Dr Walsh and the scholars do the heavy lifting...thank you all for these courses. College ain't my thing, but learning outside the classroom is. Thank you too, Derek.
Derek, you're the best interviewer among all. I've seen others interviewing professor Welsh and you seem to make her elaborate more than others. You make it more vivid, lively, and exciting. Thank you for taking the time to do all this.
Robyn is on fire from 32:24 - almost inspiring the way she talks about Paul’s historical importance. Also a great pitch for the course, she’s a better saleswoman than she realizes!
Paul never made sense to me. Why would Paul be needed if Jesus had 12 disciples? And if Jesus appeared to Paul why would ne not appear to everyone else too? It’s ridiculous.
Exactly. If Jesus after his resurrection said to go to the nations and teach them the Gospels, why would God need to give Peter a revelation, 20 to 25 years after Jesus that its okay to sit with Gentiles in Acts 9/10. If Jesus would have said to go to Gentiles, the apostles would have known that and would have done that immediately. moreover Acts 15 would have been unnecessary since Jesus would have discussed that matter with them and the apostles would have known what commandments Gentiles have to keep. I think there was never a mission to go specifically to Gentiles, but Paul just saw an oppurtunity to be good in a thing and that was later completely misinterpreted as "apostle to the Gentiles vs apostles to the Jews". Acts even says that Peter was the apostle to the Gentiles, chosen by God. Paul in Galatians says the opposite.
I understand at a deep level what Dr Walsh means when she speaks of the intercession of the saints, I'm Eastern Orthodox (not practicing atm) ... Greek Orthodox, we have a word "Phronema" ... I don't know how to explain it but I felt it when Dr Walsh explained the intercession of Saints.
So if this mistake of recent history is incorrect how can we believe any of the info? 😮 only difference is this info is easily checked and is a fact not an opinion or came to an intelligent conclusion.
Still missing the mark on what people mean when they say Paul founded christianity. I'm sure there are some people out there who think he literally invented the whole thing. But there are people who think the Gospel of Thomas is the earliest written source. There's no accounting for crazy. Paul founded christianity as we know it. It's why something like "The Pauline Legacy" is actually interesting. He transformed whatever the original Jesus cult was doing. It's his version that became the framework for the gospels and it's his version that was able to survive outside of a fringe sect of jews. Without Paul, there likely would be no christianity beyond 70 CE. I think that earns him a little more credit than, "notable figure in the early Jesus movement".
The theory that Gospel of Thomas’s core is the oldest extant source isn’t remotely crazy…wtf?? What a bizarrely specific and misguided comparison to something as insane as “Paul is just making up everything in his letters”
Thats why i say, he is the founder of todays Christianity. A religion of Jesus became a religion about Jesus. But the church fathers are also an important part of that. Btw Jewish Christianity survived much longer than many people know. It has traces till the 10th or 11th century.
@@benji-sl9rw All of the gospels are after Paul. They were all influenced by Paul, given that Mark is the earliest, Mark uses Paul and the others copy Mark. The people who wrote the gospels were writing decades after Paul died and they likely never even knew him personally let alone anyone in the founding Jesus cult. I'd love for Bart to explain how he knows what Jesus taught when we have no writings from him, our earliest source writing about him is a person who never met him and the stories about him that came decades after are all fabrications. In other words, I wouldn't take what Bart says as gospel. He's turning into a bit of a dinosaur in the field.
There's a lot of arguments about who founded Christianity, and I think the argument is not especially useful, because I dont think there is a singular founder, I think there are components which have individual figures of great importance. If Mary Magdalene was one of the first people to believe that Jesus was resurrected, she may be one of the most important early 'founders.' We also know James was important in spreading a 'kind' of early Christianity. What about even later figures? Almost every significant theologian contributed something that Christians would consider 'bedrock' - Athenasius, Origen, Augustine, onwards. And the other thing is that just because other variants of Christianity mostly disappeared, doesn't mean their legacy is gone, Jewish Christianity would profoundly influence the development of Islam, Mandaeism might trace back to a form of Christian gnosticism. Or it might not, a little unclear.
@@PasteurizedLettuce "There's a lot of arguments about who founded Christianity" The problem is that I'm not making an argument about who founded christianity. Christianity is a massive conceptual space that is too large to be encompassed by anyone or anything other than a broad label. I was being very intentional when I said "... as we know it." Christianity as we know it stems from an ideological branch with Paul at its root. There were other christianities that were running parallel with Paul's christianity for a long time. But they're all gone now. Much like how we all stem genetically from a common lineage, the things we call christianity today with all of its various and contradictory expressions stems from Paul. Paul is the Most Recent Common Ancestor, to continue the analogy.
I had a girlfriend like that. I left her because I was egotistical. Now I am forlorn. But I have a beautiful wife. I am grateful to God for a soft landing. ☑️☑️☑️
I was influenced by John Dominic Crossan’s argument that crucified persons were left to rot on the cross. I am also influenced by Spartacus the movie produced by Kirk Douglas. Crucifixion was widely used in antiquity. I understand the power of the idea of resurrection and the comfort it gives. We do want comfort.
Paul is founder of todays Christianity. Not the founder of Christianity in general. In my opinion there was a split between him and the 12. This has led into two major groups=Jewish and Gentile/Pauline Christianity.
There is a split documented between Paul and the 12. I think it's in one of Ambrose of Milans commentaries or the Clementine Homilies. I cant remember. But it says they found Paul to be an apostate. The decision apparently stemmed from the altercation where Paul describes where he confronted Peter to his face about discriminating on who to eat with. Turns out the dispute was because the gentile disciples of Paul's were eating meat sacrificed to idols and that's why Peter withdrew from that group of gentiles. Paul teaches it's ok to eat meat sacrificed to idols in 1 cor 8 and 10.
Much admiration for Prof. Walsh. However, why would the distinguished professor have a lamp with a fairly powerful bulb behind her, and not in front? We can barely see her.
People still think they see Elvis. LOL 🤣 I used to know a woman many years ago who said she would talk to Elvis on the phone... for her birthday. Well, after he had already died.
100%. He also calls them so called pillars and even more. He questions their authority and in relation to Galatians 2 12 to 14 most scholars see a huge dispute or even a split.
Carrier confirms my assessment that Earl Doherty's book is quite good - i'll check if the thick 2nd Ed mentions Paul being against James / Peter. or will try searching the Jesus Puzzle site for Gal 2 12-14
Scholars talk about "Mark" was probably written about . . . CE" or "Josephus was written between c. 94 and 97 CE," but how do these dates refer to publication such writings. In our world, someone finishes up a manuscript, it goes to the publisher, and bang, copies for sale might flood bookstores and libraries within months. Back then, publishing was such a laborious process, copies might at best trickle out. If Luke/Acts can be shown to use Josephus, what are the chances it could have happened SOON after Josephus was written? And percentage-wise roughly, how much were most books published as complete copies, and how much could someone get their hands on a copy and hand it off to their scribe/slave to make their own copy? If the latter, the copy might have only been of a portion of the book, just a favorite part. Or deliberately altered to fit a personal concept?
Scholars have a rule of thumb that it took about ten years for a book to become widely copied and distributed. For that reason they reckon Matthew and Luke at least ten years later than Mark (although other factors place Luke much later than that). Something like Josephus "Wars" could have been distributed more quickly because it was literally Imperial propaganda commissioned by the Emperor and had all the Imperial publishing powers. "Wars" would have been ubiquitous within a year.
I always found it odd that a god who created the universe would need to make a covenant with this one group in the Middle East that has to give up all their other deities and worship only him.
Regarding fantastical claims and obviously dismissible accounts around 14:30, I like to relate it to Aesop's fables and modern cartoons with talking animals. Should future analysts believe our society thought animals talked? Are we supposed to dismiss the message of Aesop's fables because they involve impossibly unnatural narratives? Storytelling as an artform in oral traditions used many devices beyond the truth to convey messages. I would assert that some of the most absurd and fantastical miracles (once filtered from traditional storytelling tropes that were familiar enough to the narrators' audience to not be considered absurd when the stories first circulated, even though we might consider them absurd today) serve both to cement the story via its novelty and also to signal to the audience that this portion of the narrative should be interpreted and meditated upon, rather than taken literally. Even today these techniques are used in everything between creating clickbait on one end to creating the theme central to the 2012 film "Life of Pi" on the other. It really feels like public education is designed to sensitize the public to expensive rhetoric and alienate them from the ability to interpret the narratives of history.
The best argument in regards to Christ’s body being resurrected is why would have the apostles been motivated to the point of preaching for the rest of their lives and enduring persecution leading to their deaths, if they hadn’t witnessed/experienced Christ’s actual resurrection. Skeptics just don’t want to believe. Get right with God while you are still breathing and find peace in the hope of eternal life.
It’s a shitty argument because, if for no other reason, we don’t even have evidence most of the original apostles actually preached for the rest of their lives. Most of them disappear into history and we have no idea if they even remained Christians. But it’s also not the only reason it’s a shitty argument, because we have evidence of other people putting themselves into dangerous situations in which they risked death. I’m sure you don’t actually believe Joseph Smith found golden plates with the help from an angel named Moroni, yet he was the one person who would have known it was a lie but continued preaching in the face of death threats. Skeptics don’t believe because they find the arguments that you think are “the best” to be actual rubbish.
Paul was a visionary who founded his own version of Christianity based on his inner visions which formed inside his own head and which he believed came from a supernatural source.
The reason Jesus was put into a tomb and guarded instead of the ground is that the Romans and Jews want to show that the body is there. The disciples want to show that the body isn’t. Two conflicting incentives. A tomb makes it easy to check which event happened: still in tomb or not in tomb? That is why it wasn’t according to the normal procedure for Roman crucifixions
look this verse please Revelation 14:12 12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.
The human brain seems to collect around a few "sticky" pop culture tropes in written works. There really are very few. Magical-religious ones have made the most money from some of the stickiest. For example, "Life after death" - "Tea and cake or death?" (E. Izzard). Human behavior, like any other animal, is really pretty narrow and repetitive, even across millennia.
To believe Jesus does not mean you are Christian. Jesus never called his disciples as Christians. Actually you are called Christian if you believe what Paul had said about Jesus. The problem is that Paul was wrong in his surmising or his theological formulation about Jesus. Take note: the gospel preached by Jesus is not the same in the gospel of Paul about Jesus.
"Paul doesn't get enough attention" makes no sense to me. If you are a Christian you are giving him attention. Walsh may find him fascinating, but I feel that scholarship at this level far exceeds what most people of faith require for their lives.
That was the craziest thing I heard her say 😮it made me think, what planet is she living on and to be fair, I don’t think she said much about anything.
"Scholars have kind of jumped all over with this particular answer you cite here" Again, lets not use the fiction pejorative, lets just ask the question how reliable a source is Mark. So DRM's in "Epic , . . .gospels" pages 58, 61-62 Shows 16 areas were Mark is creating a memesis with his Q source and 68 areas were mark is borrowing from and matthew and luke are redacting mark's edits. Thats a pant load of Marks twisting Q and his critics feeling the need to rewrite. It is no less of an assumption that the Author of Matthew and Luke things marked s-t-r-e-t-c-h-e-d the facts at least, that they thought they knew about Jesus. Mark is not a very reliable source, but at least at times he starting with a source. And Mark kind of follows the order of the Q at the beginning and end (prior to the passion narrative) but jumbles things up for literary reasons in the middle. Peter is not just rambling things to this author out of sequence. Mark is using a sequenced source and he is intentionally twistng the order. OK so we cannot take marks words on: - how a specific event progressed - what the intent of a saying was - the details of what happened even though we are pretty sure he had a written source. But we have no idea about any written source about the passion narrative that predates mark, in fact without Q the earliest source about the resurrection is P66 papyrus where most of chapter 21 is missing and chunks are missing from chapter 20. And even so reading Matthew and Luke, lets just suppose they had sources for the birth narrative, are they honest brokers of the truth. Certainly luke knows his narrative contracdicts matthews, why not say something about the difference and give his source. Again historiography in first/second century biographies is not by any means historical. Without any birth narrative in Q do we take any part of the M/L birth narratives as "historical fact" or biographical pillow fluffing? And so there is no cogent part of the passion narrative that is in Q, its all Mark or derivation of Mark, thus can it in any way be relied upon as historical fact. So you are left with Paul, and does Paul know anything or is he imagining what must have happened with the putative crucifixion. Its not fair to say Paul was late, the problem with Paul is that he is admittedly exterior and relies on his imagination/vision seeking. Lets go back to what Paul says. This is 4 years after the crucifixion plus three years after wandering in the desert that he finally meets Cephas. So thats 7 years after Jesus was killed versus Marks 40 years after the event. But what Paul says is meaningful and describes his attitude toward the disciples. He spent 15 days with Cephas and learned nothing. Was it that he learned nothing new or he pretty much went in one ear and out the other? And so there are a couple of places in the pauline epistles were Paul describes a piety rule that was from the Kyrious (JC) but the rest of the gospels have a great many more sayings. So it would seem, according to his letters, that he did not really care about the piety rules of the disciples. Nor did he seem to be particularly mindful of how Jesus was remove from the cross or entered. So is Paul an unreliable source because he was late, not really, he's an unreliable source because he put his mystic vision seeking in front of what others were telling him. Was Jesus heaped on a pile of bodies, buried, or entombed. The greek word for entomb is Thaboe The word paul uses E'taphae which is no entombed but means buried. Taphos means to bury. The word Thaboe can be used for entombed or burial, but Paul uses the word not used for entombment but burial. So in Paul's mind Jesus was buried, was this his real-world mind or mystical mind? Who knows, but that only fact on Jesus's body we have. If indeed he was buried then all the accounts in Mark through Joh are complete bullshit.
What the scholars tend to miss is that Paul was right. The end of days was within pauls generation. Anyone who studies the Jewish war of 67-73 knows that the Romans left Judea and Galilee flattened as if it had been attacked with nuclear weapons. For the people who survived at the time if that suffering wasn't the end of the world I don't know what would be
Preterism has long had its adherents. Taking a preterist approach to both Paul and the Jesus character of the gospels will make Paul and Jesus sound less crazy, for sure, but it also has not been very popular through history. People like apocalypses and preachers make a lot of money preaching that the end is near.
@@TheDanEdwards thank you for mentioning that term. I never heard of it before. I only knew about the fulfillment through Josephus. Josephus himself blamed the Jews directly for their own destruction and stupidity by not accepting Jesus as their savior. So it's true it's all been fulfilled just as Mark had written but without the return of Jesus because of the Jews arrogance.
@@DrSales-zl3kq Josephus mentioning Jesus is an interpolation. and Josephus is not a prophet etc. In that time or even today, people tend to blame themselves when something happens. But wars happens for many reasons, especially the Jewish Roman war. If you say that everything already happened you make Jesus a false prophet. I mean by the NT he is. In Mark he said to the Pharisees that they will see him coming on the clouds. They never saw him coming on the clouds and dont exist anymore. And no, the son of man coming on the clouds happens before the resurrection according to Revelation
Nice interview with the lady. I hope she learned from Paul the apostle of love, his message of love and respect for others human. That is the best lesson mankind can learn to have a better world. I hope she loves her husband the way Paul asked to love
The following describes your confusion, and the reason for your confusion. "....and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation-as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures. (2 Peter 3:15-16) These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. (1 Corinthians 2:13-14)
The body was asked for as soon as Jesus Bar "Abbas" had died. Two Jesus' with identical names (as far as the Romans were concerned) were crucified that day. The one who made it out alive was the (goat) lamb who took away the sin of the world. Coordinating the day Jesus is sentenced with the day Barabbas was executed is WHY Jesus tells Judas to go now quickly, why the Sanhedrin met overnight to try him, why Jesus was sweating bullets over his father's will, and why the pharasees incited the crowd to demand crucifixion. It was all orchestrated. Barabbas WAS crucified, HIS legs were broken so he would expire, and he is who the soldiers confirmed to Pilate was dead. Joseph of Arimathea wasn't just a wealthy man from some land nobody ever heard of. He was a powerful Temple official, and Jesus' father. He had enough pull with Pontius to request his son's body be promptly removed and buried honorably. The part about a rebel leader being released as part of a custom of Pilate was a nod-and-a-wink to the reader that the story was changed to conceal what really happened from the Authorities. But they needed to keep in the Yom Kippur elements, because that was the whole "taking on sin" thing that was attributed to Jesus' "death". All of his post resurrection appearances are of a man who is in disguise (Mary sees a gardener), and comes and goes unannounced. He hangs around long enough to recuperate from the crucifixion, then goes to one of his father's houses outside the province, possibly outside the empire, with the intent to someday return to his disciples.
Joseph Claudius (the Tekton) Bar abbas Nero J.C. (twin) John (Jesus) Silas Drusus J.C. (twin) James the lesser Mary Agrippina minor (the blessed Lady), maiden Elisabeth Agrippina maior (twin-mother) Zacharias Germanicus , Benedictus (eloquent speaker), the Blessed Lazarus Brittannicus ( 'brother' ) Jesus Nerones ( 'brother' ) Simon Lucius Anneus Seneca (Pilate, Ananias, Caiaphas, Judas, Peter) Mary M. Pompeia Paulina (wife of Seneca) Martha Poppea Sabina ( 'housekeepster' ) Alpheus Andrew the elder, father of Matthias (Germanicus) and Justus (Claudius) Nathanael Cornelius (James the Just, Paul), Mathan, Heli or Exlai
What you are missing is that Paul didnt work allone. He worked with the Roman Empire to create this fiction. How else will all the anonymous authors of the Gospels came together to write and also tried to support Pauls letters. Its a professional group that came together to create the bible. ☑️☑️☑️☑️
I don't understand these podcaststhe more if I wanna understand Paul I'll read Paul. I don't need somebody else to tell me about hit's like look at me, look at me. They're all narcissist. Even though she seems very nice.
She's a MACHINE GUN of facts, questionings, hundreds per video Her favorite word is PROBLEMATIC Not even Bart Ehrman, Tabor Throw that many facts In her 60s she'll terrorize debaters
Oh, so you reject the Biblical principle that the worker is worthy of his wage. Got it. BTW, Bart is one of the most financially successful scholars there is. Multiple best-sellers for which he gets PAID.
No one invented Christianity. A Christian is a believer in Jesus Christ. So when did Christianity begin? It began with Jesus. Yea the belief in Jesus was given an associated name. So look no further for the origins of Christianity. JESUS ✝️
Not every Christian had the same belief. There were many versions of Xtianity. Some said to keep the law for eternal life, some said you only have to have faith. So when people talk about Paul inventing Christianity, they talk about todays Christianity. A religion of Jesus became a religion about Jesus..
@germanboy14 A Christian is one who believes in Christ. Many people are antichrist. Paul lived during a time when Jews were transitioning from the law and temple sacrifice to no longer needing the law or the blood of animal sacrifice to atone for sins. Jesus came to be the sacrifice that took away mans sin. Jesus (his body) became the new temple. There were many Christians before Paul, people that believed Jesus.
To believe Jesus does not mean you are Christian. Jesus never called his disciples as Christians. Actually you are called Christian if you believe what Paul had said about Jesus. The problem is that Paul was wrong in his surmising or his theological formulation about Jesus. Take note: the gospel preached by Jesus is not the same in the gospel of Paul about Jesus.
@Josephbarnabas The disciples were first called Christians in Antioch. Christ ian One who believes in Christ a disciple of Christ. AKA the saints Did you learn from someone that Paul teaches a different gospel or is this the conclusion you came to on your own after diligently studying the scripture?
👑Genesis 12:3 🇮🇱 Matthew 25 31-46👑 ✝️ Christians speak of scriptures as being this or that as a salvation 🛐 issue, here 👑 Jesus made this a salvation 🛐 issue Himself in Matthew 25 31-46 🇮🇱 😊No teasing out scriptures or extrapolations needed, it's as plain as the Sun shine 😊 👑 Jesus made this a salvation 🛐 issue in Matthew 25 31-46 🇮🇱 and before He returns I'd recommend ministering the same love ❤God bless you on your journey ❤
I seriously doubt if Paul was anywhere near as ugly as the thumbnail picture of him makes him out to have looked like. For one thing he was immensely popular in many situations and as a general rule ugly people don't usually attract crowds of people.
@@andrewclemons8619 I always see him as a skinny guy with a limp. He probably wasn't that noticeable until he started to speak. He obviously had a compelling personality though
No substance at all, just buy my course, buy my course, buy my course, said in several ways and in words that nobody could or would even want to understand
@@autumn5852 Agree. Lots of these biblical scholars have discovered a new revenue stream vs. their collegiate salaries. I do feel like I learn a lot from Bart Ehrman & the like, but it sometimes makes me ashamed of myself for not having done a simple synoptic gospel comparison myself. Regardless, they are shining light on truth, which is good. Unfortunately, most of them just aren't as charismatic as Christopher Hitchens!
@@allenhodge7245 Claudians are the 'house' of Elisa, Klopas, Zacharias, Zebedee aka the nicolaitans. Zacherias wife ; Elisabeth, Salome, Mary the elder, Agrippina maior married with Germanicus .
U AM THE ROOT OF THE OFFSPRING OF DAVID AND THE BRIGHT AND MORNING STAR 🌟 THE LION 🦁 OF JUDAH IS SIRIUS 🦁 🐕 💫 THE BRIGHTEST STAR 🌟 IN THE SKY LOOKUP ✨️ 😀
You all need a new topic other than Jesus. Seriously do you have an agenda? I can only imagine what she teaches about Paul. No one needs a college education to learn about Paul. They only need the scripture and God to understand.
"No one needs a college education to learn about Paul" - have you tried a college education, especially in fields like history, archeology, and anthropology?
@TheOriginalDanEdwards When you attend a university or seminary to learn about the bible you will leave educated with what your teacher/professor taught you. Having a learned perspective of scripture rather than letting the Holy Spirit teach you with an understanding that no man can give.
@@Kimberly-lx4qyyou are assuming there's some supernatural guidance for *your* interpretation of a book. Why? Did you know that Ephesians, Timothy 1 and 2 weren't even written by Paul? It's easy to live in wishful thinking and deceiving yourself. It's difficult to study thoroughly to find the truth.
And yeah, there's an agenda: to show people what Christianity is truly about. Many of us have complex religious trauma derived from such religion. So if there are missionaries washing people's brains and indoctrinating little kids, we need informants helping people know the truth.
@@alwilliams5177 Forgivable, of course. Having said that I should also remark that I thought that Journey, Boston, and Kansas were basically the same band with different lead singers. It is only worth mentioning who performed that song for the sake of accuracy.
Sign up for Dr. Robyn Faith Walsh's new course on Paul's Legacy
www.mythvisionpodcast.com/paulslegacy
I think there are videos with robin that don't have her name in the title or a dedicated playlist, makes it hard to watch all her videos with you :[
Dr Walsh and the scholars do the heavy lifting...thank you all for these courses. College ain't my thing, but learning outside the classroom is. Thank you too, Derek.
Derek, you're the best interviewer among all. I've seen others interviewing professor Welsh and you seem to make her elaborate more than others. You make it more vivid, lively, and exciting. Thank you for taking the time to do all this.
Dr Walsh is my favorite Biblical scholar. Just ordered her course on the Pauline legacy!
Robyn is on fire from 32:24 - almost inspiring the way she talks about Paul’s historical importance. Also a great pitch for the course, she’s a better saleswoman than she realizes!
She's become one of my favorite scholars. Great stuff.
I love how she presents her knowledge😊 thank you for the great info
It's so nice to hear my side of the story and presented so well that an idiot like me can understand it so easily thank you again 😀💯♥️
Wow Derek, you raised the bar man!
I think it was Journey, not Boston that did "Don't Stop Believin'" Trivia aside, it's a great interview and discussion.
Love Dr. Walsh, brilliant scholar
I really enjoy Robyn Faith Walsh interviews 👍
Thank you Neil, thank you Dr. Faith Walsh.
Best into yet. Classy. Professional. Excellent work. Brilliant scholar!
Paul never made sense to me. Why would Paul be needed if Jesus had 12 disciples? And if Jesus appeared to Paul why would ne not appear to everyone else too? It’s ridiculous.
12 dudes not being able to write nor read?
Exactly. If Jesus after his resurrection said to go to the nations and teach them the Gospels, why would God need to give Peter a revelation, 20 to 25 years after Jesus that its okay to sit with Gentiles in Acts 9/10. If Jesus would have said to go to Gentiles, the apostles would have known that and would have done that immediately. moreover Acts 15 would have been unnecessary since Jesus would have discussed that matter with them and the apostles would have known what commandments Gentiles have to keep. I think there was never a mission to go specifically to Gentiles, but Paul just saw an oppurtunity to be good in a thing and that was later completely misinterpreted as "apostle to the Gentiles vs apostles to the Jews". Acts even says that Peter was the apostle to the Gentiles, chosen by God. Paul in Galatians says the opposite.
I appreciate her careful appriach to not take Derek's bait 😘 I also like that she is careful to not impose modern skepticism onto ancient people.
At the same time im glad she applies critical thinking and some skepticism to miracle claims based on eye witness or second and third hand accounts.
Theology etc is what I get into when I'm not studying Modern Monetary Theory (economics, macro) 😊
You've really improved the video quality lately, well done 👍🎉❤
I understand at a deep level what Dr Walsh means when she speaks of the intercession of the saints, I'm Eastern Orthodox (not practicing atm) ... Greek Orthodox, we have a word "Phronema" ... I don't know how to explain it but I felt it when Dr Walsh explained the intercession of Saints.
Phronema, the mind of the church, a state of being and behavior in which we act out the collective conscious of the sacred -- the church, as it were.
Not Boston. Don't Stop Believin' is a Journey song, ha!
That's what I was thinking when she made that quip.
That confused me a lot for a second, but being busy I ignored it. Thx.
So if this mistake of recent history is incorrect how can we believe any of the info? 😮 only difference is this info is easily checked and is a fact not an opinion or came to an intelligent conclusion.
@@honorahs.3262 she's an expert on The Gospels & Paul and other Greco-Roman shit but not on 80s pop songs...
@@chuckleezodiac24 Yes I know but just saying...so many people are experts but even experts have their own slant.
Can't wait
Still missing the mark on what people mean when they say Paul founded christianity.
I'm sure there are some people out there who think he literally invented the whole thing. But there are people who think the Gospel of Thomas is the earliest written source. There's no accounting for crazy.
Paul founded christianity as we know it. It's why something like "The Pauline Legacy" is actually interesting. He transformed whatever the original Jesus cult was doing. It's his version that became the framework for the gospels and it's his version that was able to survive outside of a fringe sect of jews. Without Paul, there likely would be no christianity beyond 70 CE. I think that earns him a little more credit than, "notable figure in the early Jesus movement".
The theory that Gospel of Thomas’s core is the oldest extant source isn’t remotely crazy…wtf?? What a bizarrely specific and misguided comparison to something as insane as “Paul is just making up everything in his letters”
Thats why i say, he is the founder of todays Christianity. A religion of Jesus became a religion about Jesus. But the church fathers are also an important part of that. Btw Jewish Christianity survived much longer than many people know. It has traces till the 10th or 11th century.
@@benji-sl9rw All of the gospels are after Paul. They were all influenced by Paul, given that Mark is the earliest, Mark uses Paul and the others copy Mark. The people who wrote the gospels were writing decades after Paul died and they likely never even knew him personally let alone anyone in the founding Jesus cult.
I'd love for Bart to explain how he knows what Jesus taught when we have no writings from him, our earliest source writing about him is a person who never met him and the stories about him that came decades after are all fabrications.
In other words, I wouldn't take what Bart says as gospel. He's turning into a bit of a dinosaur in the field.
There's a lot of arguments about who founded Christianity, and I think the argument is not especially useful, because I dont think there is a singular founder, I think there are components which have individual figures of great importance. If Mary Magdalene was one of the first people to believe that Jesus was resurrected, she may be one of the most important early 'founders.' We also know James was important in spreading a 'kind' of early Christianity. What about even later figures? Almost every significant theologian contributed something that Christians would consider 'bedrock' - Athenasius, Origen, Augustine, onwards. And the other thing is that just because other variants of Christianity mostly disappeared, doesn't mean their legacy is gone, Jewish Christianity would profoundly influence the development of Islam, Mandaeism might trace back to a form of Christian gnosticism. Or it might not, a little unclear.
@@PasteurizedLettuce "There's a lot of arguments about who founded Christianity"
The problem is that I'm not making an argument about who founded christianity.
Christianity is a massive conceptual space that is too large to be encompassed by anyone or anything other than a broad label.
I was being very intentional when I said "... as we know it."
Christianity as we know it stems from an ideological branch with Paul at its root.
There were other christianities that were running parallel with Paul's christianity for a long time. But they're all gone now.
Much like how we all stem genetically from a common lineage, the things we call christianity today with all of its various and contradictory expressions stems from Paul. Paul is the Most Recent Common Ancestor, to continue the analogy.
I really like her and what a looker 👀 scholar and beauty 💯
what a beautiful scholar..
that chick's not bad either.
That’ just subjective .
beauty is in the eyes of the beholder!
I had a girlfriend like that. I left her because I was egotistical. Now I am forlorn. But I have a beautiful wife. I am grateful to God for a soft landing. ☑️☑️☑️
@@0786AHAAlright, try to stay off the drugs buddy.
I was influenced by John Dominic Crossan’s argument that crucified persons were left to rot on the cross. I am also influenced by Spartacus the movie produced by Kirk Douglas. Crucifixion was widely used in antiquity. I understand the power of the idea of resurrection and the comfort it gives. We do want comfort.
damn yall got me simping for Robyn 😍🥰
Paul is founder of todays Christianity. Not the founder of Christianity in general. In my opinion there was a split between him and the 12. This has led into two major groups=Jewish and Gentile/Pauline Christianity.
There is a split documented between Paul and the 12. I think it's in one of Ambrose of Milans commentaries or the Clementine Homilies. I cant remember. But it says they found Paul to be an apostate. The decision apparently stemmed from the altercation where Paul describes where he confronted Peter to his face about discriminating on who to eat with. Turns out the dispute was because the gentile disciples of Paul's were eating meat sacrificed to idols and that's why Peter withdrew from that group of gentiles. Paul teaches it's ok to eat meat sacrificed to idols in 1 cor 8 and 10.
Much admiration for Prof. Walsh. However, why would the distinguished professor have a lamp with a fairly powerful bulb behind her, and not in front? We can barely see her.
Because she’s an angel duh
@@nickc9223 OK, but what kind of an angel?
@MiCajaDelIdiota the cute type
a lot of thought went into that set up, believe you me.
@@AnHebrewChild Why should I believe you? Are you an Angel Walsh's apologist? Present your evidence!
People still think they see Elvis. LOL 🤣
I used to know a woman many years ago who said she would talk to Elvis on the phone... for her birthday. Well, after he had already died.
7:30 I think the super apostles could be James and Peter
They definitely are. This is not a mystery, this is understood as a matter of course. They are also the "Judaizers" and the "circumcision party."
100%. He also calls them so called pillars and even more. He questions their authority and in relation to Galatians 2 12 to 14 most scholars see a huge dispute or even a split.
Carrier confirms my assessment that Earl Doherty's book is quite good - i'll check if the thick 2nd Ed mentions Paul being against James / Peter. or will try searching the Jesus Puzzle site for Gal 2 12-14
Derek: "empty tomb?" RFW: "literary motif" Derek: "but was the historical tomb empty?" RFW: "literary story telling"
So cut to the chase ~~~How do we know what Paul wrote down in the first place is true or knowable ~~~~ Is there a God that listens to prayer##
Scholars talk about "Mark" was probably written about . . . CE" or "Josephus was written between c. 94 and 97 CE," but how do these dates refer to publication such writings. In our world, someone finishes up a manuscript, it goes to the publisher, and bang, copies for sale might flood bookstores and libraries within months. Back then, publishing was such a laborious process, copies might at best trickle out. If Luke/Acts can be shown to use Josephus, what are the chances it could have happened SOON after Josephus was written?
And percentage-wise roughly, how much were most books published as complete copies, and how much could someone get their hands on a copy and hand it off to their scribe/slave to make their own copy? If the latter, the copy might have only been of a portion of the book, just a favorite part. Or deliberately altered to fit a personal concept?
Scholars have a rule of thumb that it took about ten years for a book to become widely copied and distributed. For that reason they reckon Matthew and Luke at least ten years later than Mark (although other factors place Luke much later than that). Something like Josephus "Wars" could have been distributed more quickly because it was literally Imperial propaganda commissioned by the Emperor and had all the Imperial publishing powers. "Wars" would have been ubiquitous within a year.
@@Ken_Scaletta Thanks.
Do as thou wilt is the whole of the law according to Paul.
And she makes pizza
And is a movie buff
Perfect
I lover her, she very smart.
Smart about what? What did she actually say in this video?
Don't Stop Believing was Journey, not Boston
Dr Walsh can you find anywhere Paul acknowledges that Jesus came in the flesh? 1John 4 2
Regardless of the answer to this question, it is the right question to ask.
Markan priority is not right. Mathean Priority seems more likely. Particularly Matthew written in Hebrew
I always found it odd that a god who created the universe would need to make a covenant with this one group in the Middle East that has to give up all their other deities and worship only him.
Beauty, youth, Perfect teeth, slender
Brains, education, elocuent, classy, Funny, tech, Glamorous hair
Outgoing, Sofisticated
And she's into Paul, Impressive
Regarding fantastical claims and obviously dismissible accounts around 14:30, I like to relate it to Aesop's fables and modern cartoons with talking animals. Should future analysts believe our society thought animals talked? Are we supposed to dismiss the message of Aesop's fables because they involve impossibly unnatural narratives? Storytelling as an artform in oral traditions used many devices beyond the truth to convey messages. I would assert that some of the most absurd and fantastical miracles (once filtered from traditional storytelling tropes that were familiar enough to the narrators' audience to not be considered absurd when the stories first circulated, even though we might consider them absurd today) serve both to cement the story via its novelty and also to signal to the audience that this portion of the narrative should be interpreted and meditated upon, rather than taken literally. Even today these techniques are used in everything between creating clickbait on one end to creating the theme central to the 2012 film "Life of Pi" on the other.
It really feels like public education is designed to sensitize the public to expensive rhetoric and alienate them from the ability to interpret the narratives of history.
Is that a halo over professor Walsh?
I never thought of someone paying the writer to put in a narrative to make them feel more elevated, such as them carrying the cross. 🤔
The best argument in regards to Christ’s body being resurrected is why would have the apostles been motivated to the point of preaching for the rest of their lives and enduring persecution leading to their deaths, if they hadn’t witnessed/experienced Christ’s actual resurrection. Skeptics just don’t want to believe. Get right with God while you are still breathing and find peace in the hope of eternal life.
It’s a shitty argument because, if for no other reason, we don’t even have evidence most of the original apostles actually preached for the rest of their lives. Most of them disappear into history and we have no idea if they even remained Christians.
But it’s also not the only reason it’s a shitty argument, because we have evidence of other people putting themselves into dangerous situations in which they risked death. I’m sure you don’t actually believe Joseph Smith found golden plates with the help from an angel named Moroni, yet he was the one person who would have known it was a lie but continued preaching in the face of death threats.
Skeptics don’t believe because they find the arguments that you think are “the best” to be actual rubbish.
Paul was a visionary
who founded his own version of Christianity
based on his inner visions
which formed inside his own head
and which he believed came from a supernatural source.
I believe his writings are inspired of God.(even Yahweh)
Paul was surely smoking something.
@@danielajah5262Since it's all made up, I doubt you are correct.
@@JaysonT1 naa.. I believe the Bible as the greatest book ever in human history.
That is really simplistic, if paul had been a philosopher he would be as great as plato and the others
its happening
i summon the spirit of JZ Smith: Christianity is UNIQUE! Unique!!
Which really isn't saying anything since all religions are unique.
The reason Jesus was put into a tomb and guarded instead of the ground is that the Romans and Jews want to show that the body is there. The disciples want to show that the body isn’t. Two conflicting incentives. A tomb makes it easy to check which event happened: still in tomb or not in tomb? That is why it wasn’t according to the normal procedure for Roman crucifixions
And why would they do Al that with a random rabbi?
look this verse please
Revelation 14:12
12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.
The human brain seems to collect around a few "sticky" pop culture tropes in written works. There really are very few. Magical-religious ones have made the most money from some of the stickiest. For example, "Life after death" - "Tea and cake or death?" (E. Izzard). Human behavior, like any other animal, is really pretty narrow and repetitive, even across millennia.
Where does Paul get his information from
Romans
To believe Jesus does not mean you are Christian. Jesus never called his disciples as Christians. Actually you are called Christian if you believe what Paul had said about Jesus. The problem is that Paul was wrong in his surmising or his theological formulation about Jesus. Take note: the gospel preached by Jesus is not the same in the gospel of Paul about Jesus.
Followers of Jesus are not Christians.
Followers of Paul are. 💯☑️☑️☑️
Is Robyn seeing anyone? Just curious. Asking for a friend.
I assume that rock ring on her left hand means "yes".
😂
Now that she is an athiest... It ok to have multiple love interests
What Scriptural evidence exists for people going to heaven when they die?
None
"Paul doesn't get enough attention" makes no sense to me. If you are a Christian you are giving him attention. Walsh may find him fascinating, but I feel that scholarship at this level far exceeds what most people of faith require for their lives.
His teachings take up the lion's share of Sunday morning services...so, yeah.
That was the craziest thing I heard her say 😮it made me think, what planet is she living on and to be fair, I don’t think she said much about anything.
✌️
He was separated for the gentiles. He was blinded by Jesus Christ.
Without Paul there is no Christian on the Gentiles.
"Scholars have kind of jumped all over with this particular answer you cite here"
Again, lets not use the fiction pejorative, lets just ask the question how reliable a source is Mark.
So DRM's in "Epic , . . .gospels" pages 58, 61-62 Shows 16 areas were Mark is creating a memesis with his Q source and 68 areas were mark is borrowing from and matthew and luke are redacting mark's edits. Thats a pant load of Marks twisting Q and his critics feeling the need to rewrite. It is no less of an assumption that the Author of Matthew and Luke things marked s-t-r-e-t-c-h-e-d the facts at least, that they thought they knew about Jesus. Mark is not a very reliable source, but at least at times he starting with a source. And Mark kind of follows the order of the Q at the beginning and end (prior to the passion narrative) but jumbles things up for literary reasons in the middle. Peter is not just rambling things to this author out of sequence. Mark is using a sequenced source and he is intentionally twistng the order. OK so we cannot take marks words on:
- how a specific event progressed
- what the intent of a saying was
- the details of what happened even though we are pretty sure he had a written source.
But we have no idea about any written source about the passion narrative that predates mark, in fact without Q the earliest source about the resurrection is P66 papyrus where most of chapter 21 is missing and chunks are missing from chapter 20.
And even so reading Matthew and Luke, lets just suppose they had sources for the birth narrative, are they honest brokers of the truth. Certainly luke knows his narrative contracdicts matthews, why not say something about the difference and give his source. Again historiography in first/second century biographies is not by any means historical.
Without any birth narrative in Q do we take any part of the M/L birth narratives as "historical fact" or biographical pillow fluffing?
And so there is no cogent part of the passion narrative that is in Q, its all Mark or derivation of Mark, thus can it in any way be relied upon as historical fact.
So you are left with Paul, and does Paul know anything or is he imagining what must have happened with the putative crucifixion. Its not fair to say Paul was late, the problem with Paul is that he is admittedly exterior and relies on his imagination/vision seeking.
Lets go back to what Paul says. This is 4 years after the crucifixion plus three years after wandering in the desert that he finally meets Cephas. So thats 7 years after Jesus was killed versus Marks 40 years after the event. But what Paul says is meaningful and describes his attitude toward the disciples. He spent 15 days with Cephas and learned nothing. Was it that he learned nothing new or he pretty much went in one ear and out the other?
And so there are a couple of places in the pauline epistles were Paul describes a piety rule that was from the Kyrious (JC) but the rest of the gospels have a great many more sayings. So it would seem, according to his letters, that he did not really care about the piety rules of the disciples. Nor did he seem to be particularly mindful of how Jesus was remove from the cross or entered.
So is Paul an unreliable source because he was late, not really, he's an unreliable source because he put his mystic vision seeking in front of what others were telling him.
Was Jesus heaped on a pile of bodies, buried, or entombed.
The greek word for entomb is Thaboe
The word paul uses E'taphae which is no entombed but means buried. Taphos means to bury.
The word Thaboe can be used for entombed or burial, but Paul uses the word not used for entombment but burial. So in Paul's mind Jesus was buried, was this his real-world mind or mystical mind? Who knows, but that only fact on Jesus's body we have. If indeed he was buried then all the accounts in Mark through Joh are complete bullshit.
What the scholars tend to miss is that Paul was right. The end of days was within pauls generation. Anyone who studies the Jewish war of 67-73 knows that the Romans left Judea and Galilee flattened as if it had been attacked with nuclear weapons. For the people who survived at the time if that suffering wasn't the end of the world I don't know what would be
The end of days never actually happened, though, so...Nope. Bible failed.
Paul spoke about the return of Jesus, going up to heaven etc. He was more than wrong
Preterism has long had its adherents. Taking a preterist approach to both Paul and the Jesus character of the gospels will make Paul and Jesus sound less crazy, for sure, but it also has not been very popular through history. People like apocalypses and preachers make a lot of money preaching that the end is near.
@@TheDanEdwards thank you for mentioning that term. I never heard of it before. I only knew about the fulfillment through Josephus. Josephus himself blamed the Jews directly for their own destruction and stupidity by not accepting Jesus as their savior. So it's true it's all been fulfilled just as Mark had written but without the return of Jesus because of the Jews arrogance.
@@DrSales-zl3kq Josephus mentioning Jesus is an interpolation. and Josephus is not a prophet etc. In that time or even today, people tend to blame themselves when something happens. But wars happens for many reasons, especially the Jewish Roman war. If you say that everything already happened you make Jesus a false prophet. I mean by the NT he is. In Mark he said to the Pharisees that they will see him coming on the clouds. They never saw him coming on the clouds and dont exist anymore. And no, the son of man coming on the clouds happens before the resurrection according to Revelation
Why did Jesus really have to be baptized?
He was baptized with holy water.
Shouldn't the water become holy touching Jesus? 😂😂
Nice interview with the lady. I hope she learned from Paul the apostle of love, his message of love and respect for others human. That is the best lesson mankind can learn to have a better world. I hope she loves her husband the way Paul asked to love
It's not Boston it's Journey. LOLOLOL
The following describes your confusion, and the reason for your confusion.
"....and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation-as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures. (2 Peter 3:15-16)
These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. (1 Corinthians 2:13-14)
The body was asked for as soon as Jesus Bar "Abbas" had died. Two Jesus' with identical names (as far as the Romans were concerned) were crucified that day. The one who made it out alive was the (goat) lamb who took away the sin of the world. Coordinating the day Jesus is sentenced with the day Barabbas was executed is WHY Jesus tells Judas to go now quickly, why the Sanhedrin met overnight to try him, why Jesus was sweating bullets over his father's will, and why the pharasees incited the crowd to demand crucifixion. It was all orchestrated. Barabbas WAS crucified, HIS legs were broken so he would expire, and he is who the soldiers confirmed to Pilate was dead. Joseph of Arimathea wasn't just a wealthy man from some land nobody ever heard of. He was a powerful Temple official, and Jesus' father. He had enough pull with Pontius to request his son's body be promptly removed and buried honorably. The part about a rebel leader being released as part of a custom of Pilate was a nod-and-a-wink to the reader that the story was changed to conceal what really happened from the Authorities. But they needed to keep in the Yom Kippur elements, because that was the whole "taking on sin" thing that was attributed to Jesus' "death". All of his post resurrection appearances are of a man who is in disguise (Mary sees a gardener), and comes and goes unannounced. He hangs around long enough to recuperate from the crucifixion, then goes to one of his father's houses outside the province, possibly outside the empire, with the intent to someday return to his disciples.
Joseph Claudius (the Tekton)
Bar abbas Nero J.C. (twin) John (Jesus)
Silas Drusus J.C. (twin) James the lesser
Mary Agrippina minor (the blessed Lady), maiden
Elisabeth Agrippina maior (twin-mother)
Zacharias Germanicus , Benedictus (eloquent speaker), the Blessed
Lazarus Brittannicus ( 'brother' )
Jesus Nerones ( 'brother' )
Simon Lucius Anneus Seneca (Pilate, Ananias, Caiaphas, Judas, Peter)
Mary M. Pompeia Paulina (wife of Seneca)
Martha Poppea Sabina ( 'housekeepster' )
Alpheus Andrew the elder, father of Matthias (Germanicus) and Justus (Claudius)
Nathanael Cornelius (James the Just, Paul), Mathan, Heli or Exlai
Good story brother. Where’s the evidence for any of that?
What you are missing is that Paul didnt work allone. He worked with the Roman Empire to create this fiction. How else will all the anonymous authors of the Gospels came together to write and also tried to support Pauls letters. Its a professional group that came together to create the bible.
☑️☑️☑️☑️
Kinda like 9/11 creation
Robert larue hodgen larue backward is Eural URIEL Apollyon
That also goes for Johnny LaRue. John Candy picked that name for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear! Revealed his true identity!!!!
I dont need a book to understand the book. Its not complex as it's made out to be.
More loed
I don't understand these podcaststhe more if I wanna understand Paul I'll read Paul. I don't need somebody else to tell me about hit's like look at me, look at me.
They're all narcissist.
Even though she seems very nice.
Paul in the "first" century? Really. Why?
Take the course to learn it lol
She's a MACHINE GUN of facts, questionings, hundreds per video
Her favorite word is PROBLEMATIC
Not even Bart Ehrman, Tabor
Throw that many facts
In her 60s she'll terrorize debaters
You’re pretty
Thank you, Captain Obvious.
I will stick to Bart as a scholar.. like to learn without monetary gain .
Oh, so you reject the Biblical principle that the worker is worthy of his wage. Got it. BTW, Bart is one of the most financially successful scholars there is. Multiple best-sellers for which he gets PAID.
Bart is selling courses, too.
It's not even fair that someone so gorgeous can also be so intelligent. And she has a little humor? Pretty sure she's a lizard person.
No one invented Christianity. A Christian is a believer in Jesus Christ. So when did Christianity begin? It began with Jesus. Yea the belief in Jesus was given an associated name. So look no further for the origins of Christianity. JESUS ✝️
Not every Christian had the same belief. There were many versions of Xtianity. Some said to keep the law for eternal life, some said you only have to have faith. So when people talk about Paul inventing Christianity, they talk about todays Christianity. A religion of Jesus became a religion about Jesus..
@germanboy14
A Christian is one who believes in Christ. Many people are antichrist. Paul lived during a time when Jews were transitioning from the law and temple sacrifice to no longer needing the law or the blood of animal sacrifice to atone for sins. Jesus came to be the sacrifice that took away mans sin. Jesus (his body) became the new temple. There were many Christians before Paul, people that believed Jesus.
To believe Jesus does not mean you are Christian. Jesus never called his disciples as Christians. Actually you are called Christian if you believe what Paul had said about Jesus. The problem is that Paul was wrong in his surmising or his theological formulation about Jesus. Take note: the gospel preached by Jesus is not the same in the gospel of Paul about Jesus.
@Josephbarnabas
The disciples were first called Christians in Antioch.
Christ ian
One who believes in Christ a disciple of Christ. AKA the saints
Did you learn from someone that Paul teaches a different gospel or is this the conclusion you came to on your own after diligently studying the scripture?
You're right no one invented Christianity. It evolved like every social phenomenon.
👑Genesis 12:3 🇮🇱 Matthew 25 31-46👑
✝️ Christians speak of scriptures as being this or that as a salvation 🛐 issue, here 👑 Jesus made this a salvation 🛐 issue Himself in Matthew 25 31-46 🇮🇱
😊No teasing out scriptures or extrapolations needed, it's as plain as the Sun shine 😊
👑 Jesus made this a salvation 🛐 issue in Matthew 25 31-46 🇮🇱 and before He returns I'd recommend ministering the same love ❤God bless you on your journey ❤
I seriously doubt if Paul was anywhere near as ugly as the thumbnail picture of him makes him out to have looked like. For one thing he was immensely popular in many situations and as a general rule ugly people don't usually attract crowds of people.
Astute observation
Americans are more focused on physical looks than other cultures. People can have have great charisma irrespective of looks.
@@leonieromanes7265 if I had to guess I'd say Paul wouldve looked like John Goodman
@@andrewclemons8619 I always see him as a skinny guy with a limp. He probably wasn't that noticeable until he started to speak. He obviously had a compelling personality though
@@leonieromanes7265 what makes you think he had a limp?
I AM PAUL
The real Paul or the Pseudo-Paul?
You need to be super hero in dismantle the myth of the trinity you created on the behalf of the Romans
I didn't like Paul because he hated women.
Quit shilling paid courses
Too many unnecessary words; not enough substance.
No substance at all, just buy my course, buy my course, buy my course, said in several ways and in words that nobody could or would even want to understand
@@autumn5852 Agree. Lots of these biblical scholars have discovered a new revenue stream vs. their collegiate salaries. I do feel like I learn a lot from Bart Ehrman & the like, but it sometimes makes me ashamed of myself for not having done a simple synoptic gospel comparison myself. Regardless, they are shining light on truth, which is good. Unfortunately, most of them just aren't as charismatic as Christopher Hitchens!
A PAUL 🍎 PAP PAUL APOLLYON ABBA DON JACOB'S GRANDFATHER WHO IS AKHENATEN
Rebecca's father. Robert Larue Hodgen Larue backward is Eural EL GOD IZ JESUS BETH HOUSE 🏠 ELIZABETHTOWN KENTUCKY UNBRIDLED SPIRIT 🐎
@@allenhodge7245 Claudians are the 'house' of Elisa, Klopas, Zacharias, Zebedee aka the nicolaitans.
Zacherias wife ; Elisabeth, Salome, Mary the elder, Agrippina maior married with Germanicus .
U AM THE ROOT OF THE OFFSPRING OF DAVID AND THE BRIGHT AND MORNING STAR 🌟 THE LION 🦁 OF JUDAH IS SIRIUS 🦁 🐕 💫 THE BRIGHTEST STAR 🌟 IN THE SKY LOOKUP ✨️ 😀
Lmao imagine believing a woman has real credentials and scholarly insights 😂
You all need a new topic other than Jesus. Seriously do you have an agenda? I can only imagine what she teaches about Paul.
No one needs a college education to learn about Paul. They only need the scripture and God to understand.
"No one needs a college education to learn about Paul" - have you tried a college education, especially in fields like history, archeology, and anthropology?
@TheOriginalDanEdwards
What do those things have to do with learning about Paul?
@TheOriginalDanEdwards
When you attend a university or seminary to learn about the bible you will leave educated with what your teacher/professor taught you. Having a learned perspective of scripture rather than letting the Holy Spirit teach you with an understanding that no man can give.
@@Kimberly-lx4qyyou are assuming there's some supernatural guidance for *your* interpretation of a book. Why? Did you know that Ephesians, Timothy 1 and 2 weren't even written by Paul? It's easy to live in wishful thinking and deceiving yourself. It's difficult to study thoroughly to find the truth.
And yeah, there's an agenda: to show people what Christianity is truly about. Many of us have complex religious trauma derived from such religion. So if there are missionaries washing people's brains and indoctrinating little kids, we need informants helping people know the truth.
After leaving Christianity its all so ludicrous now.
My parents still take it literally
Avoid the FALSE Teachings of Paul...
Don't Stop Believing was Journey, not Boston.
If you have any idea of how much time developing such a deep understanding of the ancients takes, a music trivia mixup is easily forgivable. 😊
@@alwilliams5177 Forgivable, of course.
Having said that I should also remark that I thought that Journey, Boston, and Kansas were basically the same band with different lead singers. It is only worth mentioning who performed that song for the sake of accuracy.