Was Jesus a False Prophet?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 24 เม.ย. 2023
- Visit www.bartehrman.com/courses/ to shop from Bart Ehrman’s online courses and get a special discount by using code: MJPODCAST on all courses.
Historical scholars for over a century have maintained that Jesus predicted that the end of history as we know it was to come in his own generation. Conservative Christians -- laypeople and scholars alike -- have insisted that this is a complete misportrayal of Jesus. And many people -- possibly most? -- believe that if Jesus really did preach this message, not only was he obviously wrong but also Christianity cannot possibly be true. A Jesus who was demonstrably mistaken about a central element of his preaching could not be a prophet of God, let alone the Savior of the world. In this episode we consider the issue and its implication: did Jesus proclaim the imminent end of the world? If so, can Christian faith even be possible, let alone reasonable?
Bart and Megan tackle such questions as:
-What actually is apocalypticism?
-What does it mean when we say that Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet?
-Were there other apocalyptic prophets in the ancient world, or was Jesus a one-off?
-Was there anything different about Jesus’ message compared to his prophetic peers?
-How were they viewed by the general population - were they taken seriously, or were they viewed in the same way that we may view people on a street corner with “the end is near” signs??
-If Jesus was anticipating that the Kingdom of God would be a physical reality before the end of his life, is it fair to say that he wasn’t expecting to be crucified?
-How do the writers of the gospels deal with this complication, and how do their reactions differ?
-Was Jesus, then, a false prophet?
-How did early Christian cults and sects deal with the world not ending?
On my last visit to an evangelical church, I heard a political speech. It was like watching FOX news. I never went back.
Don't go back to that church. They are doing their own thing
“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.” - Barry Goldwater November 1994
@@terryreynolds200 This quote surprised me because, in 1964, he was considered a conservative's conservative. What he feared largely happened, too. Today, MAGA would banish him as a RINO.
stay away from those evangelical churches in my opinion
Evangelicals and the republican right are joined at the hip
Dr. Ehrman has an impressive knowledge of the history of ancient civilizations, culture , religions, but fortunately for us laymen he is a gifted teacher. I feel very thankful I have had the opportunity to learn so much from him.
I haven’t watched the podcast in quite a while, but I am absolutely loving the microphone upgrade for Dr. Bart Ehrman. Keep at it people you were doing great work.
Read my book about it, Jesus Failed and Finished in Disaster
Letting go of American Evangelical Christianity was one of my best life choices.
Same here john
It's difficult to see the benefit of leaving a cult until you've actually left the cult.
Likewise! I'm truly amazed at the overwhelming relief and joy I feel again.
Repent, you rejecting the spirit.
@@Phi1618033 man I could not agree more. My life has had much more meaning and purpose once my chains were broken.
It'll be a sad day when I don't hear new content from Bart. I could listen to this stuff all day
Thanks for asking the big questions that most Christians would never dare to bríng up.
Jesus never said that the end of the world would come in his generation or even close to the next generation. Megan Lewis put up this false question and Bart did not correct her. When some people asked Jesus he replied that no one knows when the end will come. Matthew 24:36
Bart Erhman should be debating with a Catholic theologian like Scott Hahn, or apologists like Jimmy Akin and Trent Horn. They know their stuff.
David cottage
Dr Ehrman covers that. Didn't you listen ? The Gospels were written at different times and as the years passed the message shifted, adjusting to circumstances, as it became increasingly obvious that Jesus wasn't going to come back "in their lifetimes ". I seem to remember reading Christ saying, "before this generation is out" or similar, although I'm not enough of a scholar to quote chapter and verse.
As the years passed Christianity spread and became more organised. They had local bishops, deacons and what have you. I'm sure there was a lot of money involved as well. Christianity had to be marketed effectively. Marketing is not a recent invention, by any means.
@@AndriyValdensius-wi8gw Wrong, the apostles kept notes of what he said, nowhere in the bible does it say they did not take notes, they could not rely on just their memories. They passed what was preached on to others in the church hierarchy of those times. Jesus didn't leave a bible but he told the apostles that not one word (Jesus meant the true meaning) must be changed from what he said. He also said that the Holy Spirit will tell them what to say and do. Jesus could have got highly educated Jews to be his apostles, instead, the twelve he picked were fishermen and from other simple professions.
@@AndriyValdensius-wi8gw "Before this generation will pass away" does not mean the time of those Jews who were living 2000 years ago. Read Matthew 24 entirely and you will see that Jesus meant the end times, as he also said there will be wars and earthquakes in various places (on Earth) meaning it will be a long time to come.
Professor Ehrman has made Bible scholarship available for us plebs. Totally altered my view of the Bible. Very few Christians have either the interest or guts to go deeper than their surface devotional interest in the scriptures.
Can you blame them, really? They're told their whole life that they're essentially perfidious cowards who will be tortured in a fire for all of eternity if they don't "believe in Jesus" (whatever that means---seeing as it means many different things to many different people.).
It's hard to turn away from something taught so strictly to you and to turn away from the belief of your family, friends and most of the people around you.
@@Willie_Wahzoo 👍
Oh wow I thought "plebs" was solely a Trinidadian word 😅 thank you for using it in this comment
You find what you are searching to.. internet gives you the answer you want
@@BrunoCardoso-dp3bd Internet? No. Academic scholarship? Yes.
I am ex-clergy. Recovering Anglican Priest. Thank you, Bart and Megan!
Let's not assume Erhman goes unrefuted here. Daniel Wallace give a fine balance to Erhman. Watch the debates.
One of the better episodes thus far, very informative, really enjoyed this one!
Very informative! I’m looking forward to next week
Finally! 🎉 Bart got the propper microphone! ❤ so happy to be finally able to hear the podcast with good sound ❤
I just wished muslims who are very pleased with Ehrman's skepticism realized they're not any better than christians. For instance, the Quran has only one version just because all the others were eliminated very early on.
Hahaha nice joke
@@pamalickkujabi3461
There's only one cult thats still practising bloody sacrifice, apostacy kills.. etc
Wake up, abdul boy.
Yours is the funniest among existing religious books.
@@pamalickkujabi3461 Koran indeed is a joke, but not a nice one, and not even funny
@@Endrin911 It will be good if you talk on matters you have knowledge on or else you make a fool of yourself! My humble advice to you
@@notanemoprog Oh okay standup comedian I heard you
That gospel assignment sounds super fun... if you're only taking one course that semester, haha. I just imagine, slammed with 15 credits, several finals and papers coming up, and goddammit Bart wants to write the dang Bible?!? lol. Glad I'm not in college anymore man.
Excellent discussion. Much appreciated.
Excellent as usual.
I must admit I also enjoy the format. Megan refers to it as a 'show'. Indeed it is as it resembles an old English TV quiz show with an announcer declaring the next segment in a bright cheerful manner.
Always learn something new.
Great episode. Request for future one (forgive me if you’ve already covered this). You’ve mentioned before the historical value of the gospels: beyond the mythology, these are the written versions of verbally communicated accounts. Can you talk more about that history of verbal communication and the possible biases or lack thereof at the point when they were transcribed? TY!
If you are speaking of oral tradition, story telling, Erhman does talk about this in some of the other podcasts and debates he has done. Very interesting indeed.
It's often commented that ancient writers of religious texts were more concerned with conveying a message than they were with actual historical facts --- kinda like nursery rhymes - The doomsday death cult known as Christianity was, for the most part, plagiarized from several more ancient 'resurrection cults' collectively known as 'The Mysteries' - which was acknowledged very early on by Christians. Justin Martyr, considered the earliest Christian Apologist, said in an open letter to the Roman Emperor, Antoninus (circa 150 CE), -
"And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter."
This is one of the reasons the Church was so adamant about burning books - to destroy the evidence that there was nothing special or novel about the Jesus Myth
Yes, grading is the worst part of being a professor! However, I do love grading paper. I am not a professor anymore but I used to give my art appreciation students and assignment to discuss an artwork that they either identified with or did not identify with. They were amazing because the students would be honest and raw in their essays and I would learn so much about them as individuals. ❤
Boring
Thank you for the time ,dott Bart ehrman ✌️
Covered a lot of ground in this one...very informative and thought-provoking.
Excellent, as always!
I've been listening to Bart Ehrman and viewing numerous videos on early christianism for several years now. I think this video gives an exceptional insight into early christianism in a most succinct way. Amazing job. Well... coming from Bart... not really surprising! 😉
That's a good word, 'christianism', I might have to adopt that.
Annointism, Yahwehism, Abrahamism, Paulism, Scripticism. The possibilities are endless.
@@garrybooker churchianity, Paulianity lol
Wow just wow, always discovering something new with you guys ❤
I'm very interested in the book you are working on.
I wish to say, Thank you sir. You have given me information to address the many questions I have in Christianity and provided the frame to my life picture. Mysterious ways indeed!
I love it! Bart stated that the authors of at least two of the gospels were actively putting words in Jesus’s mouth or keeping him mute as they saw fit! 😂 Bart has won a subscriber!
he shouldn't be assuming that jesus even had a mouth, much less what the guy said
@@scambammer6102 😂 amen!!
"Putting words into the mouths" of various historical figures was standards practice during the Greco-Roman period. Historians like Tacitus, Livy or Cassius Dio wrote about people who lived a hundred or more years before them. Yet they write what someone supposedly said. As Dr Bart explained, they just made it up. They wrote what X might have plausibly said on such and such an occasion given the circumstances.
oooh. spicy topic. Can't wait!
I have been binging y’all for a few weeks! Thank you so much…
Megan for your incredible smile , for sharing your scholarship and family , and your wonderful style. Bert fir your passion, scholarship and kindness.
Oh and Megan! Your joyful “Goodbye” at the end of every podcast.
Here in Germany we love the teachings and knowledge of Bart Ehrman. -
But my evangelical friends kind of hate Bart. 😂😅
Ironically, it was German theologians who kicked the entire critical New Testament scholarship off, such as David Friedrich Strauss and Albert Schweizer. Gerd Ludeman was German too, and even Bart Ehrman has German roots.
@@Nexus-jg7ev you are right😊👍🌻
The truth about our cherished beliefs can be very painful. Few love to hear the sins they love to act.😇
Megan is super sweet and has a big brain. She's an excellent host. Thanks, Megan!
Don't need the pronouns though.
Another interesting talk. Thanks.
cant wait for next week
Would love to see episodes on what we can say about Jesus' family, as well as the supposed tension between Paul and James/Peter in the early church. I know other scholars have a lot to say about this, but the evidence they work with has always seemed flimsy to me. Would be interesting to hear a more measured view from Bart.
Definitely would love to see Bart's take on James.
I think an episode about Jesus’s and the early church’s relation to economics (the root of all evil, etc.)-and how church positions on that matter of wealth acquisition has changed or varied over the centuries-would be much more useful.
James Tabor has some interesting things to say about Jesus family
Read my book about it, Jesus Failed and Finished in Disaster
James is written about Israel and the law ....if u read it u would of understand that ....
Paul was apostle to the gentiles ( non new ) yet many people get confused and can't able to discern between the two
You have to see that dispensational
I find it amazing that modern humans haven't overcome the basic psychology of ancient people's flawed ideas. Jesus doesn't stack up...
We are primates with primate brains.
How can they when huge medical organizations like the APA come up with utter nonsense like having a delusion is a mental illness unless it is in a group.
It's amazing!!
It can't be said often enough, loud enough. Jesus swung... and missed! That there came a massive following after his death... purely because people who invested in his ideas, couldn't let it go! The inventors of the resurrection and whatnot.
@@theobolt250 Actually the only way it took off was due to Roman Society at the time. Basically, if Paul, who was a Roman Citizen, had not taken up the gauntlet for Christianity, it never would have gotten off the ground. If you weren't a Citizen, you were ignored. So it was political, as many things are.
Who was writing down detailed historical information such as that other Jesus guy who got hit with a rock? Where can I get those documents? Great Podcast... You two are always a fun listen.
Jesus ben Ananias in Josephus's _Jewish War_
Josephus Flavius
When I think of 1990s authors writing about the historical Jesus, I think of Hyam Maccoby. I'd love to know what Dr Ehrman thinks about Maccoby's books
Megan is such a great facilitator for this podcast. And Bart - well, what can you say? The humour between the two of them and the easy-to-understand explanations are fabulous. Thanks to you both!
Why does Megan have a (she/her)?
You know very well why she has "she/her" pronouns in her chyron, and you are being passive-aggressive.
Hair dyed pink & cut short, bluestocking glasses, nose-piercing, pronouns; young, female, British academic.
From this we can say with 90%+ certainty that she is:
From a well-heeled family in the Home Counties;
Went to Oxford or Cambridge;
Is a 3rd or 4th wave feminist;
Is pro-choice;
Voted Remain in the Referendum;
Votes either Labour or Liberal Democrat - and is, as chance would have it, quite similar in appearance to Lib Dem MP Layla Moran (and if she has dual American citizenship, she also votes Democrat);
Reads the Guardian;
Supports Just Stop Oil & co.;
Is most emphatically the ideological opposite of a TERF;
Believes that Nigel Farage, Boris Johnson, Douglas Murray etc are all literally Nazis;
Has certainly read her Foucault & Derrida, etc;
In short, she is a far-left ideologue.
Which is obvious & doesn't need to be slyly inferred with feigned wide-eyed innocence as per your question.
Love the write a Gospel assignment! Wish I had such an assignment. I'd probably plan to do Stephen, then when the deadline approached switched to someone barely alluded to in the letters so I could just make some stuff up.
Fascinating! Thank you
one of the things i like to do is if i download a copy of these videos for my myself i can clip out portions which are relevant and of special interest, like the verse about the virgin and young woman issue, but i find the verse online in the relevant version and screenshot it so i can edit in and flash it up on screen which really helps the viewer, in this case myself but if i showed anyone.
I duh-no... when I hear that the Kingdom of God is coming, I don't really see it as apocalyptic... especially when combined with "the kingdom of God is within you"
it's apocalyptic to anyone that doesn't believe in these archaic immoral fairy tales - IF true
Only in the later gospels does it become that the kingdom is within you. This is an apologetic to the fact that Jesus’s predictions didn't come true.
For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; ***and then he shall reward every man according to his works.***
Truly I tell you, ***some who are standing here will not taste death*** before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom Matthew 16:27-28
*CHRISTIAN APOLOGETIC RATIONALIZATIONS*
*Rationalization #1: Matthew 16:28 refers to Jesus’ transfiguration, not his second coming.*
The transfiguration of Jesus is a story recorded in Matthew 17, Mark 9, and Luke 9. The first problem is that these Gospels place the transfiguration at different times. In Matthew, it occurs after Jesus made the prediction about his second coming. That might make it seem reasonable to think that it was a fulfillment of the earlier prediction. However, Mark and Luke place the transfiguration event before Jesus made spoke the prophecy. Laying aside the obvious discrepency in timing, we can say for certain that an event occurring before a prediction is made can’t be fulfilling the prediction. The “prediction” wouldn’t be a prediction at all.
*The preceding verse (verse 27) starts off the description of Jesus’ coming by saying he would come “in glory” with angels to dole out judgment to “every man”. That is not what happened in the transfiguration stories. Therefore, the explanation doesn’t work.* Some try to make it work by separating verse 28 from the preceding verse so that the two verses talk about different “comings”. This is a baseless tinkering with the passage in order to make a doctrine fit the scripture. The same Christians who do this will accuse other of taking verses out of context when they disagree with an interpretation. Yet, this is exactly what they do here.
*Rationalization #2: The word translated “generation” can mean “race”. So, Jesus meant the Jewish race would not die out before he returns.*
This is a manufactured definition to suit doctrinal purposes. *When you see “generation” in the New Testament is means just that - people living in a particular era, not a race of people.* Elsewhere when he speaks of the Jews, he does so by saying “Jews”. It’s rather strange that he would speak cryptically in just this one instance.
*Rationalization #3: When Jesus said “this generation shall not pass away” he meant the generation living at the time of the end times tribulation.*
*Correct! Jesus told his followers that they would go through persecution. So, he apparently thought they would be the generation living at the time of the end.* It is evident in the writings of the New Testament that first century Christians saw the tribulations they were going through as a fulfillment of Jesus’ prediction about the end times and the tribulation. If they saw it as such, modern Christians have no real justification not to see it that way as well.
Notice that Jesus didn’t say “that generation” - which would be the normal way of referring to a future generation. *He said “this generation”.* ***Besides through a plain common sense reading of the text, we know he meant the people alive while he was speaking because he said that some of his listeners (and the high priest at his trial) would still be alive to see his return to Earth.***
*Rationalization #4: When Jesus said that some of his listeners would be alive to see him return, he was talking about the Day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit descended on the church.*
This is another explanation that is so far from rational that is it hard to accept that anyone sincerely believes it. The Book of Acts tells the story of the Holy Spirit appearing over the heads of the saints as tongues of fire endowing them with the magical ability to speak in unlearned languages. *There is no mention of them seeing Jesus in the clouds with angels. The supposed event did not accompany the final judgment. None of the things Jesus said would occur at his return happened on the Day of Pentecost.*
*Rationalization #5: When it was revealed to John in his visions that Jesus would come quickly, it is to happen on God’s time scale, not a human time scale. “The time is near” and “coming quickly” are not to be taken literally. To God a thousand years is a day.*
This is actually the first Christian attempt (found in 2 Peter 3) to explain away the fact that Jesus had not come as expected. *Believers of the time had begun to waver in their faith because Jesus had not come back as promised.* The writer tells them not to listen to people who say, “Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation.” (2 Peter 3:4) By “fathers”, he evidently means the founding fathers of the faith who had all died by that time. *This is evidence that almost from the start of Christianity, believers have been wrestling with the apparent failure of their savior’s end times prophecy.* In verse 8, the writer tries to reassure them by saying, “with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day” and continues in the next verse to say that the Lord is not slacking on his promise. He basically tries to make the argument that time is meaningless to God.
*This passage is in obvious contradiction to what Jesus himself said about his return and everything else written in the New Testament about it.* This contradiction raises the question: Did the Simon Peter, one of Jesus’ personal disciples, actually write this book? The most truthful answer: Not likely.
When reading 2 Peter, we must keep in mind when it was written. It is well-known that many of the writings floating around the early church were not written by the people claimed to have written them, but were forged by believers to push their particular doctrines. This is most likely the case with the book of 2 Peter.
*The first clue is that the writer acknowledged that “the fathers” have died. Since Peter was one of those founding fathers of the church, he couldn’t have written this book.* It has proven difficult for scholars to pinpoint exactly when the book was written, but they all place its origin sometime between 60 and 160 A.D. This means that it was written at least 30 years after Jesus’ crucifixion is believed to have taken place when he was 33. Assuming his disciples were somewhere around his own age and taking into account average life expectancy of that time and that, according to church tradition, the apostles were all killed, none of them would have likely been alive in 60 A.D. (the earliest date scholars say the book would have been written).
*So, what can we make of the fact that this is in the Bible? It was written by a believer who didn’t want Jesus’ failure to come to cause the faith to die out.* Knowing that Peter was a founding apostle and a personal disciple of Jesus who was deemed to be the first Pope of the Christian faction that came to be known as the Roman Catholic Church, the writer forged this book in Peter’s name. It seems likely that this was an attempt to keep believers in the nascent Catholic churches in the fold. This is not the only case of forgery to uphold Catholic doctrine. (There are other forgeries in the New Testament that have been recognized by scholars as such.)
*Whether written by the apostle Peter or something else, it is an obvious rationalization to try to deal with the failure of a prediction that came to be central to the Christian religion.* We do not accept similar rationalizations from modern-day doomsdayers and we shouldn’t accept them from ancient religious people either.
*Rationalization #6: In Matthew 16 when Jesus said some of his listeners would see him “coming in his kingdom”, he was talking about his coming into his kingdom in Heaven after his resurrection when he went back to Heaven. Many saw this event through visions.*
*This fails to take into account what Jesus said his “coming in his kingdom” would be connected to the day of judgment when he would “reward each according to his works”.* As far as I know, no Christian apologists say the judgment occurred when Jesus supposedly went back to Heaven in the first century. Everything in the New Testament places judgment day at the end of the world. Even if we were to throw the Matthew 16 passage completely out of the Bible, there would still be the problem of other passages where Jesus said *“this generation will not pass”* before he comes and New Testament writers testifying to their belief that he would come in their lifetime. *It is no wonder that this rationalization has largely been dropped by Christian theologians.*
*Rationalization #7: Maybe in our human understanding we don’t know what Jesus meant when he said “this generation would not pass away” and that “some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom”. He couldn’t have meant he was coming in the first century because he hasn’t come back yet and that would make him a false prophet.*
This rationalization is nothing more than interpreting the Bible by a doctrine you want to be true. If you’re going to believe in the Jesus of the Bible, shouldn’t you base your doctrines on what the Bible actually says? It is self-deceit to look at Jesus’ “prophecy” detailing his return in the lifetime of his disciples and rationalize why it didn’t happen. Only a mind interested in maintaining the illusion of faith could twist and mangle the plain words of the Bible the way Christians have in an attempt to make the incredible credible. An honest mind looking at the facts would have no choice but to admit that Jesus’ prophecy of the end of days has failed to come true.
I think I can answer the question about the Bodmer Papyri and why Phokion J Tanos is of interest. He smuggled a lot of antique documents from the ME to Europe, including the Nag Hammadi library. His life make a fascinating story, reads like noir-fiction and Lovecraft stories at times James M. Robinson has written a lot about him.
I thank you for all the hard work putting in to every episode, I think that Bart, like a lot of us have been bruised by orthodox and evangelical doctrine, but, I also think that very same doctrine has dulled his hearing in Jesus, one day I think he’ll read something that very much so will spark a new interest in the philosophy in Jesus words, not the worlds view of Christianity!! Mad respect to you and Bart.
I'm sorry but sometimes when Bart is gazing directly at the camera in his most serene and sagacious state of mind he looks like he's stoned, and I don't mean biblically. :P
But as he is as sharp as a razor, it must simply be that he is highly experienced as an interviewee.
Next week is one of Paulogia’s favorite subjects. Maybe contact him so he can promote the podcast?
TL-DR: all prophets are false prophets.
I'd say _not even false_
Too short-should'veread: that answer is not useful, because scholarship is not designed to answer the question of god's existence. Dr Ehrman answers the more useful questions "Did Jesus consider himself a prophet" and "Was he seen as a false prophet in his day".
Wasn't Jesus referring to the transfiguration in those passages. The chapters only have value for reference but weren't originally intended. It seems that seeing the coming of the kingdom of heaven directly refers to seeing Jesus with Moses and Elijah with the voice of the Father and the Holy Spirit. This event in the synoptic gospels takes place in the next verses after the "apocalyptic" references. Food for thought.
I’ve learned a lot from this channel about religion but also about public speaking.
Every time I hear about another figure around the time of Jesus, like Jesus ben Ananias or Judas the Galilean, and the remarkable similarity to Jesus in the gospels (predicting the destruction of Jerusalem, clearing the temple), I have to wonder if some of the gospel stories (which are not attested to in Paul) are creative conflations with these other figures.
Much of the Christian mythology was plagiarized from several more ancient 'resurrection cults' collectively known as 'The Mysteries' - which was acknowledged very early on by Christians. Justin Martyr, considered the earliest Christian Apologist, said in an open letter to the Roman Emperor, Antoninus (circa 150 CE),
- "And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter."
This is one of the reasons the Church was so adamant about burning books - to destroy the evidence that there was nothing special or novel about the Jesus Myth
The gospels were written AFTER the destruction of the Temple.
No wonder they take that in account.
Asking before finishing the video, so perhaps this gets addressed. Do we have any records indicating how the early church founders reacted to the lack of an apocalypse during their lifetime? Ie: at what point did "the end is coming soon", become "the end is coming eventually"
Never, they still believe it’s coming soon and very possibly in our lifetime!
Yes, the apostle Peter said: "But beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day"" 2 Peter 3 : 8. KJB
Now it's good for yourself to know that even in the Old Testament, God had already testified: "For a thousand years in Thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night" Psalms 90 : 4. KJB
Mock not Jesus-Christ, following Dr Bart Ehrman in such a way of loss. He (Bart) doesn't know what he is doing... or knows it but can't go back !
@@WilsonCBrou
LMAO - okay Loony….
in 2 Peter I've heard that the question of a delayed coming is addressed
Another great video.
The problem with most bible believers is they never ever can ‘see’ anything wrong while gazing into an abyss of contradictions. Best example is the proclaimed urgent return aka second coming of Christ Jesus. When ? Soon very soon. In our lifetime or generation according to most writers in the bible. Then people , christian and non christians alike , are wondering why it takes longer than proclaimed by the insiders and leadership of the early church.
Then we ‘learn’ the golden trick ! A day, soon, generation, imminent are completely different matters in God’s realm. A day can mean a thousand years. Imminent can mean postponed and generation can mean something vaguely like a spiritual brand of people that form a singularity . In other words never trust simple straightforward language because in the end it can mean the exact opposite.
Do you also promise your children a new specific gift and not coming through as a parent ? And after your child starts to cry because he/she is waiting for three years now , you claim a mummy’s and daddy’s ‘soon’ is not a children ‘s ‘soon’ ? Three years is still ‘soon’ for us older people you ignorant child. The more developed authority always communicates in a way it’s understood correctly by the receiver. Not setting a trap , knowing the lesser developed ones surely misjudge or misinterpret the promise. Evildoers use those tactics.
I just wanted to say "No, Paul was."
I think Dale Allison's POV is better than Bart's, who is really following Bultmann and is underestimating Jesus' view of himself. Also, that Jesus wasn't merely an apocalyptic prophet, but one with a conditional eschatology similar in some facets to dispensationalism. Where his eschatology timing changed based on the response he got.
Or the _Jesus_ in the gospel is a character, given the gospel story is a constructed story. Whatever real person or persons inspired the character, the _Jesus_ character in the gospel is playing an apocalyptic role for a culture (Roman era Judaism) that was in turmoil over the Roman occupation.
@@TheDanEdwards Where is your evidence for this?
Future is the obvious, a possibility, the unexpected. In that realm all prophets are false, even Jesus. He said Gods kingdom would arrive in his generation... It didn't.
Exactly Christian’s don’t want to admit it and it makes them mad I’m glad it does 😂.
was Hillel the elder an apocalyptic prophet? his teaching and parables are amazingly similar to the teachings and message of Jesus.
There is no such thing as a prophet
Is there any other kind of prophet?
Brian.
@@jeffryphillipsburns That's true. Thanks for the reminder.
Only naughty boys.
I thought it was a strange choice of words as well. Adding the word “false” is quite unnecessary. We don’t say false wizards or false leprechauns.
There are NO prophets in religion, only profits! 🏦
Examples of these words of jesus that contradict ( quote) " love one another" the contradiction is that jesus cannot accept his own younger brothers, another ( " quote") love your enemies, contradiction about that was he cannot love his own younger brothers,🔥✌️
Mistaken, but not wrong?
As a teenager, I began admiring Jesus when I first read his teachings in the Sermon on the Mount. As I grew older and studied him more carefully, I started seeing that Jesus, like his predecessor John the Baptizer, thought -- and taught! -- that the end of the world was going to arrive within his own generation. Yet unlike John who stressed the coming of God’s wrathful fiery punishment, Jesus emphasized the good news of God’s imminently approaching Kingdom.
Although ultimately I was compelled to acknowledge that Jesus was proclaiming something that did not happen, I continued admiring him, and still do, for this reason: I finally became convinced that he expected his death would almost immediately be followed by his being gloriously lifted up before the eyes of all the world so that people everywhere could suddenly see his death as a loving, forgiving gift of God intended for the benefit of all humanity.
In other words, Jesus was expecting that his dying would soon wonderfully and totally fulfill Isaiah 52:13-53:12 for the sake of everyone on earth, and this understanding of God’s intended “will” was so unexpected that even Jesus had to struggle with it in Gethsemane (Mark 14:33-36).
A short while later, as Jesus was standing before his accusers, he told them that they would see him exalted “at the right hand of Power and coming with the clouds of heaven” (14:62; see Psalm 110 and Daniel 7:13-14 ) In stating that, I think Jesus was saying that they -- even they! -- would soon see and possibly (or even surely?) appreciate what God had done for everyone, including them. (Note also Luke 12:10a.)
“But wait a minute,” someone will object. “What Jesus was expecting did not happen. He was mistaken!”
In attempting to answer that, I find myself in agreement with historian Dale C. Allison who replied to a similar objection by stating, “I think Jesus had it right: he so thirsted for justice on such a grand scale that he had to embrace his [Jewish] tradition’s belief in the transcendence of history and death. He may have been mistaken, but he wasn’t wrong.” (“The Apocalyptic Jesus: A Debate,” ed. Robert J. Miller, 2001, p. 105 .)
Although subsequent events did not fulfill Jesus’ expectations, his unique view of his people’s visionary hopes still may be admired as wondrously forgiving and inclusive.
Needless to say, what I say above is very different from the last part of Ehrman's interview. I am basically in agreement with everything Ehrman says right up until he says he does not think Jesus expected to be put to death in Jerusalem -- which is certainly not what the early gospel of Mark says from 9:31 on.
For a very different (and in my opinion, better) view, see Dale C. Allison's "Constructing Jesus: Memory, Imagination, and History" (2010), paying special attention to Allison's fifth chapter wherein he argues that Jesus expected he would be put to death, and that this was God's will for him, and for that reason Jesus did not resist death.
But what I said in the post above goes further than Allison does, for I am convinced that the historical Jesus' expectation that he must die was influenced by Isaiah 53, an understanding which was difficult even for him, as we can see in Mark 9:31-33 where he lashed out at Peter, and later in Mark's Gethsemane scene where Jesus himself struggled with the necessity of his death (14:32-36) as he apparently had found it revealed in Isaiah 53:10.
I do not see how anyone can doubt the historicity of that Gethsemane scene wherein Jesus, who had earlier told his disciples that they must be prepared to die with him and warned them that if they sought to save their lives, they would lose their lives (9:35-36), seeks to save his own life even while stating that his will and the Father's will are not one and the same (14:36), though he subordinates his will to that of his Father -- as reveaed in Isaiah 53:10.
How different from the Gospel of John in 10:30 where the Son and the Father are one and the same in perfect harmony. (See also John 12:27-28a.)
Even so, what Jesus expected to happen did not happen. And so I refer again to my last sentence in the post above.
@@jamesboswellii2034 i think it’s impossible to reflect on the past without ‘inserting’ certain knowledge of the dominant view in a person’s present. All NT writers lived in a present were Jesus was crucified and raised from the death as fulfillment of prophecy and a Divine plan….so they thought. Since all of them believed this outcome was ‘God’s secret will/plan’ they of course concluded that Jesus had fore knowledge of this plan. Therefor in the gospels Jesus foresees his own crucifixion and gives hints about it in certain places.
The problem lies with Jesus early mission. Especially in Matthew Jesus urges the people to be perfect like their Father in heaven and seriously undertake actions to fulfill the law in a new way like Jesus taught. In true love for God and thy neighbor without scoffing at any detail.
Jesus himself claims that a house divided in itself cannot exist.
The same applies to a mission this important. You cannot proclaim a message like Jesus did in early Matthew , with so much conviction and fire, when you secretly are running a different agenda hoping people won’t listen in the end because otherwise they may refuse to crucify you and the prophecies remain unfulfilled.
The bible is a collection of religious opinions that are very often in conflict with one another.
You cannot preach a message like Jesus did with true honesty , fire and conviction and at the same time knowing they won’t listen and they really shouldn’t because otherwise a higher agenda would be blocked.
That’s the philosophical tirannie of biblical scholars AND parts of scripture that has misguided ordinary people simply asking for a clear direction and instructions for centuries.
We were promised a kingdom, but all we got was church… a true wise man once said.
@@andrevanderschoot842
Thank you for this. I just want to point out to you that Jewish scholar Amy-Jill Levine is in disagreement with several present-day historical Jesus scholars in that she thinks it was NOT the later church, but probably Jesus himself who believed that he would suffer a God-willed death which would result in righteousness for many, a concept she says he "quite likely" derived from "Isaiah's Suffering Servant songs, particularly Isaiah 53." (The Historical Jesus in Context, p. 37).
Dale Allison also thinks that Jesus himself 1) believed he would have to die, 2) thought this death was willed by God for a good purpose, and therefore 3) did not seek to escape from death but went toward it.
Against those who do not think Jesus went to his death willingly, Allison says, "I think it much more likely that, in this particular, our sources are not bereft of memory. Jesus' decision to die, whenever made and whatever the motivation and whatever his precise interpretation, left a vivid impression [on his followers]. Indeed, next to the fact that Jesus was crucified by order of Pontius Pilate, his acquiescence to his fate is probably the best attested fact about his last days. At some point, he determined to assent to his miserable end, accepting it as the will of God": Constructing Jesus: Memory, Imagination, and History, p. 433.)
Liberals and progressives (one of which I consider myself to be) tend to dismiss any sense that Jesus himself believed his death was necessary as God's will for him. I myself used to climb right up the wall at the merest suggestion that Jesus himself was in any way into some sort of self sacrificial or atonement (ugh!) thinking.
As I grew older, I had to change. Many years ago Joachim Jeremias helped me get my head clearer on this matter, and today Amy-Jill Levine and Dale Allison offer added support for my conviction that Jesus himself was into something like that sort of thinking.
I suppose I would change my mind if anyone could convince me that Mark 1:13 and 8:27-33 and 10:35-45 and 14:22-25 and especially 14:32-36 are in no way historical.
@@jamesboswellii2034 so you need someone to convince you that archaic immoral fairy tales that include talking snakes and donkeys,, and unicorns, and zombies crawling out of their graves and roaming the city, are in no way historical? --- grow up
Nice video Dr. Ehrman. I would disagree with that the “Forces of Good v Evil” was dominant in the Jewish view. Reason being in Judaism we don’t view “evil” as an independent entity. In the book of Isaiah G-d says “I created light and darkness, and I created peace and evil.” and even in Job, Satan is working on behalf of G-d. The concept of dualism where evil is independent of G-d or that Satan is an opposing power to good ie G-d steps outside of ethical and strict monotheism of the Torah. The concept of dualism came much later, even after Jesus.
I agree. Judaism rejected Duelism. Even in Job, Satan is the great Accuser of man . However, he is under the power of Hashem.
Exactly. God is ONE and God has created everything.
_[" Reason being in Judaism we don’t view “evil” as an independent entity."]_
Your modern Judaism. Not Second Temple Judaism. Your religion has metamorphized over the centuries.
_["The concept of dualism where evil is independent of G-d or that Satan is an opposing power to good ie G-d steps outside of ethical and strict monotheism of the Torah."]_
The Torah reveals plenty of polytheistic roots. The oldest manuscripts we have show that Jehovah was once a god subordinate to another. Monotheism was a later development.
@@Kyeudo Corret, but the Ethical parts seem Original
Yes Hammarabis Laws are old, but they lack various moral or ethical commands. I knew a out Judaisms earlier development from professors. Jesus is a retrograde money back to Polytheism, especially the Trinity
@@1DaTJo Are you Jewish?
hi bart, I watch your videos and find them very informative and thought provoking. I want to know your views on what happened to jesus after crucifixion. I am an Ahmadi Muslim and I believe he went to kashmir lived there and died there to avoid jew persecution. Do you have any kind of research on the matter. Thanks
The Pharisees believed that pikuach nefesh, saving lives superseded all laws, including the Sabbath laws. So some of stories in the “New” Testament.
Jesus was a cult leader like Jim Jones.
If I wrote a gospel for your class, it would either be the Gospel of Longinus or the Gospel of Martha.
_The Gospel of Legion_ would be my choice. OINK!
Longinus was my first idea (since there is a Gospel of Judas). But I aiming now for the Gospel of the Fig Tree.
@@bonifaceawa Now _that_ is a book I'd like to leaf through
I wrote a gospel this morning. The gospel of rectus.
I would love to read such a gospel where Longinus starts out his recollection of the feat of his great grandfather, Cassius Longinus, who delivered the fatal stab wound in the assassination of Julius Caesar and witnessed Caesar's funeral, and ties it all in with his own witnessing of the passion and crucifixion of Jesus.
It's something inherently human to find al kind of ways to convince yourself you didn't spend decades believing the wrong thing . The brother of my grandmother was a Jehova Witnesses . He believed the world would end in his lifetime, and then died in the early 80thies. Decades later, young Jehova witnesses still try to convince people the world will end in our lifetime.
And sadly their grandchildren's grandchildren will still try to convince people the world is about to end. I expect they will likely do this for another 2000 years. But it's a good hook to keep the parishioners in their pews in a state of eternal expectancy. They get to sit and wait and do nothing. Note that's very contrary to the succinct description Bart gives of the essence of Jesus's message to act kindly towards ones fellow.
@@elarakamai A lot of people seem to need someone who tells them what to believe and how to behave , and that will never change . I think a lot of these 'extremer 'American' cults , like JW, Scientology , etc are slowly dying out due to social media exposure. But sadly that same social media also gives us potential new crazier global cults, like Qanon.
Jw is a cult ....pluck out Bible verses and have no understanding....they get things wrong
It would be very interesting to know your reasons for thinking that Jesus thought of himself that he was the messiah. I read Robert Graves' book titled King Jesus and though his contention is not accepted, it was a great book.
King Jesus is a fictional novel and graves was not a scholar.
Since there isn't really a God, then there's no such thing as a prophet of God, which means all so-called prophets of God are false prophets.
QED
Where is your evidence there is no God?
@@zephyr-117sdropzone8 It doesn't work that way. That god does not exist is the DEFAULT. _You_ are the ones who need to provide extraordinary evidence for your extraordinary claim, and really any evidence would do. There is none.
@@notanemoprog Extraordinary evidence? For what extraordinary claim? The claim is not extraordinary. Only to the ones who presuppose naturalism, which has precisely zero evidence in support. NDEs, documented miracles in peer-reviewed journals, fine tuning, all sorts of evidence has been presented. You need to get with the times. Atheism is dying.
@@zephyr-117sdropzone8 Naturalism is your, and every other person's who ever lived, DEFAULT. Therefore it needs no defending. Theism is the baseless fact-free theory that has innumerable variants, all variations on the same theme, that most believers got indoctrinated in by their parents. There was never a miracle in history, documented or not. There were no actual NDEs. No evidence for anything immaterial has ever been presented by anyone.
Yes he was... that's why the people of his day crucified him. Thank you Dr.Ehrman
I'll be honest, I expected the word Preterist would have at least popped up in this episode.
One thing that is interesting about Abraham giving one tenth to Melchizedek. The original Hebrew in the OT (Genesis 14:20) mentions that "he gave him a tenth of everything". The context implies that it is actually Melchizedek that gave the tithe to Abraham, since the context before the verse was talking about Melchizedek.
Genesis 1 claims that plants were created on day 3, before the Sun's warmth was in existence, yet Mark 10:6-7 has Jesus believing that Adam and Eve were actually real humans
•• it doesn't sound like " divine inspiration "
Starts at 4:18. You might want skip to this point.
Usually the least religious or non religious people are the most knowledgeable about religion.
Once you read the entire Bible, who wrote its various books, the times it was written in, read many other non canon religious writings of the era, see how Christianity is in a constant state of change and evolution and see that all world religions have experienced similar paths of development you come to realize the delusion of it once you spend the time and effort to question this almost universally accepted social construct.
Only 20% of Christians have actually read the entire Bible (pew research poll) and most blindly go through the motions unquestioning their indoctrination and get their information from a 5 minute weekly sermon at a 1 hour weekly church service.
if love exists then so does God
This podcast is THE Best !!!
If the writers of the New Testament were so bold as to change what Jesus wrote then there would be a lot more problems and the Bible wouldn't be changing lives so profoundly today. Those who canonized the Bible would simply have removed mention of last days if it were so "incorrect".
Jesus couldn’t write lol
Imo yes, but I’m here because I like your teachings.
I’d love an episode where Dr. Ehrman takes us through some of the classic Jesus movies. I love Jesus Christ Superstar and The Last Temptation of Christ particularly and would like to hear what a scholar says about them.
Yes, I'd love that too. Especially Last Temptation is such a fascinating Jesus depiction to discuss! He should also talk about Mel Gibson's take as well as newer movies that focus on specific aspects, like Risen, Mary Magdalene, or 40 Days in the Desert. And what about the adaptation of Bill O'Reilly's Killing Jesus? Nah, just kidding about the last one. ;)
Ha this is a great idea
I would love to hear this!
Is there any connection between Jesus and Hillel?
This kind of view is useful even for believers to deepen their faith, much more than what is usually preached in all kind of Churches!
Meghan is a great host! Keeps things on track; and she's very cute, too!
Yes, but Bart is even cuter.❤
do we need she/her? pandering to the current zeitgeist?
Oh shut up
Thank you.
Insightful and informative as per usual. Bart's closing comment about elite Roman views on the good life that prevailed at the time of Jesus, made me recall the (good) shock I had upon reading Tolstoy's short work "Confession"; we've completely lost sight of just how radical & revolutionary the preacher from Nazareth really was! The Christian church's takeover of the imperial superpower, and its subsequent growth into a supranational superpower is the greatest irony in history. That Paul guy, eh?.....The ultimate fifth columnist!
"Christianity in its true sense puts an end to the State. It was so understood from its very beginning, and for that Christ was crucified."
- Leo Tolstoy
"Even for a Christian anarchist, Leo Tolstoy’s reading of the Bible was unusual. When he ‘converted’ to Christianity near his 50th birthday, he did not embrace the orthodox Christianity of the traditional church. For him, Jesus was no ‘son of God’, nor did he perform any supernatural miracles. Tolstoy was convinced that these superstitious stories in the Bible had been added by the church in order to keep ‘Christians’ hypnotized enough to ensure that they did not question the unjustifiable compromise that the church had reached with the state. He was convinced that an honest and full application of Christianity could only lead to a stateless and churchless society, and that all those who argued the contrary were devious hypocrites."
The Quran confirms Jesus(as) son of Mary(as) was indeed a righteous servant of G-d. This is also stated in the book of Acts.
Koran was cobbled together from pre-existing Jewish and Christian apocryphal literature and hymns. Its value as "confirmation" of anything is zero.
And of course, we believe everything we read, instead of trying to use the brains god gave us to think for ourselves. That's how research works -- just believe everything you read.
fairy tales also confirm that Goldilocks broke into a house owned by a family of bears
@@DwayneShaw1 Well I was there and I'll sign a sworn affidavit to that effect. Don't disrespect Prophetess Goldilocks (PBUH)
the "she her" was enough for me to cut it short.
Loll me too. And the pink hair. These liberal lefties are so stereotypical.
Then you are easily trigged, aren't you, snowflake?
18:46 - Do you think Jesus went to Jerusalem because the prophecy in Zechariah 14? The one which states that the apocalypse will begin on the Mount of Olives, just outside Jerusalem?
Yea, but dispensational doctrine teach it's future event ...Israel coming back ...okay ...does that mean the apostle ??? They have be resurrected ...and go through the tribulation ...well that doesn't make sense
Well done 👍 ❤
As far as grading, I give Bart Ehrman an 85%. I hope that teaches him how he can do a better job.
Eh, not without addressing what it would take to get rated higher…
@@gorillaguerillaDK Well, the semester is over so Bart has probably already forgotten the material covered. Not only that, but I have 300 other students. If I only had say, 30 students I could give him more attention. He can console himself on the fact that grading is SO important for his education.
@@elzoog Do you have an actual point?
@@jeffryphillipsburns If getting an 85% isn't clear enough for you as to what Bart is getting wrong, then you must not be well educated.
@@elzoog Any teacher worth their salt doesn't just give a grade, they also explain what the student needs to do to improve. Formative feedback is immensely more important than quantitative feedback.
*Thank you Jesus for the gift of life and Blessings upon me and my family. $32,000 weekly profit Our lord Jesus have lifted up my Life!!!*
Artificial Intelligence or Natural Stupidity?
Wow I know her and I have also been trading with her, She's such an amazing woman with good skills keeps me happy all week knowing I earn 15thousand extra income trading with her.
Her trading income stream is mind blowing, I also trade with her. I've made $62,000 so far trading with her guidance/advice.
@@percyferguson5840 There is her whats Apk line 👎🏾👎🏾👎🏾
It's amazing how she's influencing lives positively with her trading and management skills. I started trading with $2,000 and now I've made over $10,000 in just one week.
"In every man there sleeps a prophet, and when it wakes there is a little more evil in the world." - Emile M. Cioran
So, yes. But then so is every prophet.
Most of what are claimed as prediction are either postdiction, or so vague as to be a horoscope.
There is the final kind though, which are the inevitable ones. Oh, this city in the most war torn region on earth since the existence of humans will be destroyed? You don't say.
Letting of his or her own religion is one of the most relieving experience, in the beginning it wud be loss of meaning but after some time thw withdrawals go away u feel more emphatic towards ur fellow people
These talks are medicinal applications of reason injected into my previously poisoned mind. Thank you for your thoughtful dissertations. That old wounds might one day heal.
Anyone knows if there are surviving manuscripts containg Genesis that date before the 7th century?
Melchizedek - Pretty sure "Salem" meant "shalom". Peace. Not King of a town as this guy says.
@ around 30:00
Judgement day did come. It came around 68/ 70ad when Rome enacted judgment on the Judeans. Jesus warned them, but they did not listen and return to Yah.
1 Thessalonians 4:13-18
To discredit Joseph Smith and the like, Christian apologists are quick to point out that the biblical standard for prophesy is 100% accuracy, and that the penalty for failure is death. So, while I respect Dr. Ehrman's tact, I think it's fair to classify Jesus as a falsed prophet.
It is interesting to see the influence Dr. Bart's earlier experience in a church continues to have on his perspective on the text. He still assesses it from their doctrinal point of view in many cases, and then forming counter points to those from an academic point of view. Rather than deriving the points from the text itself. In one case he will reference how christians justify certain tenants and apologetics, while shortly thereafter siting the academic equivalent Q .
Here is an academic endeavor, ignore the commentary from all outside sources, or possible outside sources, since the texts in the canon are fairly well vetted. Look at what the texts say, with the OT as a known source for those at the time. And understand that through transmission to current times there might be some tuning needed.
Then Mark 9:1 makes sense, but it does not mean what Dr. Bart thinks it means, because he was told what to think it means, and it does not mean what it appears he thinks it means, but what it actually meant did in fact happen, and is recorded as such.
1 Thessalonians 4:13-18
Love each other as much as you love yourselves and you have fulfilled Gods love in it's entirety
Dr. Ehrman says that, in Jesus' time, a prophet was someone who preached the word of God. However, I'm wondering if he means the "direct" word of God (as in, "God came to me last night and said...") or a more general / "indirect" sense of God's word (as in, "the Bible tells us that God says..."). Could you or he clarify in which sense was Jesus preaching? Thank you.