These two just make the best hostess - ínterviewee couple ever. Megan is so spot on with questions and followups and Bart so engaging and articulate and scholarly at the same time, that the amount of food for thought the audience receives is astounding, and possibly more than we can chew in one sitting. Thank you both and your teams behind the scenes!
When I was about 5 or 6 I went to a Bible School Day Camp during the summer. There was a rather severe woman there who wanted to make sure all the kids knew that Jesus died for our sins. I understood that even at that age I had sinned, according to my parents, but it seemed rather extreme to me that Jesus, such an important guy, had died for my sins. What a guilt trip that was! I resented it, and thought "Who asked him to die for my sins? I didn't. Now I have to be Mr. Perfect so as to properly bear the burden of Jesus dying for me." I think that is a terrible message.
Human sacrifice was not a tradition within the Abrahamic faiths but was present in Roman and Greek customs. Christianity didn’t overcome the Roman and Greek world; instead, the later adopted Christianity. I wonder how such ideas might have found their way into later beliefs, I just wonder.
@ I’m telling you, there is no way to escape the incongruencies. Once you start pulling on one thread, it’s over. If what you are saying is correct, that means God died, and He clearly says in Timothy and other places that He is immortal.
@@AmmeeeeeeerThat was redacted, along with the part where Paul spent a period of time driving a chariot around the desert while wearing leather, being a sort of warrior while on the road.
I believe if you pay for youtube that stops, I dont know thatbecause I am unwilling to do so, but I believe that is the case. The ads are our punishment, or stimulus to direct us to desire to pay them. Kinda like a rat in a maze with shocks and treats.
It should be termed “Poulanity.” When it comes to salvation, Christians align with Paul’s teachings than with those of Jesus. 3 years of preaching Jesus didn’t once preach a doctrine of “believe in my death, and you will be saved”; he taught, like the prophets before him, to believe in him as a prophet and to follow the law. Paul, however, preached a different message: believe that Jesus died for your sins and abandon adherence to the law. No witness to his Vision of Jesus and the accounts contradict, just like his teachings contradict Jesus's. Call it by the name of its founder, Paulanity.
Wouldn’t it make sense to describe Jesus’ teachings beyond emphasis of the ‘law’? My limited understanding is that his message of being kind to those around you, particularly the poor helped usher in a mew perspective on morality that was well outside of Jewish law.
@ Jesus, while keeping the external aspects of the law, also internalized it. So it’s not just about not committing adultery anymore; it’s about not even thinking about it. Paul, however, says to forget the law-it was nailed to the cross and died. Ironically, Paul himself followed the law, as did Jesus. If Jesus came today, he would share a plate of food with me, but not with the vast majority of Christians today, he would NOT recognize them as following his teachings. That’s what happens when you follow a man who clearly stated he was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel-not to you. We can choose to follow whoever we want or follow the appropriate prophet sent to us.
@@moafro6524 It was beautiful. I saw him, our lord and savior Jesus Christ. His hair was flowing like a river and his eyes were like the sun. He had wings with gems inlaid upon them, and a flaming cloak. At length he spoke to me, and whispered "Ape, I don't think that was a micro dose".
@@1ApeinSpace If the concept of God presented by religions didn’t make sense to me-a God who rests, needing a rainbow to remember, who experiences human limitations like needing to use the bathroom, and who never directly claims to be God but is somehow believed to conceal his divinity, a divine being who could be killed by his own creation despite fervently praying to God (or perhaps to himself) to let the suffering pass, I would find myself deeply disillusioned with religion. A God that promises to hears his messiah from the throne and to save him by his right hand, yet doesnt come through in the NT, I would be scratching my head. That said, I wouldn’t consider substance abuse for escape. The truth is, neither you nor I created this world; the one who did is God-not someone who curses a fig tree for not bearing fruit out of season, a perfectly fine fruit bearing tree, can you believe that.
@@moafro6524 Yea, I've often wondered if god knows everything, do you think he knows what it feels like to lick whipped cream off women's breast? Cause it is a great feeling.
Since Christians put so much emphasis on first-person witnesses being the best evidence (which they’re not) and the gospels are written in 3rd person but they’re actually first person testimony (which they’re not) , it’s interesting that Paul’s actual first person writings are different than the 3rd person descriptions of him (occasionally 2nd person). If we needed any more reason to doubt the gospels, this disparity with Paul gives us yet another reason.
Oh, wow! A new word to learn. Is that word in Acts? I am all for it, even forgiving Jesus for being such a jerk to Peter, calling him Satan, and those folk in John asking honest questions.
Can you make a video on the connections between Marks Gospel and Paul? To me they are so similar it makes me believe the author was Mark the traveling companion of Paul
they dont know what paul said because they have been told what paul said, which he did not say... they claim he said what is now church doctrine , but he did not say that, and you personally object to the doctrine, but certain foundational precepts you do not, actually you live them out.
True Megan is often striking but Bart can be easily referred to as foxy as a scholastic entity. In fact his written works may exceed those of St Augustine; at least the more plausible stuff. Many "Christians" have the Pauline curse of slipping into the "Sauline" persona which they may despise on occasion.
Excellent as always. It seems obvious the questions have been worked out before. It would be good to see bart "cross examined" by say an evangelical scholar But still very good.!!!
Depends what you mean by scholars. There are many videos of Bart debating evangelicals from Theological Schools/Colleges etc on TH-cam for example. Bart's certainly not shy when it comes to debating them. As regards evangelical professors who lecture at universities for example, they will be teaching very much the same thing as Bart. That's because they view everything purely from an historical perspective and not a religious one.
I haven’t read the Bible in a long time but watching these has made me want to go re-read the New Testament. Is there a specific translation people would recommend for fidelity to the original? I have a King James Version around but while it’s a beautiful translation I have a feeling it takes some liberties and may be a bit harder to understand than a modern translation. Any suggestions?
The NRSVUE is generally the most scholarly translation as far as I know! I’ve seen it recommends by a few different folks who know what they are talking about. The KJV is indeed beautiful but maybe not the best if you want to get the most likely intended sense of the text!
@@michaeldebellis4202 Definitely the right choice! If you want an excellent study bible used by students, professors and clergy as well as the general public, then have a look at "The New Oxford Annotated Bible with Apocrypha: New Revised Standard Version". I assume that the latest edition uses the NRSV Updated Edition. I wouldn't worry about the difference though.
If Acts was written after the destruction of Jerusalem, which seems likely, while the Epistles were written before, that alone could explain why the importance of Jewish law is downplayed in the former.
How then would have paul and 4 others gone up to complete a vow if jerusalem was destroyed? Acts 21;23, and how coould paul be arrested in the temple acts 21:27 if it was destroyed?
The Jewish and non-Jewish Christians could have decided that they would keep kosher when they did eat together. Would that have solved this "big" problem they seemed to be having?
Acts seems to have been composed by someone who was at least aware of some of Paul's epistles; either he did not have access to them or he just chose to disregard the actual content found within them. Compare the following ↓statement↓ to the narrative written in Acts 18: _"I thank God that I baptized none of you but Crispus and Gaius; lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name. And I baptized also the household of Stephanas; besides, I know not whether I baptized any other."_ ~ Paul (I Corinthians 1)
If the very late dating of Luke/Acts holds up, maybe the author considered the letters of Paul to be more the IP of Marcion, and wanted an account that could supplant the stories of conflict in the early churches. (That's one of my favorite passages in the letters of Paul, by the way. Paul forgets important information that is corrected in mid-composition. You find out later that Stephanas is there as part of the group that came from Corinth to get Paul's input on the issues! Awkward!)
@@瑟萧-h6l That should have read Acts 18, without the addition of _-19._ I originally typed _Acts 18:1-19_ instead of _Acts 18:1-17_ and ended up botching the correction.
@@John.Flower.Productions Could it be that in 1 Corinthians, Paul refers to those who were baptized by his own hands. And does the book of Acts refer to those who were baptized by Paul's co-workers? For example, Acts 18:5 states that Silas and Timothy had already arrived in Corinth, indicating that there could be people other than Paul who were baptized.
Thank you!!!! I understand the New Testament better than I did before. It's fan fiction. Luke-Acts, and the other 6 letters of Paul, Revelation. Fan-Fiction. It would be like me writing a work based on Harry Potter, Ron, Herminie, and Dumbledor going to the Asian Magic Academy and defeating Xi Jin Ping. Then, 200 years from now, the cult that thinks Harry Potter is the new messiah includes my work without knowing it was written by an old fat white guy in his underwear.
I prefer Acts' fictional Paul. He is a real man, shipwrecked on Malta with a poisonous viper stuck in his arm, and hanging out in the bath houses of Ephesus befriending the pretty Roman soldier boys in their pleated micro skirt uniforms. My kind of Paul. Paul, the sailor, the man, the soldier boy. Of course, I need to reread Acts, but in my own way. Hey, Paul is a Roman citizen you know, suddenly in Acts. You need to see that secret that Paul is hiding in his heart. Paul would never lie to you.
For my money "Paul" is from the first third of the 2nd century and a product of Marcion and his Marciotines. The first "Paulinists" in history we know of and I suspect the first ever. There's way too much connective tissue between Paul and the Marcionites (including very gnostic-flavored, celestial jesus theology) to dismiss out of hand. "Acts" was written to paper over the strife and factional infighting of various christian cults. And to co-opt and sterilize "Paul" for the emerging proto-orthodoxy. Because they did hijack Paul.
Most. Yes. Old or ancient outdated pre-science man-contrived proprietary foundational tribalist tomes such as the Jewish Bible, the New Testament, the Quran and the Book of Mormon, are each a desperate attempt by men to fashion a moral fabric, enable trust to trade, publish a political manifesto, rally to war, or make claim to real estate.
Boy, Megan is so sharp! That question of Luke-Acts using the character of Paul to showcase Luke’s message of Salvation while changing Paul’s core message was right-on! Brilliant!⭐️🤩⭐️
Couldn’t agree more. Bart is obviously fascinating and deeply knowledgeable, but Megan’s direction/ questions really make the show special in my opinion.
Paul a hero? Perhaps more anti-hero. In Galatians Paul claims to be an apostle sent by God but in Acts, those ranks are narrowed to those who walked with Jesus and witnessed his resurrection. In Galatians he's sent by God, in Acts he's sent by Antiochian church and under Barnabas. Etc., etc. Seems like Luke is a corrective to letters in circulation.
The book of Acts was submitted to the Roman Court as an affidavit in defense of Paul who was on trial at that time and so anything and ask that is Pro Paul is slanted and is done to get Paul off the hook
Ok, now let me bring this up. When you read Galatians and maybe 1st and 2nd Corinthians there’s an air of questioning Paul’s apostleship and this notion that he is asserting himself as being worthy or higher ranked than others are saying. I’m of the belief that what we see in acts is likely a reflection of what Paul was addressing in his letters . Which is right or wrong or partially truths idk, but it seems to me that there was a very real pushback against him.
Thank you so much for sharing & educating! It seems to me the tumultuous first century & the backward, resentful middle east, is the tumultuous backdrop as 2 cultures collided! It would be odder if there were no discrepancies, seems to me. The whole era warped and swayed like a plasma discharge! But as these western & eastern powers collided, I think Paul saw the sophistication of the previous era of Athenian democracy & Athenian theatre, 500 years prior (The book of Esther, after all, by the time it's written down, seems to me the jewish answer to the play & heroine, ANTIGONE.) And in the BACCHAE, the god of revelry, wine, & theatre, DIONYSUS, is imprisoned but an earthquake releases him, just like Paul. The greek word "hypocrite" is actually a political term that came out of ancient greek dramatic theatre, invented as a way to debate the now famous & wealthy "actors" coming out of theatre, becoming some king's mouthpiece in the Assembly, to garner votes from unwary citizens. Their debates effected voting. And an opponent would call the dramatic actor, "Hypocrite!", for betraying the city, working for a king, not the city . . . using his acting skills in political speeches, to sway voters.... But theatrical performances & competitions were part of a yearly festival, where citizens gathered together, as a community, and were made to think! Actually, if Western Civilization can be described as "a family whose Father is Greek, whose mother is Hebrew, and they packed up the family & moved to Rome", is true, then I suspect the early christians were right smack-dab in the middle of this huge cultural CLASH, with Greco-Roman societies, more sophisticated. Of course there'd be discrepancies galore; I'm surprised the whole enterprise didn't go down the tubes altogether, given poor communications, wars, poverty, and disease, yikes! But something in the story gave ordinary people, hope. It's perspective we need now! And context. th-cam.com/video/FAkLTWQUbG8/w-d-xo.htmlsi=yQNtMF4GRyK6qikr Part 1, THE GREATEST SHOW ON EARTH (part 2 & the decline of democracy, discusses origins of the word, "hypocrite") It's also said, when the roman empire conquered GREECE, ..."the conquered conquered the conquerer"....
face palm, talk about contradicting oneself. 1 cor 9:21 he states he is not without the law, but appears as such. Youre really smart bart, but sometimes over analysis misses the obvious.
Hi, Acts Is supposedly written by Luke and if you compare Acts 9:7 to Acts 22:9 not only do you realise Paul's testimony is unreliable and should not be trusted. But opens the lid on a sub plot I believe Paul was part of... I have spent a long time getting my head around the guy Paul/Saul... And we all know he was a Jew working for the Romans. With maybe a falling out with the Jews over their position on homosexuality which the Romans had no trouble with. I suspect Paul as he invented his christianity for the Romans to control was worried where it might lead, and his suspicions were well founded. Once the Romans saw how the single god belief made a better scam for controlling people, Paul would have known if he got to powerful his life would be in danger, so as to insure against christianity being misused by the Romans I believe Paul deliberately left things like Acts 9:7 & Acts 22:9 in scriptures to bring it down. Things like Galatians 1:11-16 is so counter productive to Paul's fabricated new faith it in my mind makes it very clear there was no divine inspiration or eye witness accounts of anything... It would have been so much better for faith if Paul had not written it... so his motive in my opinion was to give a programming back door so as to end it.
Acts has many...... contradictions.....Acts 1:16 verse (if you read it) about king David speaking about judas Iscariot's betrayal of Jesus Christ and Acts 2:31 verse about the messiah's ("Jesus Christ's resurrection.....") it's all a lie
I have a BA in Bible and an MDiv, graduated in 1988. Bart teaches nothing I did not engage then. Bart shares what most NT scholars have know for a long time. If one is used a Sunday School perspective from a literalist inerrancy theology this is probably shocking
I was on Reddit over the weekend, and I saw a comment saying Bart isn’t a respected biblical scholar. I was a little surprised by that, and didn’t get an answer when I asked why they said that? What is controversial about Bart?
He doesn’t agree with people who say that everything in the Bible is exactly what actually happened and that the Bible contains no errors or contradictions.
@@cullenjohnson0 That’s fair enough, but if the only reason Bart is controversial is because his scholarly view doesn’t align with someone’s doctrine. Then I can’t see what other reason someone would have for saying Bart isn’t a respected biblical scholar. If Bart has some opinions about the Bible that don’t align with other scholars and historians of Christianity, I’d be interested in hearing the counter argument. I’m not a smart guy, or a Christian, so I don’t have a dog in this fight. I’m just a curious person with a newly discovered interest in religions, philosophy, and history.
bart is much better at hiding his internal dialog through his eyes, but head diection gives it away, meg, your eyes say everything, facs, memory, creativity etc. a trained person would have fun with this.
Paul was 100% a false apostle. All of Asia Minor rejected Paul. They complained to James about Paul that he was trying to make them end the Laws. When Paul arrives in Jerusalem, James questions Paul in Acts 21:21 about this complaint which the people of Asia Minor made. James made Paul do a nazarite vow in Acts 21:26, which included shaving his head and animal sacrifice. So they were still sacrificing animals long after Jesus. The people of Asia Minor came back to Jerusalem and seen Paul. They dragged him out of the temple and beat him up and nearly killed him in Acts 21:27-32 for preaching against the Law of Moses. The Roman guards came and took Paul away and jailed him. Paul then writes to Timothy and says all of those in Asia Minor had rejected him in 2 Timothy 2:15. After Paul dies, Jesus is speaking to the people of Asia Minor. The very people who rejected Paul. Jesus is praising them for rejecting false apostles in Revelation 1:20 and Revelation 2:1-2. The argument which no Christian can answer to is, why was Jesus praising the enemies of Paul who nearly killed him? If Paul was a true apostle, then Jesus would have rebuked them. But he was praising the very people who rejected Paul, proving Paul could never have been a true apostle. Jesus never mentioned Paul even once to them. Even Barnabas completely fell out with Paul. The church is hiding this as they know most Christians don't read Bible and are just blindfollowers.
You are exactly correct on all your points in Dr erdman's meanwhile was incorrect when he said that the vision Peter received was that the food laws no longer exist that is absolutely bogus
I tend to agree with you, but if I’m addressing this from the perspective of what’s being mentioned in the Bible then I would question who authored acts and why? Why did this author paint Paul out to be different than what Paul presented of himself? Which is telling the complete truth? Or are both religious propaganda? I believe today that whomever wrote acts had to been aware of certain Paul writings for him to be depicted that way.
@@Dizzinator2114 The book of Acts was written by Luke as an affidavit or like a Friend of the Court type document to try to get Paul out of prison as he was on trial at that time Call Steven in his own writings that he was a liar and a thief and a hypocrite and a murderer and yet this is the man 99.9% of Christians follow instead of following the teachings of Christ which are not the same whatsoever at all
@GwynWilliams-rg8vb To be honest, I don't think the authors of all gospels were truthful. For example, in Acts 21, when James questioned Paul about preaching against the Law of Moses in Asia Minor, the author never wrote down Paul’s response. I can never trust Paul or any of the gospel writers.
In my opinion, highlighting core differences/omissions in texts claiming to have a narrative or knowledge of the same event isn’t an argument from silence. In my experience, he does a skillful job at highlighting why he or other scholars think something, and how omissions between accounts can be useful information.
In my opinion, if the universe has any pity on this planet and after the cataclysmic event that's sure to come wipes 99.9% of us off the planet and if the human species is forced for generation to pulls it's self out of those few enclaves on horseback, should ever come across any so called holy books and they are used in a fire to keep these few warm and they are never read? Then maybe the human species has a chance at peace as they build a world of limitless possibility.
Some seeds fall on good ground. Some on bad. It is all pre determined. Jesus is from the decadent oligarchic family of David. Too many contradictions for me to deal with in Christianity. The oligarchs shall inherit the Earth--if there is any Earth left to inherit
I'm retired at 47, went from Grass to Grace. This video here reminds me of my transformation from a nobody to good home, honest wife, $75k biweekly and a good daughter full of love ❤️
I raised 75k and Christina Ann Tucker is to be thanked. I got my self my dream car 🚗 just last weekend, My journey with her started after my best friend came back from New York and saw me suffering in dept then told me about her and how to change my life through her. Christina A. Tucker is the kind of person one needs in his or her life! I got a home, a good wife, and a beautiful daughter. Note!:: this is not a promotion but me trying to make a point that no matter what happens, always have faith and keep living!!
Paul is the false Apostle spoken of in Revelation 2:22 in any contradictions in his writings are because Paul is was liar and he stated he was a liar Peter's vision of different animals on a sheet was absolutely not to allow gentiles to keep the kosher law in the states that Within the verbiage of that chapter The book of Acts was written as a brief illegal brief to try to get Paul off the hook because he was being tried and the book of Acts was addressed to the Roman authorities
Meg, just stop with the physical modifications , Im sure you are complete without them. almost every episode you have changed your outward appearance, why? just be as you are, wash all of that away, and be .
come on guys TURN YOUR BRAiN ON, at 6:15-ish , you mean to tell me that a single author contradicts themselves in the same text???? because lord have mercy that they go back and fact check themselves. Seriously that is just dumb, i mean really relly really dumb. Exclude all other writtings they most likely had the writting that is considered a single "book" therefore they just could not be bothered to to rewrite it without contradictions????? OR the writer did not see them as contradictions, and you do because you are missing some obvious insight the writer had. No one ever explains that water is "wet" but it is assumed to be the case. Some times scholars program their brains to ignore things that are kinda obvious....
This post is so poorly written and littered with spelling and grammatical errors and such ignorant and unsupported assertions it's genuinely not clear if it was intended seriously or ironically. It reads like "Dis viddeeooo am stupidz" etc.
@@b.g.5869 and yet you have nothing to comment as to the content of the post. It is really easy to fish ad hominem trolls like you. But you can not make a real comment. Two thumbs up, good job.....
@@mythoughtsonfaith1031 Your post literally makes no argument whatsoever; you just make ad hominem attacks and unsupported assertions. For example, you state as though it's a self evident truth that authors never contradict themselves within the same text. It happens all the time. You present no compelling argument against Ehrman's claim, you literally just say it's stupid. You come across as an extremely confused ignoramus.
These two just make the best hostess - ínterviewee couple ever. Megan is so spot on with questions and followups and Bart so engaging and articulate and scholarly at the same time, that the amount of food for thought the audience receives is astounding, and possibly more than we can chew in one sitting. Thank you both and your teams behind the scenes!
Always LOVE this podcast! THANK YOU so much!
When I was about 5 or 6 I went to a Bible School Day Camp during the summer. There was a rather severe woman there who wanted to make sure all the kids knew that Jesus died for our sins. I understood that even at that age I had sinned, according to my parents, but it seemed rather extreme to me that Jesus, such an important guy, had died for my sins. What a guilt trip that was! I resented it, and thought "Who asked him to die for my sins? I didn't. Now I have to be Mr. Perfect so as to properly bear the burden of Jesus dying for me." I think that is a terrible message.
Human sacrifice was not a tradition within the Abrahamic faiths but was
present in Roman and Greek customs. Christianity didn’t overcome the
Roman and Greek world; instead, the later adopted Christianity. I
wonder how such ideas might have found their way into later beliefs, I
just wonder.
@@moafro6524doesn't the Abraham/Isaac story allude to human sacrifice?
You need to get into the Dionysian omophagia of the Greek New Testament: "This is my body. This is my blood," then head for Eleusis outside Athens.
Funny thing, the story seems to point AWAY from human sacrifice, not towards it.
@ I’m telling you, there is no way to escape the incongruencies. Once you start pulling on one thread, it’s over. If what you are saying is correct, that means God died, and He clearly says in Timothy and other places that He is immortal.
Thanks for the SHOW!
I think Acts is probably like Mel Gibson historical fiction.
I go with South Park’s Russell Crowe Fighting Around the World.
It does remind me of the scene in passion of the Christ where "they've killed God".
Not only Acts but also the Gospel of John are pious fictions.
I missed the part in Acts where Paul had an affair with the Emperor's wife and got her knocked up, and Paul dies while screaming FREEEEEDOOOOOM! 😇
@@AmmeeeeeeerThat was redacted, along with the part where Paul spent a period of time driving a chariot around the desert while wearing leather, being a sort of warrior while on the road.
Love these talks
The title of this video is a great question.
The ad interruptions every other minute is so disruptive.
I believe if you pay for youtube that stops, I dont know thatbecause I am unwilling to do so, but I believe that is the case. The ads are our punishment, or stimulus to direct us to desire to pay them. Kinda like a rat in a maze with shocks and treats.
Always good. Thank you.
Love those earrings on Megan.
I also advise doctoral candidates, and you made me laugh out loud.
why
I can't believe I've never heard this idea that Luke didn't have a doctrine of atonement.
I would like to attend a Sunday school where Bart simply goes through the Bible and explains what it says.
@@parkburrets4054 Ehrman or Simpson?
Why would Paul have had to have written hundreds and hundreds of letters? Assertion without evidence.
Acts 1:20 verse puts apostle Peter saying and misquoting what king David took and wrote about himself on what his enemies took and said about him
If you combine Eisenman and Papias then Paul is the man of the lie who talks too much.
It should be termed “Poulanity.” When it comes to salvation, Christians align with Paul’s teachings than with those of Jesus. 3 years of preaching Jesus didn’t once preach a doctrine of “believe in my death, and you will be saved”; he taught, like the prophets before him, to believe in him as a prophet and to follow the law. Paul, however, preached a different message: believe that Jesus died for your sins and abandon adherence to the law. No witness to his Vision of Jesus and the accounts contradict, just like his teachings contradict Jesus's. Call it by the name of its founder, Paulanity.
Wouldn’t it make sense to describe Jesus’ teachings beyond emphasis of the ‘law’? My limited understanding is that his message of being kind to those around you, particularly the poor helped usher in a mew perspective on morality that was well outside of Jewish law.
@ Jesus, while keeping the external aspects of the law, also internalized it. So it’s not just about not committing adultery anymore; it’s about not even thinking about it. Paul, however, says to forget the law-it was nailed to the cross and died. Ironically, Paul himself followed the law, as did Jesus. If Jesus came today, he would share a plate of food with me, but not with the vast majority of Christians today, he would NOT recognize them as following his teachings. That’s what happens when you follow a man who clearly stated he was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel-not to you. We can choose to follow whoever we want or follow the appropriate prophet sent to us.
@@moafro6524
It was beautiful. I saw him, our lord and savior Jesus Christ. His hair was flowing like a river and his eyes were like the sun. He had wings with gems inlaid upon them, and a flaming cloak. At length he spoke to me, and whispered "Ape, I don't think that was a micro dose".
@@1ApeinSpace If the concept of God presented by religions didn’t make sense to me-a
God who rests, needing a rainbow to remember, who experiences human
limitations like needing to use the bathroom, and who never directly
claims to be God but is somehow believed to conceal his divinity, a
divine being who could be killed by his own creation despite fervently
praying to God (or perhaps to himself) to let the suffering pass, I
would find myself deeply disillusioned with religion. A God that
promises to hears his messiah from the throne and to save him by his
right hand, yet doesnt come through in the NT, I would be scratching my
head. That said, I wouldn’t consider substance abuse for escape. The
truth is, neither you nor I created this world; the one who did is
God-not someone who curses a fig tree for not bearing fruit out of
season, a perfectly fine fruit bearing tree, can you believe that.
@@moafro6524 Yea, I've often wondered if god knows everything, do you think he knows what it feels like to lick whipped cream off women's breast? Cause it is a great feeling.
Interesting that Luke's depiction of Paul agrees more with Jesus' message of repentance than the actual Paul did.
Since Christians put so much emphasis on first-person witnesses being the best evidence (which they’re not) and the gospels are written in 3rd person but they’re actually first person testimony (which they’re not) , it’s interesting that Paul’s actual first person writings are different than the 3rd person descriptions of him (occasionally 2nd person).
If we needed any more reason to doubt the gospels, this disparity with Paul gives us yet another reason.
Some verses in the Acts have interested me. One is the doctrine of 'apokatastasis', how everything is reconciled. - Even the Devil is pardoned.
Oh, wow! A new word to learn. Is that word in Acts? I am all for it, even forgiving Jesus for being such a jerk to Peter, calling him Satan, and those folk in John asking honest questions.
Can you make a video on the connections between Marks Gospel and Paul? To me they are so similar it makes me believe the author was Mark the traveling companion of Paul
As always, great content. Have you two met in person yet?
Paul was told to go to "the street called Straight," during his vision.
they dont know what paul said because they have been told what paul said, which he did not say... they claim he said what is now church doctrine , but he did not say that, and you personally object to the doctrine, but certain foundational precepts you do not, actually you live them out.
10:15: paul was accused of breaking the law cause he say telling gentiles can also get salvation without circumcision.
True Megan is often striking but Bart can be easily referred to as foxy as a scholastic entity. In fact his written works may exceed those of St Augustine; at least the more plausible stuff. Many "Christians" have the Pauline curse of slipping into the "Sauline" persona which they may despise on occasion.
Yeah, Bart is GQ smooth! 😂
Arguably Bart's essence is beyond the GQ albeit itself a worthy element in any religious analysis despite your evident vaudevillean intent.
Excellent as always. It seems obvious the questions have been worked out before. It would be good to see bart "cross examined" by say an evangelical scholar
But still very good.!!!
Depends what you mean by scholars. There are many videos of Bart debating evangelicals from Theological Schools/Colleges etc on TH-cam for example. Bart's certainly not shy when it comes to debating them. As regards evangelical professors who lecture at universities for example, they will be teaching very much the same thing as Bart. That's because they view everything purely from an historical perspective and not a religious one.
I haven’t read the Bible in a long time but watching these has made me want to go re-read the New Testament. Is there a specific translation people would recommend for fidelity to the original? I have a King James Version around but while it’s a beautiful translation I have a feeling it takes some liberties and may be a bit harder to understand than a modern translation. Any suggestions?
NRSVUE, new revised standard version updated edition is one that many critical bible scholars recommend.
The NRSVUE is generally the most scholarly translation as far as I know! I’ve seen it recommends by a few different folks who know what they are talking about.
The KJV is indeed beautiful but maybe not the best if you want to get the most likely intended sense of the text!
@@LukeNAndothanks to both of you, I’ll get NRSVUE.
@@michaeldebellis4202 enjoy your study!
@@michaeldebellis4202 Definitely the right choice! If you want an excellent study bible used by students, professors and clergy as well as the general public, then have a look at "The New Oxford Annotated Bible with Apocrypha: New Revised Standard Version". I assume that the latest edition uses the NRSV Updated Edition. I wouldn't worry about the difference though.
Thanks for this ;0)
If Acts was written after the destruction of Jerusalem, which seems likely, while the Epistles were written before, that alone could explain why the importance of Jewish law is downplayed in the former.
How then would have paul and 4 others gone up to complete a vow if jerusalem was destroyed? Acts 21;23, and how coould paul be arrested in the temple acts 21:27 if it was destroyed?
@@mythoughtsonfaith1031 I fairly explicitly referred to the dates of writing, not the dates of the occurrences.
13:15 yes, god forgives repentance, if my people who are call...... The passover lamb is not a sin sacrifice
"Paul was a jewish when with Jews and a Gentile when with Gentiles." Mmm.. I used to live my life kinda like that, then i realized it was LYING.
The Jewish and non-Jewish Christians could have decided that they would keep kosher when they did eat together. Would that have solved this "big" problem they seemed to be having?
Sorry buddy cheese goes on the burger
Seems there habe been an ACTIVE attempt to remove the church from judaism.
@@rocketpod1 Isn't this optional and a matter of choice though?
Why? Surely it would be just as fair if the jews dined non-kosher
... was there just a lot of hysterical blindness in the first century??
This is the real question. Maybe the desert heat was driving people manic.
So Peter was the traditional conservative, while Paul was the woke liberal 🤣
Awesome conversation!
PS The sound on the P+P advert sounds better this week 🫡
Another great episode. Keep it coming.
Acts seems to have been composed by someone who was at least aware of some of Paul's epistles; either he did not have access to them or he just chose to disregard the actual content found within them.
Compare the following ↓statement↓ to the narrative written in Acts 18:
_"I thank God that I baptized none of you but Crispus and Gaius; lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name. And I baptized also the household of Stephanas; besides, I know not whether I baptized any other."_ ~ Paul (I Corinthians 1)
If the very late dating of Luke/Acts holds up, maybe the author considered the letters of Paul to be more the IP of Marcion, and wanted an account that could supplant the stories of conflict in the early churches. (That's one of my favorite passages in the letters of Paul, by the way. Paul forgets important information that is corrected in mid-composition. You find out later that Stephanas is there as part of the group that came from Corinth to get Paul's input on the issues! Awkward!)
使徒行传19章讲的是在以弗所，哥林多前书1章讲的是哥林多。也许保罗所指的“我没有为你们任何人施洗”是哥林多中的人。
@@瑟萧-h6l That should have read Acts 18, without the addition of _-19._
I originally typed _Acts 18:1-19_ instead of _Acts 18:1-17_ and ended up botching the correction.
@@John.Flower.Productions Your viewpoint is that there is a contradiction between Acts 18:8 and 1 Corinthians 1:14-16?
@@John.Flower.Productions Could it be that in 1 Corinthians, Paul refers to those who were baptized by his own hands. And does the book of Acts refer to those who were baptized by Paul's co-workers? For example, Acts 18:5 states that Silas and Timothy had already arrived in Corinth, indicating that there could be people other than Paul who were baptized.
King David's Psalms are not prophecies as everyone today think they are they are just songs that is all
Thank you!!!! I understand the New Testament better than I did before. It's fan fiction. Luke-Acts, and the other 6 letters of Paul, Revelation. Fan-Fiction. It would be like me writing a work based on Harry Potter, Ron, Herminie, and Dumbledor going to the Asian Magic Academy and defeating Xi Jin Ping. Then, 200 years from now, the cult that thinks Harry Potter is the new messiah includes my work without knowing it was written by an old fat white guy in his underwear.
I prefer Acts' fictional Paul. He is a real man, shipwrecked on Malta with a poisonous viper stuck in his arm, and hanging out in the bath houses of Ephesus befriending the pretty Roman soldier boys in their pleated micro skirt uniforms. My kind of Paul. Paul, the sailor, the man, the soldier boy. Of course, I need to reread Acts, but in my own way. Hey, Paul is a Roman citizen you know, suddenly in Acts. You need to see that secret that Paul is hiding in his heart. Paul would never lie to you.
Hey cool topic, wonderful presentation. I love Megan.
For my money "Paul" is from the first third of the 2nd century and a product of Marcion and his Marciotines. The first "Paulinists" in history we know of and I suspect the first ever. There's way too much connective tissue between Paul and the Marcionites (including very gnostic-flavored, celestial jesus theology) to dismiss out of hand. "Acts" was written to paper over the strife and factional infighting of various christian cults. And to co-opt and sterilize "Paul" for the emerging proto-orthodoxy. Because they did hijack Paul.
King David didn't know about any of that. King David wasn't a prophet and there's proof of that too
How much of the bibble is fiction? Is all of it a fiction based possibly on mostly fictional characters?
You are so edgy.
Most.
Yes.
Old or ancient outdated pre-science man-contrived proprietary foundational tribalist tomes such as the Jewish Bible, the New Testament, the Quran and the Book of Mormon, are each a desperate attempt by men to fashion a moral fabric, enable trust to trade, publish a political manifesto, rally to war, or make claim to real estate.
And he sang ""And I said, ooh, I'm blinded by the lights", and it was at the end of the week. The seventh day.
Too brief but great discussion. Thank you.
And thanks for the Anchor dictionary recommendation.
Boy, Megan is so sharp! That question of Luke-Acts using the character of Paul to showcase Luke’s message of Salvation while changing Paul’s core message was right-on! Brilliant!⭐️🤩⭐️
Part of why I've always loved this duo 😁 they both have functioning brains and interesting perspectives
Couldn’t agree more. Bart is obviously fascinating and deeply knowledgeable, but Megan’s direction/ questions really make the show special in my opinion.
She’ HOT !
She also has great fashion sense.
Paul a hero? Perhaps more anti-hero. In Galatians Paul claims to be an apostle sent by God but in Acts, those ranks are narrowed to those who walked with Jesus and witnessed his resurrection. In Galatians he's sent by God, in Acts he's sent by Antiochian church and under Barnabas. Etc., etc. Seems like Luke is a corrective to letters in circulation.
The book of Acts was submitted to the Roman Court as an affidavit in defense of Paul who was on trial at that time and so anything and ask that is Pro Paul is slanted and is done to get Paul off the hook
Ok, now let me bring this up. When you read Galatians and maybe 1st and 2nd Corinthians there’s an air of questioning Paul’s apostleship and this notion that he is asserting himself as being worthy or higher ranked than others are saying. I’m of the belief that what we see in acts is likely a reflection of what Paul was addressing in his letters . Which is right or wrong or partially truths idk, but it seems to me that there was a very real pushback against him.
@@onejohn2.26.Sources?
Didn’t they all desert Jesus when he died? Not all believed he had risen.
@@douglasodonnell6800 according to the stories yes, but he also told them to stand down because they were present when he was arrested.
King David: i didn't speak about judas Iscariot's betrayal of Jesus Christ that is a LIE.....
Thank you so much for sharing & educating!
It seems to me the tumultuous first century & the backward, resentful middle east, is the tumultuous backdrop as 2 cultures collided!
It would be odder if there were no discrepancies, seems to me. The whole era warped and swayed like a plasma discharge!
But as these western & eastern powers collided, I think Paul saw the sophistication of the previous era of Athenian democracy & Athenian theatre, 500 years prior (The book of Esther, after all, by the time it's written down, seems to me the jewish answer to the play & heroine, ANTIGONE.)
And in the BACCHAE, the god of revelry, wine, & theatre, DIONYSUS, is imprisoned but an earthquake releases him, just like Paul.
The greek word "hypocrite" is actually a political term that came out of ancient greek dramatic theatre, invented as a way to debate the now famous & wealthy "actors" coming out of theatre, becoming some king's mouthpiece in the Assembly, to garner votes from unwary citizens.
Their debates effected voting. And an opponent would call the dramatic actor, "Hypocrite!", for betraying the city, working for a king, not the city . . . using his acting skills in political speeches, to sway voters....
But theatrical performances & competitions were part of a yearly festival, where citizens gathered together, as a community, and were made to think!
Actually, if Western Civilization can be described as "a family whose Father is Greek, whose mother is Hebrew, and they packed up the family & moved to Rome", is true, then I suspect the early christians were right smack-dab in the middle of this huge cultural CLASH, with Greco-Roman societies, more sophisticated.
Of course there'd be discrepancies galore; I'm surprised the whole enterprise didn't go down the tubes altogether, given poor communications, wars, poverty, and disease, yikes!
But something in the story gave ordinary people, hope.
It's perspective we need now!
And context.
th-cam.com/video/FAkLTWQUbG8/w-d-xo.htmlsi=yQNtMF4GRyK6qikr
Part 1, THE GREATEST SHOW ON EARTH (part 2 & the decline of democracy, discusses origins of the word, "hypocrite")
It's also said, when the roman empire conquered GREECE, ..."the conquered conquered the conquerer"....
face palm, talk about contradicting oneself. 1 cor 9:21 he states he is not without the law, but appears as such. Youre really smart bart, but sometimes over analysis misses the obvious.
I can't do all the money grabbing on your shows anymore.
What is the introductory music?
It’s not needed thank you
Maybe this with the vocals removed: th-cam.com/video/h7ahXYwYMgM/w-d-xo.html
Hi, Acts Is supposedly written by Luke and if you compare Acts 9:7 to Acts 22:9 not only do you realise Paul's testimony is unreliable and should not be trusted. But opens the lid on a sub plot I believe Paul was part of... I have spent a long time getting my head around the guy Paul/Saul... And we all know he was a Jew working for the Romans. With maybe a falling out with the Jews over their position on homosexuality which the Romans had no trouble with.
I suspect Paul as he invented his christianity for the Romans to control was worried where it might lead, and his suspicions were well founded. Once the Romans saw how the single god belief made a better scam for controlling people, Paul would have known if he got to powerful his life would be in danger, so as to insure against christianity being misused by the Romans I believe Paul deliberately left things like Acts 9:7 & Acts 22:9 in scriptures to bring it down. Things like Galatians 1:11-16 is so counter productive to Paul's fabricated new faith it in my mind makes it very clear there was no divine inspiration or eye witness accounts of anything... It would have been so much better for faith if Paul had not written it... so his motive in my opinion was to give a programming back door so as to end it.
oh now I see , hello ....... how beautiful a couch you lay, and yet you know not....
22:00 so everyone is stupid..... seriously thats stupid
Acts has many...... contradictions.....Acts 1:16 verse (if you read it) about king David speaking about judas Iscariot's betrayal of Jesus Christ and Acts 2:31 verse about the messiah's ("Jesus Christ's resurrection.....") it's all a lie
Bart is such a fanatic! How can anyone not see this?
I have a BA in Bible and an MDiv, graduated in 1988. Bart teaches nothing I did not engage then. Bart shares what most NT scholars have know for a long time. If one is used a Sunday School perspective from a literalist inerrancy theology this is probably shocking
Who wrote this?
"Godly sorrow brings repentance that leads to salvation ..."
I was on Reddit over the weekend, and I saw a comment saying Bart isn’t a respected biblical scholar. I was a little surprised by that, and didn’t get an answer when I asked why they said that?
What is controversial about Bart?
He doesn’t agree with people who say that everything in the Bible is exactly what actually happened and that the Bible contains no errors or contradictions.
He also disagrees with those who say that Jesus never existed as an actual living person.
@@cullenjohnson0 I must’ve been reading the comment of a person who takes their religious views very seriously.
@@joshuasheets9236 It's certainly possible, though I try not to attribute motives to people I don't know.
@@cullenjohnson0 That’s fair enough, but if the only reason Bart is controversial is because his scholarly view doesn’t align with someone’s doctrine. Then I can’t see what other reason someone would have for saying Bart isn’t a respected biblical scholar.
If Bart has some opinions about the Bible that don’t align with other scholars and historians of Christianity, I’d be interested in hearing the counter argument.
I’m not a smart guy, or a Christian, so I don’t have a dog in this fight. I’m just a curious person with a newly discovered interest in religions, philosophy, and history.
bart is much better at hiding his internal dialog through his eyes, but head diection gives it away, meg, your eyes say everything, facs, memory, creativity etc. a trained person would have fun with this.
Paul was 100% a false apostle.
All of Asia Minor rejected Paul. They complained to James about Paul that he was trying to make them end the Laws. When Paul arrives in Jerusalem, James questions Paul in Acts 21:21 about this complaint which the people of Asia Minor made. James made Paul do a nazarite vow in Acts 21:26, which included shaving his head and animal sacrifice. So they were still sacrificing animals long after Jesus.
The people of Asia Minor came back to Jerusalem and seen Paul. They dragged him out of the temple and beat him up and nearly killed him in Acts 21:27-32 for preaching against the Law of Moses.
The Roman guards came and took Paul away and jailed him. Paul then writes to Timothy and says all of those in Asia Minor had rejected him in 2 Timothy 2:15.
After Paul dies, Jesus is speaking to the people of Asia Minor. The very people who rejected Paul. Jesus is praising them for rejecting false apostles in Revelation 1:20 and Revelation 2:1-2.
The argument which no Christian can answer to is, why was Jesus praising the enemies of Paul who nearly killed him? If Paul was a true apostle, then Jesus would have rebuked them. But he was praising the very people who rejected Paul, proving Paul could never have been a true apostle. Jesus never mentioned Paul even once to them. Even Barnabas completely fell out with Paul. The church is hiding this as they know most Christians don't read Bible and are just blindfollowers.
You are exactly correct on all your points in Dr erdman's meanwhile was incorrect when he said that the vision Peter received was that the food laws no longer exist that is absolutely bogus
I tend to agree with you, but if I’m addressing this from the perspective of what’s being mentioned in the Bible then I would question who authored acts and why?
Why did this author paint Paul out to be different than what Paul presented of himself?
Which is telling the complete truth? Or are both religious propaganda?
I believe today that whomever wrote acts had to been aware of certain Paul writings for him to be depicted that way.
@@Dizzinator2114
The book of Acts was written by Luke as an affidavit or like a Friend of the Court type document to try to get Paul out of prison as he was on trial at that time
Call Steven in his own writings that he was a liar and a thief and a hypocrite and a murderer and yet this is the man 99.9% of Christians follow instead of following the teachings of Christ which are not the same whatsoever at all
Out of interest, which new testament books do you think are authoritative?
@GwynWilliams-rg8vb
To be honest, I don't think the authors of all gospels were truthful. For example, in Acts 21, when James questioned Paul about preaching against the Law of Moses in Asia Minor, the author never wrote down Paul’s response. I can never trust Paul or any of the gospel writers.
Contradictions: It might have been that Luke, like Paul, *dictated* his work - and never re-read them ...
The contradictions exist because Paul was a liar and he admitted he was a liar in his own writings
Literally every argument Bart makes is an argument from silence.
In my opinion, highlighting core differences/omissions in texts claiming to have a narrative or knowledge of the same event isn’t an argument from silence.
In my experience, he does a skillful job at highlighting why he or other scholars think something, and how omissions between accounts can be useful information.
In my opinion, if the universe has any pity on this planet and after the cataclysmic event that's sure to come wipes 99.9% of us off the planet and if the human species is forced for generation to pulls it's self out of those few enclaves on horseback, should ever come across any so called holy books and they are used in a fire to keep these few warm and they are never read? Then maybe the human species has a chance at peace as they build a world of limitless possibility.
Some seeds fall on good ground. Some on bad. It is all pre determined. Jesus is from the decadent oligarchic family of David. Too many contradictions for me to deal with in Christianity. The oligarchs shall inherit the Earth--if there is any Earth left to inherit
I'm retired at 47, went from Grass to Grace. This video here reminds me of my transformation from a nobody to good home, honest wife, $75k biweekly and a good daughter full of love ❤️
I'm highly inspired.
Please spill some sugar about the bi-weekly stuff you mentioned.
I raised 75k and Christina Ann Tucker is to be thanked. I got my self my dream car 🚗 just last weekend, My journey with her started after my best friend came back from New York and saw me suffering in dept then told me about her and how to change my life through her. Christina A. Tucker is the kind of person one needs in his or her life! I got a home, a good wife, and a beautiful daughter. Note!:: this is not a promotion but me trying to make a point that no matter what happens, always have faith and keep living!!
Wow 😱 I know her too
Miss Christina Ann Tucker is a remarkable individual whom has brought immense positivity and inspiration into my life.
How do I get connection to this woman you speak about!!?
There is her line!!!! Combine the digits!!! OK
Acts is the most ridiculous nonsense ever written
Paul is the false Apostle spoken of in Revelation 2:22 in any contradictions in his writings are because Paul is was liar and he stated he was a liar
Peter's vision of different animals on a sheet was absolutely not to allow gentiles to keep the kosher law in the states that Within the verbiage of that chapter
The book of Acts was written as a brief illegal brief to try to get Paul off the hook because he was being tried and the book of Acts was addressed to the Roman authorities
Meg, just stop with the physical modifications , Im sure you are complete without them. almost every episode you have changed your outward appearance, why? just be as you are, wash all of that away, and be .
Paul the Worst Liar
The evil church replaced true apostle Barnabas with false apostle Paul.
come on guys TURN YOUR BRAiN ON, at 6:15-ish , you mean to tell me that a single author contradicts themselves in the same text???? because lord have mercy that they go back and fact check themselves. Seriously that is just dumb, i mean really relly really dumb. Exclude all other writtings they most likely had the writting that is considered a single "book" therefore they just could not be bothered to to rewrite it without contradictions????? OR the writer did not see them as contradictions, and you do because you are missing some obvious insight the writer had. No one ever explains that water is "wet" but it is assumed to be the case. Some times scholars program their brains to ignore things that are kinda obvious....
People make mistakes when writing- re read your own post. In years to come your post may be seen as a comment on Monty Python
This post is so poorly written and littered with spelling and grammatical errors and such ignorant and unsupported assertions it's genuinely not clear if it was intended seriously or ironically.
It reads like "Dis viddeeooo am stupidz" etc.
@@stephenargent4010 So you have nothing to say of the content, youre just a grammar troll..... at least it would be seen, yours will not be
@@b.g.5869 and yet you have nothing to comment as to the content of the post. It is really easy to fish ad hominem trolls like you. But you can not make a real comment. Two thumbs up, good job.....
@@mythoughtsonfaith1031 Your post literally makes no argument whatsoever; you just make ad hominem attacks and unsupported assertions.
For example, you state as though it's a self evident truth that authors never contradict themselves within the same text.
It happens all the time.
You present no compelling argument against Ehrman's claim, you literally just say it's stupid.
You come across as an extremely confused ignoramus.