chicago academics. I will say... It is a beautiful and dense read...or listen. I don't believe it's in any way a celestial revelation...but listen to it often.
This presentation is both GREAT and necessary. Thank you Dr. Ehrman and Derek. One thing that Derek can do to help others who strongly hold to the bible being the actual word of god, is to show them how he is able to change his life around without clinging to dogma. That transformation is the true "miracle" that would be transformative for other people to free themselves from religion while being a significant contributor to society and modeling how to be scholarly to improve one's epistemology. Much "agape love" to you all.
I went through an over night “supernatural “ change when I get saved 6 years ago. And I remember everything being different the next day! And now after going down these roads with rabbi Tovia Singer and Bart etc… I’m questioning things like was it just me that changed myself? It’s certainly frustrating learning about all the differences in the NT. And how God seemed to be all about war in the OT.. Hard to reconcile the 2 books composed of many books.
@Wretched2JZ yes all religions claim miracles and lives changed. The power of your mind when faith is there can be amazing. I think looking for God within is better than looking for him in a book. Was a Christian for 45 years till I ground singer, Rocco Errico and started studying in Hebrew/Aramaic and learned Christianity is 100% false no doubts about it. I don't trust any literature anymore. I think God is life and in all of us and till after death nothing can be known of him.
@@Wretched2JZ When humanity figures out what "switch" changed in your mind to become "saved" that will be a banner day. Was there a self loathing that was gone ? Was there a fear of self destruction that was removed ? It would be interesting to hear, now that the idea that it wasn't those words in a book, but some "idea" that manifested this change, what you think it might be !!!
Regarding the virgin birth: Elaine Pagels points out that in Mark, Jesus returns to his home town, preaching, and people ask, “Isn’t this the son of Mary?” That is not how one would refer to a nice Jewish boy. He would have been referred to as the son of Joseph, even if his father were dead. It sort of implies Jesus was illegitimate. She posits that Matthew and Luke then tell the birth story as a way to account for Jesus’ paternity.
The Writer's of the Gospels is UNKNOWN. A Writer, Scribe or Translator can make a story sound anyway they Desire. *The POWER Of A AUTHORITATIVEPOSITION And THE PEN!*
"Matthew constructs an absurd scene with Jesus mounting two animals at the same time and riding them into Jerusalem. Zechariah was employing the common Biblical device of parallelism and had no such awkward scenario in mind. Other gospel writers understood this, but Matthew was clearly out of the loop."
My friend, did it ever cross your mind, that multiple minds & hand worked on these Gospel materials and others? If GOD BREATHED and MOVED Upon Their Creators, *THE NEW COVENANT MESSAGE-"GOD WITHIN US PERSONALLY, BY HIS PROMISED HOLY SPIRIT, WOULD HAVE BEEN RECORDED & HANDED TO US BY "THE GOVERNMENT & RELIGIOUS POWERS" THAT BE!*
You should read one of the scholars who specialize in the social memory approach as well. I suspect that you will learn far more from them than Ehrman on this particular topic: Jens Schöter, Alan Kirk, Rafael Rodriguez, Anthony Le Donne and Chris Keith to name a few. LeDonne’s little book ‘Historical Jesus: What can we know and how can we know it’ is quite good. I also absolutely loved ‘Behind the Gospels’ by Eric Eve. His book served as my introductory reading to the topic. Both books will probably give you a better idea of the social memory theory approach, and how this way of thinking about the ancient Xtian sources may help advance the field. Werner H Kelber and Richard Horsley are also well known among the ‘memory-scholars’ in the field of NT studies.
My wife, who is a writer, just ordered Bart's book on memory, due to my hearing about it on this segment. My wife is not interested in the Bible at all.
I hold University Professors in extreme esteem. Some of the best years of my life were spent at Cleveland State U, majoring in Music Theory/Composition. My very 1st Philosophy Professor,Dr.Rosenbaum,was the sweetest guy in the world and I loved it. Professor Ehrman evokes those same warm feelings in me.
McLatchie is so low rent. Every debate I’ve seen him in he gets his butt handed to him in the openings then just stammers in disbelief nobody is convinced by his “argument.” Lol
The pursuit of knowledge (truth) is always worthwhile. But there are two types of knowledge (or truth). There are true historical facts, and Bart Erman is interested to find out what is true or false about this particular slice of the past (the Bible and early Christianity). However, we are still left with the other kind of knowledge, best described by Socrates, who asked what is the really important question: how should one live? If you find, after a reasonably diligent search, that living a good Christian life is the answer to that question, it really doesn’t matter what Bart Erman ‘discovers’ about what is true or false in the Biblical account, interesting as that may be.
Matthew: Hey Joseph, you don't look very happy tonight. What up ? Joseph: My girlfriend is pregnant. Her father is gonna kill me ! Matthew: Why don't you tell him it was the Angel of the Lord ? Joseph: You must be joking. That wouldn't fool anybody. Matthew: O ye of little faith !
The four gospels are the lessons taught to four different classes of students. There are the 3 disciples closet, thec12 in general, the first 70 brought in and the newest disciples--the other 70. For this reason there are variations in the lessons. It is Judaiic tradition to title the gospels by the first words of the text. So these gospels are revealing of the four beginnings we can experience. Salvation through foriveness, righteousness, holiness and the good part. There is no Q. Read the word with faith....
I first learn of Dr. Ehrman from Dr. Dale Martin when I found his Yale open course on Introduction to New Testament history and literature. Started following Dr. Ehrman after that and I feel I have learned so much from him on the subject biblical literature and it's interpretation of it.
Bart claims that jesus was crucified because he was claiming to be the king of the jews not because of claiming to be the son of god and blasphemy, thats historical wrong. We know from the bible and from josephus flavius that he was crucified because he claimed to be the son of god.
@@dirtypickle77 people who are interessted in truth surely care, if its wrong then clearly its manipulation for his agenda, so your respond is senseless not mine potato
Dr. Michael Heiser has articles about the book of revelation and it’s Hebrew theology intertwined with it. Dr. Bart needs to take a Hebrew theology course to help understand the Hebrew concepts the gospel writers would have known and conveyed in their writings.
I love Dr Heiser. I think her and the guest here would have a LOT in common regarding interpretation of Scripture. They do obviously have big points of disagreement on a few points. Trinity, and meaning of son of god usage
The Life of Apollonius composed by Philostratus is dated much later than the New Testament and the gospels. It is removed by more than a century of the latest book of the New Testament to have composed in the 90s CE. In other words, there could not have been any Christian scribe copying details and legends from the deeds of Apollonius and then applying those to the historical Jesus. If there was indeed copying then it must have been Philostratus copying from the gospels or the life of Jesus and then applying such details to Apollonius
Just think, if Star Wars is a religion and books of different language get found, THESE EXACT CONVERSATIONS WILL HAPPEN. I personally find the Flavius family and Josephus conspire very intriguing. Also, the Hykos in Egyptian history and the story of Joseph and Moses seem tangible.
In Love With your IDEA OF Jesus? What about THE ONE TRUE GOD, Jesus was recorded as Praying-Calling On- Communicating To,, WHO Gave him Insight-Knowledge -Wisdom and The Power to perform signs and wonders? The ONE he Came to Deliver HIS GRACIOUS REPENTANCE GOSPEL MESSAGE To Mankind. *TO RETURN (PERSONAL ACTIONS-WORKS) TO GODS RIGHTEOUS KINGDOM AND OUT OF THE KINGDOM OF DARKNESS! NOT JUST BELIEVE THE DELIVERY PERSONS EXISTENCE, BUT THE GOD WHO SENT JESUS*
I read somewhere that in antient Rome, in the time of monarchy or early republic, a father could sell a son into slavery only thrice, and after third time the son is free. Obviously, the father was "pater familias" - the head of the clan, and the "slavery" was servitude for a certain ammount of time, after which the "slave" returned to his family. True, it was Rome, not Israel, but the customs of primitive societies were similar, and we can draw some parallels concerning slavery in early, nomadic jewish society.
Enjoy listening to Dr. Ehrman. Christians need to spend more time learning about the origins of their faith from scholars that do not have faith commitments.
How in the hell does Dr. Ehrman know more about the origins of my faith than any other Christian like me? What does he know that I don’t? Does he have access to some special recently unearthed eyewitness accounts that I don’t? He’s an atheist for hire and disingenuous and dishonest at that. Stop your infantile nonsense.
Thank you!!! Question: will you maybe put the part about slavery in a new video? Such an important issue, and what Bart says is a good addition to what Joshua Bowen says in the Within Reason podcast, I think.
bro thanks for that.. i feel pressed to say something here, while you are not too horrible on the eye, consider putting your guest on fullscreen whenever there is a long monologue coming. Im sure u wont get bothered by that
@@mythvisionTV your problem in the west at first is that both theist and atheist are the two sides of one coin , both idolise there thought and there methodology for knowledge.both lost actually in there illusions. The worst is that both come overcome there ego and recognise there fall.
You cant refute Bart Ehrman, because most things he says are consensus among scholars and sometimes his opinions are even considered liberal. This means everyone who wants to "refute" Bart Ehrman has to change mainstream scholarship
Hello. Only trouble us Bart can critique Christianity as I do, but like Christianity he does not know the truth, but I do. The NT truth is linked to Abraham, but Christianity is not.
@@germanboy14 I take me very seriously, and academics do not have original thoughts, like you in your own bunker. Now me I have many original thoughts, 28 videos of original thoughts. It is so reassuring to find you, cheerleading for Bart, like an out-rider for a Pride Parade.
How did we degenerate to the utter triviality of biblical literalism? Luther is remembered for relying on Sola Scriptura but he felt free to demote 14 books of the Bible to “apocrypha”. Calvin wasn’t a literalist either. In his Commentary on Luke 13:10 he wrote “the Evangelists did not care much about exactness.” His comment on Matthew 27:9-10 is, “How the name of Jeremiah crept in, I confess that I do not know nor do I give myself much trouble to inquire. The passage itself plainly shows that the name of Jeremiah has been put down by mistake…for in Jeremiah we find nothing of this sort, nor any thing that even approaches to it.”
When Dr Erhman says let the authors speak for themselves we can ask the hypothetical question "okay guys, you wrote these books so that i might believe...so how do you want me to relate to the others who also wrote maybe something that seems contradictory" Paul tells us "tell hell with anybody who disagrees with me"
There's, also, Kill Witches - You should not ever let a sorceress live. (Exodus 22:17 NAB). How many innocent people were brutally murdered because of this single sentence?
Hey, I don't know if this was brought up, but I can think of three modern examples of what happens when a prophecy doesn't come true: Harold Camping, Trump supporters who believe he won the election, and the entire JW religion.
Bart claims that jesus was crucified because he was claiming to be the king of the jews not because of claiming to be the son of god and blasphemy, thats historical wrong. We know from the bible and from josephus flavius that he was crucified because he claimed to be the son of god.
@@Horvat04 Actually, here's why Ehrman (and others) don't think Jesus claimed to be the son of God: Mark was the first gospel to be written and the author of Mark never mentions anything about Jesus saying he was the son of god or a divine being. The gospel of John was written at least 30 years after Mark and it's only in this later gospel that Jesus says things like, "I and the Father are one" and "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me". The crucial question is, if Jesus really did say he was god, why would Mark leave that out?? It seems like a pretty important detail, don't you think? Yet Mark never mentions it. That's why historians don't think Jesus said it. Flavius Josephus didn't write The Antiquities until 93 years after Jesus died, so he couldn't know what Jesus said. The first and most extensive reference to Jesus in the Antiquities (in Book 18) states that Jesus was the Messiah and a wise teacher who was crucified by Pontius Pilate. Almost all modern scholars reject the authenticity of this passage. The passage Josephus originally wrote may have started out with a reference to the life and execution of Jesus by Pilate, but it was probably altered later by Christians with an agenda.
@@susansteinkraus2821 no...see first of all, the scriptures of Paul which describes him as the son of god, the lord, etc was earlier written than all the gospels, so you are wrong.. second is when we have copys of copys we dont even know how old any of this is originally because we only have what we have dated...so i dont give much about all these dating especially when you know that paul was earlier. According to flavius you are right, his scriptures survived because it was in favor for christianity..he himself had his agenda as well, narrarating the political aspect, not the moral or religious aspects. Bart Ehrman is clever manipulating the scriptures for his agenda. Because there is no other explanation why he claims that..he knows paul is older and that we have copys of copys so it makes no sense. People believe him because they dont know much but he got flaws as we see and deceives by claiming things. This is scam strictly speaking... even though i like him. But im aware of that. Sorry for my broken english
@@Horvat04 Yes, PAUL describes Jesus as the Son of God. PAUL thought Jesus was the Son of God, but Paul never says JESUS called himself that. Paul never quotes any of Jesus’ sayings. Paul would have no way of knowing anything that Jesus said. He never even met Jesus. And, yes, the letters of Paul were written before the gospels, but they were written after Jesus’ death. Saul/Paul was not a follower of Jesus and did not know him before his crucifixion. The narrative of the Book of Acts suggests Paul's conversion occurred four to seven years after the crucifixion of Jesus. What’s crucial here is what Jesus said about himself, not what Paul thought about Jesus. I’m not sure I understand your point about Ehrman “claiming that he knows Paul is older.” The letters of Paul WERE written before any of the gospels; you said so yourself. Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean? Are you objecting to Ehrman saying that the gospel of Mark was written at least 30 years before the gospel of John? Could you also explain more about the significance of the fact that we only have copies of copies of copies of all the biblical texts? That is, what would the fact that we don’t have the originals have to do with figuring out when a text was first written? After all, we don’t rely on carbon dating the papyrus it’s written on. We analyze what the text says and the language the author uses. The prevailing view among today’s mainstream Bible scholars (not just Bart Ehrman) is the view that the Gospel of Mark was written first around 70 CE and was followed by Matthew (80 CE), Luke (85-90 CE), and then John’s gospel (95-100 CE). This date range means there are roughly 40 to 70 years between Jesus’ death and our earliest written narratives of his life and ministry. How did scholars come up with these dates? FIRST, as we all know, the Gospels tell us that Jesus was crucified in Judea at around 30-33 CE. This means that the Gospels were necessarily composed after c. 33 CE. But how long after? When it comes to evidence pertinent to establishing a lower date limit for the Gospels, the most glaring evidence would be that the Gospels make explicit reference to the Roman-Jewish War (66 - 73CE). Specifically, the Gospels refer to when Roman soldiers surrounded Jerusalem in 67 CE, and most notably the Gospels mention the complete destruction of the Jerusalem Temple, which happened in 70 CE (see e.g., Luke 21 and Mark 13). This tells us the Gospels were, in all likelihood, written after these events since they make direct mention of them. SECOND, we need to take a look at when the Gospels first show up on the historical radar. We look at early Christian writings from the Apostolic fathers of the primitive church. Upon examining the record, we find that the four Gospels do not receive any mention in the writings from any of the earliest Apostolic fathers ranging from 60 CE to at least 115 CE - not Clement of Rome, Barnabas, Hermas or Ignatius. This conspicuous silence has long been acknowledged by secular and Christian scholars. If the Gospels had already been written, circulated, and known in the Christian community as early as the 40s or 50s CE, then we have to ask how these four earliest Christian sources from 60 to 115 CE (with many hundreds of pages of literature between them) could neglect to mention any of the Gospels. And how they could display absolutely no awareness of the evangelists Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. The most obvious answer is that these early Christian writers could not cite or mention texts that had not yet been written. THIRD, we find in the writings of Papias and Irenaeus that the Gospel of Mark was written after the deaths of Peter and Paul. Why is this such a key piece of information? Well, according to Church records as detailed in the “Chronicle” of church historian Eusebius, the thirteenth or fourteenth year of Emperor Nero is given for the deaths of Peter and Paul. This means that Peter and Paul were killed in 67 or 68 CE! To connect the dots, the Gospel of Mark, our earliest gospel account was written some time AFTER. So, we are right back to ~ 70 CE for the earliest possible composition date. I realize this reply is getting very long. Perhaps I’ll stop here and wait to hear if you are interested in pursuing this further. And please don’t apologize for your English. I admire anyone who knows more than one language!
Derek is doing his best. Interviewing scholars is not necessarily easy. I can say this because I am a scholar (not in religious studies) and I've been on both sides of that table!
"They are based on earlier oral traditions". While that is certainly true, we have to consider the fact that once scholars thought luke was built from earlier oral traditions or maybe one written tradition (Mark), but now in fact we see that that there are multiple written traditions Mark, Q, Josephus's Antiquities, memesis with certain greek texts. And what we are left with in terms of accounts appear to come from other unknown possibly written traditions. We have to assume the hebrew bible was pieced together similarly. One of the most important things to remember that the source text for matthew and luke, Q, no longer exists because christian scribes no longer wanted it to exist. Just as certain passages, exemplified in the video, no longer exists because scribes didnt like it (notably the passage in luke that was changed in all but one manuscript) Hebrew bible is not immune from editing and censorship. The fact that there are various hebrew codices informs us that there is censorship. So back to the quote, there may have been earlier written sources for the hebrew bible, its just that we don't have them. The shapiro scroll may be one such source, but it has conviniently disappearred. There is evidence that there are other sources because the bible quotes from text that no longer exists. Moreover, in genesis 9-11 the authors are paraphrasing snippets from two different versions of the shuruppak flood myth but not giving the sources. With regard to genesis 1 I should make the point that WG Lambert points out that during the late Assyrian/Neobabylonian empire there were enumerable creation myths running around and the genesis 1 may have been derived from one such myth that held more sway with the exiles than any other myth. We need to imagine that when the Israelites were exiled to mesopotamia, they were not taken to one place but many, many places with many stories. Some of those Israelites during the neobabylonian period made it back to the levant (Noting many judean and israelite settlements continued to prosper during the neobabylonian period). Starting with judges in the text there is the beginning of a single sourced text that proceeds through the rest of the Tanakh with some exceptions (Isaiah, Job). However the Torah is exception and if we reconstruct genesis based upon what is found in the Tanakh we would have a fragmented story with sources that disagree. We can ask the question how much of the Tanakh was edited as to agree with later thinking (e.g. Deuteronomy 32, DSS versus MT, Zacheria MT versus DSS and Septiagint) therefore textual criticism has not really finished doing a thorough analysis of the vartext in various sources to determine whether or not the Torah is using other sources that have been suppressed or redacted.
The best case against Mythicism is that every great lie contains a kernel of truth. Ehrman overstates the evidence for a historical Jesus. My opinion is based upon having heard Ehrman make his cases. While I am indifferent to either position, the percentages are likely 51-49 in favor.
Regarding conversions, nobody seems to mention the fact that, evangelists often converted the local king, who then decreed that Christianity became the religion of them all. It then became easier to convert the neighbouring king and it would then increase exponentially.
uhhh.... can you give five examples of that happening "often"? the ONLY time that i'm aware of that that happened in history was the conversion of constantine and it wasn't a true conversion. it was for political purposes. i can't think of another instance much less that it happened often. give some examples. bc right now i'm pretty sure you're incorrect.
I've heard of a few examples without absorbing the details, but your challenge galvanised me a bit. It didn't take more than 5 minutes of googling to come up with some examples. David Livingstone, on his own admission only converted one person, that man was Sechele, ruler of the Bakwena tribe, in what is now Malawi. After Livingstone left he converted his tribe, when other missionaries arrived they were surprised to find the locals were already Christians. There are too many other examples to itemise, but I will give you a few hints for you to research. Many of the Germanic tribes converted during Charlemagne's campaigns, this was done for political reasons and from the top down. The were a number of missions in pagan Anglo-Saxon Britain from the 7th century onwards, the kings were converted, again usually for political reasons. If you think about it, a missionary venturing into pagan lands would have quite a job converting the peasants one by one, he would probably be executed by the king, but if you convert the king, job done. That's not to say that all the subjects would instantly become Christians, they would often continue with their original practices alongside those of Christianity, some have survived to the modern day, such as at Christmas and Easter. Christians were very effective of layering their festival on top of those already being celebrated. @@CocoTheDiamond
ok, so it's happened a few times, but this isn't a specific christian tactic. like.. mh dad was a missionary and he always said to target the children and the families will follow. that worked a few times. that doesn't mean it's a christian tactic. i guess what i have a problem with is saying that this is how christianity spread and it's hella more complex and it wasn't by targeting kings.@richarshowers
One of the reasons that Christianity grew was that they were one of the few religions to evangelise, Dr Ehrman covers this in his book 'The Triumph of Christianity'. Once Constantine converted he was followed my many of the Roman elite, Christianity went from first being legalised to becoming the official religion of the Roman Empire, once in power, of course, Christians actively persecuted other religions. Many methods were used, conquest, forced conversions, the power of guns and disease and yes getting to the children. There are cases of educated adults being convinced by the arguments of Christianity of course, but most people grow up in the religion of their parents and community as I presume you did.@@CocoTheDiamond
Christ came to show us who God is and to have us repent from temple worship, rituals, animal sacrifice etc. The spiritual kingdom came in 70 AD when the temple was destroyed. That is what Christ was talking about. No more temple worship, a new way to worship God.
Im sure with slavery like everything there were decent owners that treated them as good as you might expect and terrible evil pricks that liked to torture them.
Great stuff. My only question was about the last bit, where Bart explains why his biblical scholarship did not shake his faith, but rather it was the problem of suffering that did it. Although I agree that you can be a Christian without believing in the Bible, pretty much everything we know about Jesus comes from the Bible. So why wouldn't his historical studies of the Bible at least *weaken* or undermine his faith in Jesus (of the Bible)? Certainly that is why many people lose their faith -- by carefully studying the Bible. I hear what he's saying, but I also wonder whether his "no" (to the question of whether he lost his faith because of his studies) was a little too emphatic. I bet his studies at least laid the groundwork, and then trying to deal with the problem of suffering was the final lynchpin. I'm speculating, of course.
Perhaps some of us are unaware that our family history has nothing to do with anyone else. Unless you are a particular group of Black people, are Father hates you and is coming to destroy you.
![BOWKYLION - วิงวอน (ex-change) [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/cLdnZWDaO-w/mqdefault.jpg)
Dr. Ehrman is becoming quite a regular on the show. Thanks to both of you for creating some really interesting content.
No for long if Derek keeps coming up with 3 year rules
Derek should buy him a new microphone. It would make a nice gift!
Interesting??? You must not read. He’s talking about nothing new at all! Only thing he has done is send chills down any scholars back. In other words there are much more both wiser and more intelligent scholars than mr. bart
@@commoveo1so
I first heard Bart ehrman's name from Dr. Zakir naik....... then I start searching him more and more, now, this 4 hours are the most incredble time I think I have spent on youtube.....thank you sir ehrman and derek........love to be your subscriber.....
Definitely check out his Misquoting Jesus podcast as well.
Be careful these people are also atheists... a good Christian is closer to us than an atheist..
I'm glad to see that MythVision prepared quite a lot for this interview. He seems so determined to draw as much as he can from Ehrman's knowledge.
Derek is my hero, he's highly professional, highly intelligent, very passionate, extremely attentive to his guests, experienced, a great interviewer, engages the guests in such a personal way as well. mythvision is definitely the premier channel for this type of content!
which interview is "this" interview?
Thank you Dr. Eherman for your scholarship, and thank you Derek for your continuous production and search for truth. We are all happy to come along for the ride.🤝🏼
Bart claims that jesus was crucified because he was claiming to be the king of the jews not because of claiming to be the son of god and blasphemy, thats historical wrong. We know from the bible that he was crucified because he claimed to be the son of god.
@@Horvat04if I might observe Josephus was writing in Rome a few generations later. So this may have been the case: or may not.
Why do scholars have so much trouble saying they don't know.
I feel they need spend time at Coroners courts to hear how often Open verdicts are recorded.
At best you can say this might have been the case but we can never know.
@@russellmiles2861 because they have their agenda. So be aware of that.
@@Horvat04 oh, I don't doubt that ... the whole certainly thing is funny though.
Clearly fake news is nothing new
@@russellmiles2861 even josephus got his agenda, political aspect you know...not moral or religious...there are other manuscripts where its claimed that josephus said something according to his own josephus scriptures but we dont have it. So they claim it never existed but truth is we dont have it for example. I say probably we dont have everything...things get lost its normal. But to simply claim it never existed or fake is stupid. Bart also claims alot of things..
Derek is geeking-out. Good for him. To be able to talk about something you love with a world renowned expert is a priceless experience. Much Love & Blessings.
What does he love? To hate God?
Does anyone else get commercials from religious organizations just because you watch atheist stuff a bit?
@davidd364
Sometimes I do, yes. But I never got any kind of commercials during this particular video. Did you?
@@jonathanray7931 yes I think so
All Day
Most of the viewers here are Christians, id guess
Yep, just yesterday I watched that young Turk Cenk talking to Sam Harris, and today this pops up. Definitely divine intervention.
Myth Vision really stepping up with great scholars and Bart D. Ehrman is definitely one of the ten great scholars in his field....this is a treat for those applying modern skepticism towards the biblical texts....and those just wanting to learn. Thanks to everyone involved.
Bart claims that jesus was crucified because he was claiming to be the king of the jews not because of claiming to be the son of god and blasphemy, thats historical wrong. We know from the bible and from josephus flavius that he was crucified because he claimed to be the son of god.
Stepping up? He’s been having this guy on for some time now lol where ya been!
@Raydensheraj
How is he such when he makes such a mess with Mark 2:26 ??
How can Dr Bart Ehrman be trusted to correctly explain all of the new testament when he is unable to get Mark 2:26 correct??
● the following is my reason for the critique.
Dr Bart Ehrman shows his stupidity, in the scriptures, when he claims that Jesus is incorrect, when Jesus states, that David went into the house of God, in the days of Abiathar, the high priest; because it is Ahimelech, his father, who was the high priest, when David went there.
[ this shows clearly that Dr Bart Ehrman does not understand what he has read concerning this verse. ]
Jesus did not say that David went into the house of God to Abiathar, the high priest, he did not say that David went into the house of God, and did what he did, when Abiathar was the high priest, what he said is that David went there, in the days of Abiathar, the high priest.
What David did, what he provided, and the events which transpired after he went into the house of God, to Ahimelech, continued after the death of Ahimelech.
The days of Abiathar, who became the high priest after his father, encompasses the entire time line, of the events, which Jesus used, in his answer, to the question posed by the Pharisees.
The days of Ahimelech does not encompass the same time line. Therefore he cannot be used as the reference point. He was killed by Saul, before other events, which are covered, in this highlighted time line, occurred.
One of these events being, this interaction, between David and Abiathar:
1 Samuel 22:20-23
And one of the sons of Ahimelech the son of Ahitub, named Abiathar, escaped, and fled after David.
[21] And Abiathar shewed David that Saul had slain the Lord's priests.
[22] And David said unto Abiathar, I knew it that day, when Doeg the Edomite was there, that he would surely tell Saul: I have occasioned the death of all the persons of thy father's house.
[23] Abide thou with me, fear not: for he that seeketh my life seeketh thy life: but with me thou shalt be in safeguard.
And, also, this interaction, between king Solomon and Abiathar, the high priest.
1 Kings 2:23-24,26
Then king Solomon sware by the Lord, saying, God do so to me, and more also, if Adonijah have not spoken this word against his own life.
[24] Now therefore, as the Lord liveth, which hath established me, and set me on the throne of David my father, and who hath made me an house, as he promised, Adonijah shall be put to death this day.
[26] And unto Abiathar the priest said the king, Get thee to Anathoth, unto thine own fields; for thou art worthy of death: but I will not at this time put thee to death, because thou barest the ark of the Lord God before David my father, and because thou hast been afflicted in all wherein my father was afflicted.
Jesus, by using the highest status that Abiathar attained to in life, to identify him, and starting with an event which took place with David, bookends the time line, in which can be found, the example, that provides substance to his answer.
The Pharisees question to Jesus is:
Mark 2:24
[24]And the Pharisees said unto him, Behold, why do they on the sabbath day that which is not lawful?
He, at the beginning of his response, points them to an act of David which by the Law is also adjudged unlawful.
Mark 2:26
[26]How he went into the house of God in the days of Abiathar the high priest, and did eat the shewbread, which is not lawful to eat but for the priests, and gave also to them which were with him?
Yet, David was provided protection from death, and through him protection for those under him. He provided protection for a priest who was innocent.
1 Samuel 22:22-23
And David said unto Abiathar, I knew it that day, when Doeg the Edomite was there, that he would surely tell Saul: I have occasioned the death of all the persons of thy father's house.
[23] Abide thou with me, fear not: for he that seeketh my life seeketh thy life: but with me thou shalt be in safeguard.
And David, even though he had died, provided protection, from death, for a high priest who was guilty of death.
1 Kings 2:26-27
And unto Abiathar the priest said the king, Get thee to Anathoth, unto thine own fields; for thou art worthy of death: but I will not at this time put thee to death, because thou barest the ark of the Lord God before David my father, and because thou hast been afflicted in all wherein my father was afflicted.
[27] So Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being priest unto the Lord ; that he might fulfil the word of the Lord, which he spake concerning the house of Eli in Shiloh.
The like protection, from death, that Jesus offered him disciples, he being Lord of the sabbath: of which he witnessed;
Mark 2:27-28
[27]And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath:
[28]Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
And the protection, from death, which he was going to provide, for a world, that was guilty of death, by what he was going to do, though his death.
John 3:14-16
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
[15] That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
[16] For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
For Jesus speaks of what he knows; he speaks of what he has seen.
John 3:11
Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.
JESUS SPOKE ACCORDING TO THE LAW AND TO THE TESTIMONY.
Isaiah 8:14-16,20
And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both the houses of Israel, for a gin and for a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
[15] And many among them shall stumble, and fall, and be broken, and be snared, and be taken. [16] Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples.
[20] To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.
●● from where does Dr Bart Ehrman speak? From where is he authorized? Whose counsel is he giving? Dr Bart Ehrman shows that he was stupid to this passage of scripture (Mark 2:24-28) many years ago, and continues to show, that he is still stupid to it, this many years since.
● This question is therefore asked of, and concerning, Dr Bart Ehrman:
Job 38:2
Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?
●●● To write 35 pages that document and highlight your stupidity, means that you are very much taken by it.
To get an A for what you have written, means that you had a poor teacher or you were purposely set up.
I don't know what level of scholar he is or isn't. His gift, described by him and obvious when one watches or listens to him, is talking in a way regular people can understand.
@@Wretched2JZ "Stepping *it* up," then, how about that?
I canceled my ticket to see Spider Man: Across the Multi-verse when I saw this was a 4 hour interview! I can’t think of a better way to spend a Sunday morning than watching Derek discuss the New Testament with Dr. Ehrman!
I've taken my son twice to see it. Amazing film.
Somewhere dan mcclellan is weeping.
I'm weeping. It's embarrassing to watch Derek in this video. Mythintelligence is losing it. The assault on the 3 years thing is so cringy
Bart just says "you sit over there and let the adults talk"
Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him said any Jew or Christian who hears about me and then dies without believing In the message with which I have been sent but he will be from the dwellers of the hellfire. Sahih Muslim. Chapter 240 of the Book of. Faith, Vol.1
4 hours of Bart! I'll have to free up some time in my schedule.
I'm only 45 minutes into this, but if he mentions how short on time we are once more I'm gonna lose it. Hyper down, dude, you're stressing me out.
It's a compilation of different interviews.
The spirit of humanity, enthusiasm for life, and generosity is so evident with these two.
Listening to Derek's podcasts has become my favorite pastime!
I'm so thankful the expertise of scholars is made asscessable to everyone on channels like mythvision
Why? What’s the point?
Dr. Bart Ehrman is a very good scholar and I listen to most of his debates and interviews. I have learned a lot from him and will continue to learn from him. Thanks Dr. Ehrman
@chrissadjedy8490 - That is how Dr Ehrmen strikes me, too.
Wow this is an incredible resource to have access to! Thanks for all who made this possible!
Derek, there is nothing "infamous" about ANYONE searching for the truth about ANY subject. Bart has devoted his academic lifetime to reading and studying ancient manuscripts. What I've learned from him has caused me to question everything I've learned in my lifetime. However, if all the many stoties in the Old Testament and New Testament are nothing more than creative writing exercises, I believe we're still left with questions about the origin and creation of the universe we're living in. I believe that's the ultimate question the authors of the ancient manuscripts were trying to answer with some very interesting stories.😇
Exactly! 👍🏼
Good job!
@@camilleespinas2898 THANK YOU!! 👍😇
Ive been listening to his lectures n interviews for several years. HE IS THE BEST HISTORIAN TO EXPLAIN THE BIBLE, spec NEW TESTAMENT, BUT ALL.
How many have you listened to? 2 maybe lol, now you’re a expert also ay?
@@commoveo1 - Why the negativity?
4 hours!! I'll take it in pieces... but I'll get thru it. I love these discussions.
What are you trying to do? Strip from yourself all your chance of believing in the only thing that can save you from your own sins with clever worded arguments? I love you and I don’t want this for you, don’t bring destruction on yourself to justify your wrongdoing.
@Trustinjesuschrist777 I've never sinned. Ever. To have sinned, I'd need to believe in sin, which requires to believe in someone to sin against, which requires a deity, and I don't believe in any deities.
So I cannot sin.
Besides, should I trust in JC as your screen name indicates, who will come in Armageddon along with the beings who have been prepared for the time and day of destruction to kill most of humanity? For what?
Oh, I see... trust him to save me from the mythological threats that he/they are making upon the soul I don't have... so I go to the heaven/paradise that I don't believe in and - what? Serve the god of genocide, abuse, war, bloodthirsty, and destruction, Yahweh?
Nah. Thanks.
@@Trustinjesuschrist777And you don't know me. Don't know my life. You're assuming there's wrongdoing in my life because... I listen to good arguments about a subject I enjoy?
Proverbs 14:15, one of my favorite biblical citations, says: "The gullible believe anything they're told; the prudent sift and weigh every word."
@@bortiz11 Why are you wasting your time on arguments against what you do not believe then? And why do you need outside input on this subject in a 3 hour video by a scholar on the New Testament in order to deny it if it’s so clearly wrong? It sounds like you made your decision far before watching this video, yet you still needed more reasons. How many reasons do you look for to disprove Hinduism?
@Trustinjesuschrist777 your set of questions is good, minus the word "wasting." I like to have information and reasons for my beliefs and most opinions. This team here presents doctoral opinions and summarize evidence in an easy format to understand. I also have watched arguments by theists explaining their reasons for believing, and if at any point someone proves sufficiently that there's a deity, I'll be a believer.
I have looked into Buddhism - that's what I think you tried to refer to - and many other religions as well. Again, you assume and infer a lot, but you don't know me at all, Daniel.
And yes, I made my decision before watching this video. Yet, my deconversion journey took 10 years, my deconstruction took another 10, and reassembling myself (my ethical and moral principles, definitions of love and caring, meaning of sacrifice and passion, etc) has taken another 10 years and is still ongoing.
All that, plus I'm an atheist who likes to think through most matters and find their root, married to a Jehovah's Witness who is taught the basics of the bible to be kept in the cult and under their control, avoiding critical thinking and especially negative thinking of any kind against their organization. That, and Christian nationalists controlling our government, push me to learn and keep learning about this mythos and its effects on humanity, because it affects me daily.
Now you know me a bit more. :)
GOLDWIN SMITH, Professor of Modern History at Oxford, wrote in Nineteenth Century, October 1881 "They alone regard their race as superior to humanity, and looks forward not to its ultimate union with other races, but to its triumph over them all, and to its final ascendancy under the leadership of a "tribal Messiah."
Why u think the bible refers it to the God of Israel, if this is the God who created everything it should be the God of everyone, this is very clear under Babylonian exile they became hostile to other races
@@youtubeaccount3230 Why do I think the bible refers to the God of Israel? Interestingly, I can answer that for you.
Only if you're religious, yourself, you'll be completely blind to this (just as you're supposed to be).
This is why the religious have all become the enemy against the rest of us, on earth, today. If we want to expose these elites, and their plans of complete global control, we must first expose their creation, (that's known as religion).
Because it seems undeniable, that it was these elites who created religion, and religion has always been their long term plan to gain full global control, (through their made up religions, they invented, they wrote, and they influenced globally).
We can even prove so much of this today, yet nobody ever does, or ever wants too. So, just how bizarre, and extraordinarily strange, is that? In fact, how dangerous is that? But just ask yourselves?
Q1. Who wrote Genesis (the Old Testament)? Most agree it was the Israelites, hence those people, we may not name.
Q2. What people have been named and shamed throughout history, by many of the world's most intelligent and influential people, as being liars, cheats, manipulators, and thieves?
Q3. What people have been thrown out of every European country at various times?
Q4. What people have always insisted that they're God's chosen people?
Q5. What people have always been seen as looking for full global control and overall dominance?
So, tell me, what better way of achieving complete global control, than through religion, (with its billions of followers)?
The length of deceit these particular people will go to, and have gone to, all throughout history (to achieve their aims), is unlimited, and only understanding this, before anything else, are you then be able to see everything clearly.
These people already do hold so much power today, and It's not in governments (as we see so many people wrongly thinking today). No, we're looking much higher than that, it's already in our towns, in our cities, even in our villages!
The Churches, the Temples, the Synagogues, and the Mosques are all controlled and run by the 1% (elites).
They are the controllers of all monies, and their own made up, and created religions, (that billions follow), is their Empire.
They own more land and property in this world today, than anyone, or anything else, they've the most powerful, the most wealthy, and the most widely spanned Empire in history.
We know they own all our banks, our chain stores, our energy companies, IT industries, our water boards, our gold, silver, & diamond mines, our doctors surgeries, our hospitals, our schools, our military manufactures, and many more of our other vital enterprises.
They also control everything we read and watch, (therefore, think, and learn), they own over 90% of the world's media. Yet oddly, nobody ever asks why?
The religious people really are only the slaves of these people's overall attempt at complete global control. When, oh when, will this reality ever start to hit home? If ever?
Christianity is rooted in, and comes from, the Second Temple of Judaism, but the two religions diverged in the first centuries of the Christian era.
When Christianity diverged from Judaism, when we study that divergence, we find that many of the highest rabbis converted from Judaism, to the Christian faith. (Learn all about Saint Peter)
Then, just as interestingly, when we see Islam arrive, 350-400 years later, we see, that once again, many of the highest rabbis also converted from Judaism to the Islamic faith. Why?
Because these religions, (they invented, they created, they wrote, and they influenced throughout the world) is how they've been planning total world control, and total world domination all along.
They have already accumulated huge and influential material wealth. Wealth, they used to take control of the world's media.
Wealth, they used to, stir up revolutions in various parts of the globe. We know they stood behind, not only the French Revolution, but also the Communist Revolution and, in fact, most of the revolutions we do know about.
They've formed secret organizations, such as the Freemasons, Rotary Clubs, and the Lions, which they're using to continue spreading their Zionist beliefs around the world today. And all in order to destroy societies, and to carry out their long planned Zionist interests.
We know they stood behind World War I, and they formed the League of Nations, (through which they believed they could begin to rule the world). They were behind World War II, through which they made huge, massive financial gains.
There is no war going on anywhere, without them having their finger in it. The religious people, really are, only the slaves of these elites, and their non-stop attempt to gain complete global control.
Only they're all so engrossed believing in a religious fantasy (just like they're supposed to), they're all completely blind to it.
We can even start to predict what comes next? In fact, I'd say that within the next 20/40 years, we're going to hear about some amazing discovery in Israel. Probably in a cave somewhere (again), and it will more than likely be, some scrolls, (again).
Only this time, well this time, miraculously, they'll contain so-called ''proof'' that God, did, indeed, reward them with the ''promised land''. And of course, all the Churches, Temples, Synagogues, Mosques and so-called, ''experts'' will all verify it.
@@youtubeaccount3230 We've much more proof of this being the reality of religion, than we have of any religion being real, but the religious are all blind to it.
Genesis is a book of books, that sees the reader believing that a certain people (we may no longer name), were the harshly treated, were the hated and were the hard done by, who were even slaves of Ancient Egypt! The truth, however, is just so different.
Today we do know, the Israelites, were not slaves at any time in Egypt, no, they were in fact, many of the better-paid scribes, masons, and artists.
We actually do know this for sure, as we can go and look around these uncovered, discovered, Israelite worker villages today. They were also able, to build their own tombs, (we can go and look in their tombs today), they'd steal the colours they needed to decorate their own tombs, (as colours of all kinds, were extremely expensive) from the Pharaoh's tomb, they were decorating.
Egypt's chief archaeologist, Zahi Hawass, told reporters at the site, that the find sheds much more light on the lifestyle and the origins of the pyramid builders. Most importantly, he said, the workers were not recruited from slaves, but they were a paid work force hired by the Pharaoh.
We also know they went on strike, when the Pharaoh was late delivering their grain, only, slaves don't strike?.
This kills the story of Moses, as does there, being no mention of Moses anywhere throughout all Ancient Egypt, yet we know they recorded everything, from ever war and battle they were involved in, even the wars and battles they lost are recorded, only they'd record false battle scenes to make it seem like an Egyptian victory.
We see this many times in Ancient Egypt, yet we see and find nothing about Moses at all, or even any Israelite unrest.
That's proof of religion's very beginning being nothing more than a fabricated myth.
These people, make these things up, It's what they've always done all throughout history, and it's done, to gain sympathy, but sympathy, they then use, to gain more power. We have an entire history proving this to all of us.
We know of many other things they've done throughout history, there are so many, I'll give a couple of well known examples. Like...
We know they took over Russia during the Revolution of 1917. And we know they used the "Pale Of Settlement" as their alibi to prove they had no involvement in the revolution, claiming they were all pushed out to Belarus, Lithuania, Moldova and much of present-day Ukraine (looking for sympathy). Only the reality, we now know today, is, they did indeed, take over Russia in the revolution.
We also know they financed all sides of WW2, including the Nazi's, massively increasing their own wealth, and therefore attaining much more power, power they then used to make their erroneous claims, against the Nazi, (looking for sympathy).
You have to give it to them, they're very consistent, they're extremely persistent, and they're utterly determined to gain full control.
Yet, we've much more proof of the Ukrainian nationalists committing a mass genocide, than we have of any others doing so. In fact, the Red Cross themselves, came out and said so, after their own global census of world population, showed and proved there were nothing like 6 million of them missing.
And just look what the Red Cross went through for merely saying so? From the most respected organization in the world, to the very worst organization in the world, (at the drop of a hat), as they used their new power and the sympathy they'd created, to pile on the pressure to get the Red Cross to change what they found.
In those examples above, it sees each claim they made, (look like they were being persecuted, abused, beaten, or even killed). Only, as always, with all their claims, they're always looking for sympathy, they're always seen using to gain more power.
It's the same thing, over and over again, just dressed up differently, yet still people believe it.
@@youtubeaccount3230 Still today, many have not figured out that Genesis is only a book of books, that are simply retells of many much older myths.
And we also know that all records of those much older myths, had been gathered together, then buried, and hidden, (for what turned out to be a couple of thousand years).
I wonder who it was that gathered them all together, and buried them? Why has nobody ever asked this question?
They were rediscovered in what is today Iran. The Akkadian text of the Epic of Gilgamesh, was first discovered in 1849 AD by the English archaeologist Austen Henry Layard.
And what they show us very clearly, is, that the "Book of Genesis" (where nearly every modern day religion stems from) is just a book of books, containing retells of these rediscovered much older myths.
For example, Noah and the flood story in Genesis, is the same story we find in Ancient mythology, long before Genesis, with the Epic of Gilgamesh story. Gilgamesh was a myth that came from Babylon - hundreds of years before the Bible was written.
Everything people think they know about the life of Jesus Christ? Are, again, just many parts from much older myths put together, to create the myth of Jesus Christ, for example...
1. Asklepios healed the sick, raised the dead, and was known as the saviour and redeemer.
2. Hercules was born of a divine father and mortal mother, and was known as the saviour of the world.
3. Dionysus was literally the “Son of God”, was born of a woman who had not had sex with a man, and was depicted riding a donkey. He was a travelling teacher who performed miracles, and was killed and resurrected, after which time he became immortal.
4. Osiris did the same things. He was born of a virgin, was considered the first true king of the people, and when he died he rose from the grave and went to heaven.
5. Osiris’s son, Horus, was known as the “light of the world”, “The good shepherd”, and “the lamb”. He was also referred to as, “The way, the truth, and the life.” His symbol was a cross-like symbol.
6. Mithra’s birthday was celebrated on the 25th of December, and his birth (from a rock) was witnessed by local shepherds who brought him gifts, he had 12 disciples, and when he was done on earth he had a final meal before going up to heaven.
On judgment day, he’ll return to pass judgment on the living and the dead. The good will go to heaven, and the evil will die in a giant fire. His holiday is on Sunday (he’s the Sun God). His followers called themselves “brothers”, and their leaders “fathers”. They had baptism and a meal ritual where symbolic flesh and blood were eaten. Heaven was in the sky, and hell was below with demons and sinners.
7. Krishna had a miraculous conception that wise men were able to come to because they were guided by a star. After he was born, an area ruler tried to have him found and killed. His parents were warned by a divine messenger, however, and they escaped and were met by shepherds. The boy grew up to be the mediator between God and man.
8. Buddha’s mother was told by an angel that she’d give birth to a holy child destined to be a saviour. As a child, he teaches the priests in his temple about religion, while his parents were looking for him. He starts his religious career at roughly 30 years of age, and is said to have spoken to 12 disciples on his deathbed.
One of the disciples is his favourite, and another is a traitor. He and his disciples abstain from wealth and travel around, speaking in parables and metaphors. He called himself “the son of man” and was referred to as, “prophet”, “master”, and “Lord”. He healed the sick, cured the blind and deaf, and he walked on water. One of his disciples tried to walk on water as well, but sunk, because his faith wasn’t strong enough.
9. Apollonius of Tyana (a contemporary of Jesus) performed countless miracles (healing sick and crippled, restored sight, cast out demons, etc.). His birth was of a virgin mother, foretold by an angel. He knew scripture really well as a child. He was crucified, rose from the dead and appeared to his disciples to prove his power before going to heaven to sit at the right hand of the father. He was known as, “The Son of God”.
The problem, of course, is, that these previous narratives existed hundreds to thousands of years before Jesus did.
@@youtubeaccount3230 The bible claims, that God, sent his own son, (born to a virgin mother), to earth, to prove and to educate mankind of the existence of his father God, and the bible claims that those people from over 2000 years ago, saw him perform his miracles, proving the existence of his father God.
Yet, do you know, (and this is truly amazing), but do you know, that not a single one of those people from over 2000+ years ago, even thought to make any records of such incredible wonders? Not a single one?
But they did make notes, and they did keep records about really mundane, boring things, (like how many loaves of bread they were able to bake in a day). But the miracles of Jesus Christ, himself ... Nothing? - no records - no notes - no drawings - no carvings - no statues - or even any references mentioning him, from anyone of the time?
Now, isn't that simply remarkable? So, we have to be honest, and say, that rather than teaching mankind of the existence of his father God, he's gone out of his way, to hide, and to make damn sure, he left absolutely no evidence of even his very own existence, let alone any evidence of his father, God? Nothing?
Not a single thing? Zip! Nada! Nowt!. So, really, could we not also consider to be another miracle? No, I guess not, as maybe, just maybe, he could have just changed his mind? LOL.
So, the reality is, that for a great God, who sent his own son, (born to a virgin mother), to teach us, and to prove to all of us, the existence of his father, God? We must be honest, and say, he sure did a miraculous job of hiding every single last detail of proof, that he existed, right?. LOL.
Two whole thousand years, (and more), later, and after many of mankind's greatest minds, have studied, have researched, have looked for something, anything at all, to prove this myth, and yet all of them, every single one of them, have come up with absolutely nothing! Not a thing, zero, squat, nada, nowt?
Tell me… where is all this love, all this forgiveness and compassion for your fellow man? It's literally driven many people mad, driven many people round the twist, looking for something, anything at all, just something, to prove this myth. 2000+ years!! Man? And NOTHING!! LOL!
4 hours of Bart Ehrman = a reinvigorated will to experience life intellectually.
Bart claims that jesus was crucified because he was claiming to be the king of the jews not because of claiming to be the son of god and blasphemy, thats historical wrong. We know from the bible and from josephus flavius that he was crucified because he claimed to be the son of god.
We did it reddit
Anything but intelligent
@@Horvat04 He was put to death because claiming to be the king of the jews, was in direct conflict with the roman emperor. The jews wanted him dead because he was claiming to be the son of god and that was blasphemous but in their traditions they could not sentence people to death so they had a roman do it. that is why on his tombstone it reads "the king of the jews" and the pharisee wanted it to read "he said he was the king of the jews" and by saying he was the king of the jews, to the jewish people that meant he was god, to the romans that meant he was in rebellion. He was convicted of treason. What youre saying is actually hiistorically wrong. lmfao.
@@Horvat04 he was given a purple robe and a crown of thorns to mock him for his claim as well by the roman soldiers. did you even read the story?
Thanks for the intellectual stimulation. Bart's 'off the cuff' answers to Derek's often complex questions reflect a comprehensive grasp of a gigantic subject. The good doctor has a wonderful way of answering the questions while simultaneously putting them in an understandable context.
I had no idea how many feathers Bart had ruffled, and how badly. I went to look up some of his books and there are a ton of “ responses.” That’s fine, but it’s also interesting how much those people fear Bart, his ideas, and his research.
When one of the best Biblical scholars around deconverts, becomes an atheist, and continues his Biblical scholarship that knocks down fundamentalist ideas about the Bible, and then curb stomps those ideas to death, people tend to get upset.
Christianity can't survive without lies
@@MCXM111I disagree you underestimate the NEED of simple people to rationalize their existence, Christianity gives them an easy out I studied the Bible 25 years before declaring “I’m not a Christian” but several years later now after stripping away all the magic and foolishness I do agree with the message and teachings of Christ it’s very close to the Buddha and while a probable myth I love the tale of Jesus in India being chased away by the Hindu for intellectual destruction of their cast system…. And there is a deeper level of teaching in these books which is ancient and powerful just my humble opinion 🙏
Alex and Bart do not disappoint. When I first saw the length of this video I was skeptical that there would be enough fresh insight to fill an hour plus. Well let me tell you this was absolutely riveting.
What an excellent effort. Alex really knows how to bring out the most complete information in an interview and keep his guest on track.
Have you looked into The Urantia Book? I would love to hear Dr Bart's thoughts on it if he were to read it.
I have it in English and French... hosted study groups with it and metaphysical text. It's very Seventh-Day Adventist...as we're the Sadlers and Kelloggs. Although the book is a beautiful compilation of man-made thoughts...key there is "man-made." No one in their right mind would believe that divine beings took almost 40 years to write a book that is 19th-century science.
The Osaphe Bible is another manmade wonder... however, it is not as well written. The Urantia Book is written in 19th century Chicago academia style...again...Sadler and Kellogg... along with the forum and Christie...were Chicago academics. I will say... It is a beautiful and dense read...or listen. I don't believe it's in any way a celestial revelation...but listen to it often.
Dr Bart and Derek thank you guys so much for answering some questions some of us has been asking since we were children.❤
If you can able to control your thoughts and merge with God within, you also Jesus.
This presentation is both GREAT and necessary. Thank you Dr. Ehrman and Derek.
One thing that Derek can do to help others who strongly hold to the bible being the actual word of god, is to show them how he is able to change his life around without clinging to dogma. That transformation is the true "miracle" that would be transformative for other people to free themselves from religion while being a significant contributor to society and modeling how to be scholarly to improve one's epistemology.
Much "agape love" to you all.
I went through an over night “supernatural “ change when I get saved 6 years ago. And I remember everything being different the next day!
And now after going down these roads with rabbi Tovia Singer and Bart etc… I’m questioning things like was it just me that changed myself?
It’s certainly frustrating learning about all the differences in the NT. And how God seemed to be all about war in the OT..
Hard to reconcile the 2 books composed of many books.
@Wretched2JZ yes all religions claim miracles and lives changed. The power of your mind when faith is there can be amazing. I think looking for God within is better than looking for him in a book. Was a Christian for 45 years till I ground singer, Rocco Errico and started studying in Hebrew/Aramaic and learned Christianity is 100% false no doubts about it. I don't trust any literature anymore. I think God is life and in all of us and till after death nothing can be known of him.
@@Wretched2JZ When humanity figures out what "switch" changed in your mind to become "saved" that will be a banner day.
Was there a self loathing that was gone ? Was there a fear of self destruction that was removed ? It would be interesting to hear, now that the idea that it wasn't those words in a book, but some "idea" that manifested this change, what you think it might be !!!
@@Wretched2JZ Lmao why would you listen to that crazy maniac called Tovia Singer, he believes in Judaism wich is worse than Christianity.
@@Wretched2JZ Listening to anyone who belongs to a mental hospital, is not recommendable.
Regarding the virgin birth: Elaine Pagels points out that in Mark, Jesus returns to his home town, preaching, and people ask, “Isn’t this the son of Mary?” That is not how one would refer to a nice Jewish boy. He would have been referred to as the son of Joseph, even if his father were dead. It sort of implies Jesus was illegitimate. She posits that Matthew and Luke then tell the birth story as a way to account for Jesus’ paternity.
The Writer's of the Gospels is UNKNOWN.
A Writer, Scribe or Translator can make a story sound anyway they Desire. *The POWER Of A AUTHORITATIVEPOSITION And THE PEN!*
This is exactly what I've been looking for!! I can’t wait to listen multiple times!!
Why? What’s the point?
4 hours of Dr. Ehrman and the Unholy Trinity on The Line TH-cam channel yesterday. I have my hands full with counterapologetic programming today!
What’s the point of it all though? 4 hours of your only life to argue against something you act so boldly to be false already?
"Matthew constructs an absurd scene with Jesus mounting two animals at the same time and riding them into Jerusalem. Zechariah was employing the common Biblical device of parallelism and had no such awkward scenario in mind. Other gospel writers understood this, but Matthew was clearly out of the loop."
My friend, did it ever cross your mind, that multiple minds & hand worked on these Gospel materials and others? If GOD BREATHED and MOVED Upon Their Creators, *THE NEW COVENANT MESSAGE-"GOD WITHIN US PERSONALLY, BY HIS PROMISED HOLY SPIRIT, WOULD HAVE BEEN RECORDED & HANDED TO US BY "THE GOVERNMENT & RELIGIOUS POWERS" THAT BE!*
Thank you for posting this full video! Thank you for giving us a full episode…honestly it makes me want to sign up for the patreon sight.
Why? What’s the point?
Four hours with Bart Ehrman can only be described as a treat and thank you Derek for making it happen.
For what? If this if your 1 life and you truly believe that then you’re wasting your time.
I definitely want to read Bart’s book on memory now that he’s mentioned it a few times. If it really is his best book, maybe it can make a resurgence!
You should read one of the scholars who specialize in the social memory approach as well. I suspect that you will learn far more from them than Ehrman on this particular topic: Jens Schöter, Alan Kirk, Rafael Rodriguez, Anthony Le Donne and Chris Keith to name a few. LeDonne’s little book ‘Historical Jesus: What can we know and how can we know it’ is quite good. I also absolutely loved ‘Behind the Gospels’ by Eric Eve. His book served as my introductory reading to the topic. Both books will probably give you a better idea of the social memory theory approach, and how this way of thinking about the ancient Xtian sources may help advance the field. Werner H Kelber and Richard Horsley are also well known among the ‘memory-scholars’ in the field of NT studies.
My wife, who is a writer, just ordered Bart's book on memory, due to my hearing about it on this segment. My wife is not interested in the Bible at all.
I've read it twice, and have a hard copy(signed by Bart) and a digital version. It really is a fascinating read.
I hold University Professors in extreme esteem. Some of the best years of my life were spent at Cleveland State U, majoring in Music Theory/Composition. My very 1st Philosophy Professor,Dr.Rosenbaum,was the sweetest guy in the world and I loved it. Professor Ehrman evokes those same warm feelings in me.
I’ll pay cash money for a Mclatchie/Ehrman debate.
McClachie? Oh Jonathon, no no, no, that would be a waste of my time.
Mclatchie is a joke lol professor Dave destroys him.
@@daddydaveshowshow7945 I’d like to watch Erhman destroy him as well.
McLatchie is so low rent. Every debate I’ve seen him in he gets his butt handed to him in the openings then just stammers in disbelief nobody is convinced by his “argument.” Lol
McLalachie was destroyed by Carrier..
The pursuit of knowledge (truth) is always worthwhile. But there are two types of knowledge (or truth). There are true historical facts, and Bart Erman is interested to find out what is true or false about this particular slice of the past (the Bible and early Christianity). However, we are still left with the other kind of knowledge, best described by Socrates, who asked what is the really important question: how should one live? If you find, after a reasonably diligent search, that living a good Christian life is the answer to that question, it really doesn’t matter what Bart Erman ‘discovers’ about what is true or false in the Biblical account, interesting as that may be.
Thanks so much, Derek and Bart
Always delighted to listen to anything that Dr Bart Ehrman has to say. Have watched most of his “Misquoting Jesus” weekly podcasts
Matthew: Hey Joseph, you don't look very happy tonight. What up ?
Joseph: My girlfriend is pregnant. Her father is gonna kill me !
Matthew: Why don't you tell him it was the Angel of the Lord ?
Joseph: You must be joking. That wouldn't fool anybody.
Matthew: O ye of little faith !
The four gospels are the lessons taught to four different classes of students. There are the 3 disciples closet, thec12 in general, the first 70 brought in and the newest disciples--the other 70. For this reason there are variations in the lessons. It is Judaiic tradition to title the gospels by the first words of the text. So these gospels are revealing of the four beginnings we can experience. Salvation through foriveness, righteousness, holiness and the good part. There is no Q. Read the word with faith....
Dr. Ehrman is always a win!!!
Bart Ehrman relates material in as honest a way possible letting folks decide for themselves.
I first learn of Dr. Ehrman from Dr. Dale Martin when I found his Yale open course on Introduction to New Testament history and literature. Started following Dr. Ehrman after that and I feel I have learned so much from him on the subject biblical literature and it's interpretation of it.
Bart claims that jesus was crucified because he was claiming to be the king of the jews not because of claiming to be the son of god and blasphemy, thats historical wrong. We know from the bible and from josephus flavius that he was crucified because he claimed to be the son of god.
@MrUndadoggPtownCity ya we know already the first 10 times, who cares
@@dirtypickle77 people who are interessted in truth surely care, if its wrong then clearly its manipulation for his agenda, so your respond is senseless not mine potato
@@Horvat04 do you know who Flavius Josphus really is?
@@Horvat04 you the potato repeating senseless garbage over and over and over. Get a new idea already.
I could listen to bart e all day...well...in fact...today i have.
Revelation 11:19. Revelation 12:1-5. Psalms 2:1-9. Isaiah 9:6-7. Revelation 19:11. Hebrew 6:18. Hebrew 5:13. Hebrew 4:12. 2Chonicles 7:14-16.
Dr. Michael Heiser has articles about the book of revelation and it’s Hebrew theology intertwined with it.
Dr. Bart needs to take a Hebrew theology course to help understand the Hebrew concepts the gospel writers would have known and conveyed in their writings.
I love Dr Heiser. I think her and the guest here would have a LOT in common regarding interpretation of Scripture.
They do obviously have big points of disagreement on a few points. Trinity, and meaning of son of god usage
@@bubbag8895Dr. Michael Heiser was a male. He died already.
Thank you. Watching from Alaska.
Thank you, again. Watching from Alaska.
Every time I listen to this I learn more and come away feeling more grounded.
Thank you.
The Life of Apollonius composed by Philostratus is dated much later than the New Testament and the gospels. It is removed by more than a century of the latest book of the New Testament to have composed in the 90s CE. In other words, there could not have been any Christian scribe copying details and legends from the deeds of Apollonius and then applying those to the historical Jesus. If there was indeed copying then it must have been Philostratus copying from the gospels or the life of Jesus and then applying such details to Apollonius
Why didn’t the algorithm blow this up more?
Just think, if Star Wars is a religion and books of different language get found, THESE EXACT CONVERSATIONS WILL HAPPEN.
I personally find the Flavius family and Josephus conspire very intriguing. Also, the Hykos in Egyptian history and the story of Joseph and Moses seem tangible.
Gobble smag. 🤪
Dr Ehrman my fave guy , I love that you cause my brain to think wonder and question
Until when? What are you questioning if there is no answer?
What do you labour and strive for?
Bart the man😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 after all this contradiction am still in love with Jesus yyyyy❤❤❤❤😂😂😂😂😂
In Love With your IDEA OF Jesus? What about THE ONE TRUE GOD, Jesus was recorded as Praying-Calling On- Communicating To,, WHO Gave him Insight-Knowledge -Wisdom and The Power to perform signs and wonders?
The ONE he Came to Deliver HIS GRACIOUS REPENTANCE GOSPEL MESSAGE To Mankind.
*TO RETURN (PERSONAL ACTIONS-WORKS) TO GODS RIGHTEOUS KINGDOM AND OUT OF THE KINGDOM OF DARKNESS! NOT JUST BELIEVE THE DELIVERY PERSONS EXISTENCE, BUT THE GOD WHO SENT JESUS*
I read somewhere that in antient Rome, in the time of monarchy or early republic, a father could sell a son into slavery only thrice, and after third time the son is free. Obviously, the father was "pater familias" - the head of the clan, and the "slavery" was servitude for a certain ammount of time, after which the "slave" returned to his family.
True, it was Rome, not Israel, but the customs of primitive societies were similar, and we can draw some parallels concerning slavery in early, nomadic jewish society.
Thanks! It's nice to hear an informed discussion. Thanks mate.
Thank you for that compliment and your superthanks my friend!
Enjoy listening to Dr. Ehrman. Christians need to spend more time learning about the origins of their faith from scholars that do not have faith commitments.
How in the hell does Dr. Ehrman know more about the origins of my faith than any other Christian like me?
What does he know that I don’t?
Does he have access to some special recently unearthed eyewitness accounts that I don’t?
He’s an atheist for hire and disingenuous and dishonest at that.
Stop your infantile nonsense.
if they did that there would be no christians left lol
Thank you!!! Question: will you maybe put the part about slavery in a new video? Such an important issue, and what Bart says is a good addition to what Joshua Bowen says in the Within Reason podcast, I think.
Watching this is my antidote to all the awful fundamentalist-based Supreme Court decisions today. You are my salve and balm today. Thank you.
bro thanks for that.. i feel pressed to say something here, while you are not too horrible on the eye, consider putting your guest on fullscreen whenever there is a long monologue coming. Im sure u wont get bothered by that
Thank you both!❤
For what? Trying to steal the only hope of mankind?
Bart should get a mic, I have a hard time really hearing and comprehending what he’s saying when it is not so clear
I can't stop watching Derek's pink flamenco shirt.
Thank you, again. Watching from Alaska.
Thanks!
Thank you 😊
@@mythvisionTV your problem in the west at first is that both theist and atheist are the two sides of one coin , both idolise there thought and there methodology for knowledge.both lost actually in there illusions. The worst is that both come overcome there ego and recognise there fall.
I’ll have to read the source material to see for myself but has anyone seen what Mike Winger says about the Apollonius comparison?
We love you Derek. You’re a fantastic example of the attitude we should have about these topics.
What is that attitude? Pride?
I appreciate your table of contents in the description 😊
What a treat! Thank you
Atheist here.
Why don't you go after Jews & Muslims with the same alacrity as you do with Christians?
Always a pleasure 👍
Quran aqurately right giving the truth light about everything not only about Jesus but the whole universe and science
You cant refute Bart Ehrman, because most things he says are consensus among scholars and sometimes his opinions are even considered liberal. This means everyone who wants to "refute" Bart Ehrman has to change mainstream scholarship
Hello. Only trouble us Bart can critique Christianity as I do, but like Christianity he does not know the truth, but I do. The NT truth is linked to Abraham, but Christianity is not.
Yeah. And I am related to King David
@@germanboy14 He isn't liberal he is anti. I have to change mainstream scholarship as a believer, my teaching called 'hereafter' is the NT in truth.
@@simonskinner1450 many opinions of Ehrman are liberal. And good luck, academics wouldn't even take you serious
@@germanboy14 I take me very seriously, and academics do not have original thoughts, like you in your own bunker.
Now me I have many original thoughts, 28 videos of original thoughts. It is so reassuring to find you, cheerleading for Bart, like an out-rider for a Pride Parade.
How did we degenerate to the utter triviality of biblical literalism? Luther is remembered for relying on Sola Scriptura but he felt free to demote 14 books of the Bible to “apocrypha”. Calvin wasn’t a literalist either. In his Commentary on Luke 13:10 he wrote “the Evangelists did not care much about exactness.” His comment on Matthew 27:9-10 is, “How the name of Jeremiah crept in, I confess that I do not know nor do I give myself much trouble to inquire. The passage itself plainly shows that the name of Jeremiah has been put down by mistake…for in Jeremiah we find nothing of this sort, nor any thing that even approaches to it.”
I'm a huge Bart Ehrman fan
when i was a christian i hated Ehrman but now i'm statring to like him!
I want to hug the shit out of you, Craig. Your diligence got me out of bed! Thank you for your existence!!!
You talk too fast, not for me
When Dr Erhman says let the authors speak for themselves we can ask the hypothetical question "okay guys, you wrote these books so that i might believe...so how do you want me to relate to the others who also wrote maybe something that seems contradictory"
Paul tells us "tell hell with anybody who disagrees with me"
thank you Bart and Derek for the fascinating conversation.
There's, also, Kill Witches - You should not ever let a sorceress live. (Exodus 22:17 NAB). How many innocent people were brutally murdered because of this single sentence?
Hey, I don't know if this was brought up, but I can think of three modern examples of what happens when a prophecy doesn't come true: Harold Camping, Trump supporters who believe he won the election, and the entire JW religion.
MythVision TV, This made me laugh so much! Thanks for sharing!
Thanks! Dr. Ehrman never disappoints.
Thank you for that superthanks
Bart claims that jesus was crucified because he was claiming to be the king of the jews not because of claiming to be the son of god and blasphemy, thats historical wrong. We know from the bible and from josephus flavius that he was crucified because he claimed to be the son of god.
@@Horvat04 Actually, here's why Ehrman (and others) don't think Jesus claimed to be the son of God: Mark was the first gospel to be written and the author of Mark never mentions anything about Jesus saying he was the son of god or a divine being. The gospel of John was written at least 30 years after Mark and it's only in this later gospel that Jesus says things like, "I and the Father are one" and "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me". The crucial question is, if Jesus really did say he was god, why would Mark leave that out?? It seems like a pretty important detail, don't you think? Yet Mark never mentions it. That's why historians don't think Jesus said it.
Flavius Josephus didn't write The Antiquities until 93 years after Jesus died, so he couldn't know what Jesus said. The first and most extensive reference to Jesus in the Antiquities (in Book 18) states that Jesus was the Messiah and a wise teacher who was crucified by Pontius Pilate. Almost all modern scholars reject the authenticity of this passage. The passage Josephus originally wrote may have started out with a reference to the life and execution of Jesus by Pilate, but it was probably altered later by Christians with an agenda.
@@susansteinkraus2821 no...see first of all, the scriptures of Paul which describes him as the son of god, the lord, etc was earlier written than all the gospels, so you are wrong.. second is when we have copys of copys we dont even know how old any of this is originally because we only have what we have dated...so i dont give much about all these dating especially when you know that paul was earlier.
According to flavius you are right, his scriptures survived because it was in favor for christianity..he himself had his agenda as well, narrarating the political aspect, not the moral or religious aspects.
Bart Ehrman is clever manipulating the scriptures for his agenda. Because there is no other explanation why he claims that..he knows paul is older and that we have copys of copys so it makes no sense. People believe him because they dont know much but he got flaws as we see and deceives by claiming things. This is scam strictly speaking... even though i like him. But im aware of that. Sorry for my broken english
@@Horvat04 Yes, PAUL describes Jesus as the Son of God. PAUL thought Jesus was the Son of God, but Paul never says JESUS called himself that. Paul never quotes any of Jesus’ sayings. Paul would have no way of knowing anything that Jesus said. He never even met Jesus. And, yes, the letters of Paul were written before the gospels, but they were written after Jesus’ death. Saul/Paul was not a follower of Jesus and did not know him before his crucifixion. The narrative of the Book of Acts suggests Paul's conversion occurred four to seven years after the crucifixion of Jesus. What’s crucial here is what Jesus said about himself, not what Paul thought about Jesus.
I’m not sure I understand your point about Ehrman “claiming that he knows Paul is older.” The letters of Paul WERE written before any of the gospels; you said so yourself. Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
Are you objecting to Ehrman saying that the gospel of Mark was written at least 30 years before the gospel of John?
Could you also explain more about the significance of the fact that we only have copies of copies of copies of all the biblical texts? That is, what would the fact that we don’t have the originals have to do with figuring out when a text was first written? After all, we don’t rely on carbon dating the papyrus it’s written on. We analyze what the text says and the language the author uses.
The prevailing view among today’s mainstream Bible scholars (not just Bart Ehrman) is the view that the Gospel of Mark was written first around 70 CE and was followed by Matthew (80 CE), Luke (85-90 CE), and then John’s gospel (95-100 CE). This date range means there are roughly 40 to 70 years between Jesus’ death and our earliest written narratives of his life and ministry. How did scholars come up with these dates?
FIRST, as we all know, the Gospels tell us that Jesus was crucified in Judea at around 30-33 CE. This means that the Gospels were necessarily composed after c. 33 CE. But how long after? When it comes to evidence pertinent to establishing a lower date limit for the Gospels, the most glaring evidence would be that the Gospels make explicit reference to the Roman-Jewish War (66 - 73CE). Specifically, the Gospels refer to when Roman soldiers surrounded Jerusalem in 67 CE, and most notably the Gospels mention the complete destruction of the Jerusalem Temple, which happened in 70 CE (see e.g., Luke 21 and Mark 13). This tells us the Gospels were, in all likelihood, written after these events since they make direct mention of them.
SECOND, we need to take a look at when the Gospels first show up on the historical radar. We look at early Christian writings from the Apostolic fathers of the primitive church. Upon examining the record, we find that the four Gospels do not receive any mention in the writings from any of the earliest Apostolic fathers ranging from 60 CE to at least 115 CE - not Clement of Rome, Barnabas, Hermas or Ignatius. This conspicuous silence has long been acknowledged by secular and Christian scholars.
If the Gospels had already been written, circulated, and known in the Christian community as early as the 40s or 50s CE, then we have to ask how these four earliest Christian sources from 60 to 115 CE (with many hundreds of pages of literature between them) could neglect to mention any of the Gospels. And how they could display absolutely no awareness of the evangelists Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. The most obvious answer is that these early Christian writers could not cite or mention texts that had not yet been written.
THIRD, we find in the writings of Papias and Irenaeus that the Gospel of Mark was written after the deaths of Peter and Paul. Why is this such a key piece of information? Well, according to Church records as detailed in the “Chronicle” of church historian Eusebius, the thirteenth or fourteenth year of Emperor Nero is given for the deaths of Peter and Paul. This means that Peter and Paul were killed in 67 or 68 CE! To connect the dots, the Gospel of Mark, our earliest gospel account was written some time AFTER. So, we are right back to ~ 70 CE for the earliest possible composition date.
I realize this reply is getting very long. Perhaps I’ll stop here and wait to hear if you are interested in pursuing this further.
And please don’t apologize for your English. I admire anyone who knows more than one language!
Bart Ehrman is infamous according to religious zealots only because he has a open and intelligent mind.
Let’s play a drinking game: Each time Derek interrupts a scholar about to say something interesting we drink!
Derek is doing his best. Interviewing scholars is not necessarily easy. I can say this because I am a scholar (not in religious studies) and I've been on both sides of that table!
Thank you, again. Watching from Alaska.
Every time I revisit this I learn something new.
👍
This is one of the best videos ever with Bart. Thank you for making it.
"They are based on earlier oral traditions".
While that is certainly true, we have to consider the fact that once scholars thought luke was built from earlier oral traditions or maybe one written tradition (Mark), but now in fact we see that that there are multiple written traditions Mark, Q, Josephus's Antiquities, memesis with certain greek texts. And what we are left with in terms of accounts appear to come from other unknown possibly written traditions. We have to assume the hebrew bible was pieced together similarly. One of the most important things to remember that the source text for matthew and luke, Q, no longer exists because christian scribes no longer wanted it to exist. Just as certain passages, exemplified in the video, no longer exists because scribes didnt like it (notably the passage in luke that was changed in all but one manuscript)
Hebrew bible is not immune from editing and censorship. The fact that there are various hebrew codices informs us that there is censorship.
So back to the quote, there may have been earlier written sources for the hebrew bible, its just that we don't have them. The shapiro scroll may be one such source, but it has conviniently disappearred. There is evidence that there are other sources because the bible quotes from text that no longer exists. Moreover, in genesis 9-11 the authors are paraphrasing snippets from two different versions of the shuruppak flood myth but not giving the sources. With regard to genesis 1 I should make the point that WG Lambert points out that during the late Assyrian/Neobabylonian empire there were enumerable creation myths running around and the genesis 1 may have been derived from one such myth that held more sway with the exiles than any other myth. We need to imagine that when the Israelites were exiled to mesopotamia, they were not taken to one place but many, many places with many stories. Some of those Israelites during the neobabylonian period made it back to the levant (Noting many judean and israelite settlements continued to prosper during the neobabylonian period).
Starting with judges in the text there is the beginning of a single sourced text that proceeds through the rest of the Tanakh with some exceptions (Isaiah, Job). However the Torah is exception and if we reconstruct genesis based upon what is found in the Tanakh we would have a fragmented story with sources that disagree. We can ask the question how much of the Tanakh was edited as to agree with later thinking (e.g. Deuteronomy 32, DSS versus MT, Zacheria MT versus DSS and Septiagint) therefore textual criticism has not really finished doing a thorough analysis of the vartext in various sources to determine whether or not the Torah is using other sources that have been suppressed or redacted.
Ehrman looks strung out, man. He needs a month in Cabo.
The best case against Mythicism is that every great lie contains a kernel of truth. Ehrman overstates the evidence for a historical Jesus. My opinion is based upon having heard Ehrman make his cases. While I am indifferent to either position, the percentages are likely 51-49 in favor.
Regarding conversions, nobody seems to mention the fact that, evangelists often converted the local king, who then decreed that Christianity became the religion of them all. It then became easier to convert the neighbouring king and it would then increase exponentially.
uhhh.... can you give five examples of that happening "often"? the ONLY time that i'm aware of that that happened in history was the conversion of constantine and it wasn't a true conversion. it was for political purposes. i can't think of another instance much less that it happened often.
give some examples. bc right now i'm pretty sure you're incorrect.
I've heard of a few examples without absorbing the details, but your challenge galvanised me a bit. It didn't take more than 5 minutes of googling to come up with some examples. David Livingstone, on his own admission only converted one person, that man was Sechele, ruler of the Bakwena tribe, in what is now Malawi. After Livingstone left he converted his tribe, when other missionaries arrived they were surprised to find the locals were already Christians. There are too many other examples to itemise, but I will give you a few hints for you to research. Many of the Germanic tribes converted during Charlemagne's campaigns, this was done for political reasons and from the top down. The were a number of missions in pagan Anglo-Saxon Britain from the 7th century onwards, the kings were converted, again usually for political reasons. If you think about it, a missionary venturing into pagan lands would have quite a job converting the peasants one by one, he would probably be executed by the king, but if you convert the king, job done. That's not to say that all the subjects would instantly become Christians, they would often continue with their original practices alongside those of Christianity, some have survived to the modern day, such as at Christmas and Easter. Christians were very effective of layering their festival on top of those already being celebrated. @@CocoTheDiamond
ok, so it's happened a few times, but this isn't a specific christian tactic. like.. mh dad was a missionary and he always said to target the children and the families will follow. that worked a few times. that doesn't mean it's a christian tactic. i guess what i have a problem with is saying that this is how christianity spread and it's hella more complex and it wasn't by targeting kings.@richarshowers
by the way, does anyone know why we can't respond to posts we've commented on??? there's a way around it but wtf is going on?
One of the reasons that Christianity grew was that they were one of the few religions to evangelise, Dr Ehrman covers this in his book 'The Triumph of Christianity'. Once Constantine converted he was followed my many of the Roman elite, Christianity went from first being legalised to becoming the official religion of the Roman Empire, once in power, of course, Christians actively persecuted other religions. Many methods were used, conquest, forced conversions, the power of guns and disease and yes getting to the children. There are cases of educated adults being convinced by the arguments of Christianity of course, but most people grow up in the religion of their parents and community as I presume you did.@@CocoTheDiamond
Christ came to show us who God is and to have us repent from temple worship, rituals, animal sacrifice etc. The spiritual kingdom came in 70 AD when the temple was destroyed. That is what Christ was talking about. No more temple worship, a new way to worship God.
"This video will go viral!"
Never say that
Bart Ehrman is a National Treasure !!!
I am always surprise when Bart Ehrman says there’s overwhelming evidence for Jesus I just don’t know where it is
Im sure with slavery like everything there were decent owners that treated them as good as you might expect and terrible evil pricks that liked to torture them.
What are the changes in 36 hours( friday pm to sunday am ) in a dead body after death ( according to criminologists ) & applying ritual things on it
Bart looks even more serious without glasses
How does Dr. Ehrman explain the Sign of Jonah ?
Because it appears that he never mentions it.
Great stuff. My only question was about the last bit, where Bart explains why his biblical scholarship did not shake his faith, but rather it was the problem of suffering that did it. Although I agree that you can be a Christian without believing in the Bible, pretty much everything we know about Jesus comes from the Bible. So why wouldn't his historical studies of the Bible at least *weaken* or undermine his faith in Jesus (of the Bible)? Certainly that is why many people lose their faith -- by carefully studying the Bible. I hear what he's saying, but I also wonder whether his "no" (to the question of whether he lost his faith because of his studies) was a little too emphatic. I bet his studies at least laid the groundwork, and then trying to deal with the problem of suffering was the final lynchpin. I'm speculating, of course.
Perhaps some of us are unaware that our family history has nothing to do with anyone else. Unless you are a particular group of Black people, are Father hates you and is coming to destroy you.
@@benyahudadavidl Thank you for sharing that incoherent bit of nonsense that has nothing to do with what I said.
@@Arven8 Perhaps some of us are unaware that unless you are an Israelite your opinion means nothing.
@@benyahudadavidl Perhaps some of us are nuts.
I believe in god not the bible
Mythicists are the flat earthers of new testament scholars