Hey Dan - It's Chris Huntley on the Bart Ehrman team. I've worked with a couple of your colleagues at Didaskaloi, (Robyn and Candida), but haven't had the fortune to meet you yet. I just wanted to say I thought you did a fantastic job on this video, as well as the follow up one. It's much appreciated!
@@tomfrombrunswick7571 Christianity and religion in general are doing a fine job of that on their own without help of those who seek the "correct as possible" interpretations of the text rather than blind assumptions based on that which furthers their ideology. Ridding the world of these ridiculous assertions will make western civilization more civilized.
In the evangelical world of charlatans, conmen, frauds and hucksters making MILLIONS by lying to believers about healing, causes of sin, and preaching hate, Bart Ehrman doesn't even come close to deceiving anyone by having an academic and logistical critique of the scripture.
I would say amen, but as I’m an atheist I’m not sure that’s entirely apt …but you get my sentiment! 👏 Kenneth Copeland is the epitome of what you describe, a disgusting individual!
Not sure what you are saying here. I hold a PhD in Theology with a focus on Biblical Interpretation, and I can honestly say that Bart rarely is critiquing scripture from an objective platform. More often than not, his arguments are built upon his background in a more fundamentalist upbringing (which is distinctively different from Evangelicalism).
100% this, but I guess that video creator / other Christian apologists, and fear mongers, have zero confidence in the alleged promise of Jesus to his disciples in Matthew 16:18.
Christian Apologists use Bart Ehrmen like they use the Bible. Useful when it agrees with them i.e ,there was a historical Jesus, but easily dismissed when they dislike an interpretation of scripture.
Being deceived by cognitive biases isn't an insult, nor is calling religion delusional, because that is the pure definition of delusion. If you feel insulted, that's life, you don't apologize for all of the natives murdered or children molested or women dying because they can't have abortions...
@joe5959 Not really, no. A lot of atheists are actually former believers and know the Bible and its history better than believers, hence *why they're atheists.*
@@joe5959 Atheists do not pathologically despise christians, they pity your demographic. To say that they pathologically despise you people really shows what an inflated and centric ego yourself and chistians collectively have. If anybody pathologically despises others,it is christians when it comes to their attitude towards their fellow man who happen to not believe as christians do.
On his podcast and various videos, Bart has consistently maintained that he is not there in his lectures nor through his podcast to deconvert Christians. Megan Lewis is a Christian and works with him to produce his videos. Bart himself has stated his closest friends are Christians who are scholars themselves like Jeffrey Siker. And they all share that same love of wanting to know what the bible is saying and its history. One thing I learned is that deconversion happens on part of the person themselves. One's spiritual journey is their own to take, and how willing one is to listen to opposing viewpoints and evaluate one's beliefs. And that's difficult, whether you are a Christian, non-Christian or atheist. I think Bart put it best when he stated that the Christians back then didn't have a bible, much less a canon bible, yet still called themselves Christians. They lived in a world where letters spread under different names with varying different theologies. Yet those people back then still called themselves Christians. If ancient Christians could call themselves Christians without espousing biblical inerrancy or canonicity, why not modern Christians?
Modern Christians do. But the idiots screaming hate seem to be the only people recognized as Christians in modern society. A better question is why are sane Christians ignored? What does society pretend they don't exist? We believe in science and history and archeology.
Ah yes - arguing for why the Bible cannot be the ultimate Christian authority, while still clutching to his Evangelical presumption that it must be, while explaining how unreliable it is. This is the essence of Bart Ehrman the public academic.
@@MarcillaSmith? Either you haven't listened to much of him, or you have misunderstood him? He's an atheist. He does not believe in any god at all. I've never seen him clutching to Evangelicalism theology.
@@MarcillaSmith -while still clutching to his Evangelical presumption that it must be I don't recall Bart ever saying that it must be. As I've mentioned, the early Christians didn't have an evangelical presumption that the bible was the ultimate authority. Biblical inerrancy wasn't a thing then since there was no bible. Several religions have certain texts that are indeed still a core part of the religion. But the followers don't treat it as inerrant. Just writings of the followers before them. And neither do they treat them as the sole authority.
Bart Ehrman’s reasoning for atheism/agnosticism is because of the problem of evil. He doesn’t believe critical study of scripture/ancient world is sufficient for atheism.
@@MrMortal_RaI think they means that Dr. Erhman agrees with scholarly consensus that there is evidence that a 1st Century apocalyptic rabbi named Jesus existed. He clearly states that as a historian he has no historical evidence for the supernatural claims made about said 1st century teacher.
@@MrMortal_Ra Not at all. Bart is a fairly conservative scholar he isn't really outside of the mainstream or in real conflict with his theistic colleagues. I think it is silly to think he is trying to destroy Christianity.
I watched a lot of videos on YT with Bart Ehrman and it seems to me that he makes fun of the Christian faith a bit. He decided not to believe, although being a professional teacher, he teaches reliably and allows everyone to make a choice whether to believe or not. I respect him for that. Despite everything, he spreads biblical knowledge, even without believing in what he teaches.
In this day and age, the creator is threatening the safety of Bart. He is committing stochastic terrorism by impugning the man's motivations, creating alarm as to his threat to Christianity, and his supposed religious error.
Kinda touches at a problem in media that has been around for a while, but has been happening quite a lot more recently. The fact that media is becoming more and more emotionally manipulative. If you find yourself feeling some emotion while consuming any media, it's best to stop right then and there and think "why am I feeling this way?". If you engage meaningfully in that exercise you'll often find yourself confronting your biases.
@@nasonguy I agree. Sublimal messages are also used from time to time. For example take a look at the U2 concert in Las Vegas inside the sphere from 2023. Read the text displayed on the wall. Many words there are just 1 frame long and by that if you don't pause the video and walk it frame by frame you can't see it but you subconsciousness will still register it. It contains some really n..sty stuff which has nothing to do with the songs. It contains religious stuff as well like for example: "Social Media is the Anti-Christ", "666" and so on.
@@nasonguy True. The question is still why is such garbage displayed on the wall as sublimal messages? Edit: And there is stuff worse than this displayed there. Combinations of the word school and gun. and so on.
Thanks, again. Bart is only destroying 'Christianity' for the grifterrs and control freaks. Bart is a great and humane man. He also speaks to open another's mind, never to harm.
Think of how weak this religion is if a mere mortal such as Bart Ehrman could destroy it so effortlessly. Their reactions to Bart indicate their own disbelief in the fundamental aspects of their faith. They can't just sing about an almighty god who created this world and then, engage in these styles of attack. Think of it this way. If somebody accused you of not being you, wouldn't you laugh? It would be trivial to produce the documents, the people who know you, your first boyfriend/girlfriend, the trail of your youthful behaviors that you wish were never shown ... The list goes on and on about how to prove who you are. Even if you didn't have the documents, if you were an American citizen, the NSA probably has a thick folder on each of us. So a person who believes a more literal fundamentalist version of this faith should be able to laugh it off as implausible. Why would they need to fear when they have a god on their side?
@@jenniferhunter4074Bart hasnt really destroyed anything. The camps of biblical scholarship/historians are split, and he is a textual critic. Its very easy to see past the facade these people put up in an attempt to attack Christianity. Many claims bart has said has been debunked. My advice for anyone looking for answers. Is to not refer to these modern critics, but to do the digging on your own and make your own assessment of whether this is the path you want to walk.
@@joe5959 I think the problem you have with Bart Ehrman is that he isn't an apologist who manipulates the data to support a Christian world view. No offence, but your feelings do not matter. You really should look up the biblical scholarship rather than listening to apologists. Ehrman is an academic. Not a kook. Not somebody who profits by grifting on gullible evangelical Christians. He has his bonafides. If you're going to pretend his expertise and credentials don't matter, you will have to dismiss any supporting experts for "your side". Fair's fair. In addition, all we have are the texts. Of course, textual criticism will be the main source for studying the historical Christianity. We're not time travelling. Nothing I've seen from Dr. Ehrman implies he's anything but a well-respected academic in the field of biblical studies. He has worked at reputable academic institutions. I am sorry but this is unbecoming of evangelical christians to smear others. It's petty. It's silly.
C’mon. The Church has been through everything imaginable and it's still here. Anyone can be deceived if not careful. Anyone who chooses to believe Bart will have to answer to God. The Bible says we are to work out our salvation with and trembling.
This guy is big mad at Ehrman. Read Ehrman’s books. Listen to his podcasts. He’s focusing on the scholarship regarding the New Testament and early Christianity. He’s not telling people that it’s false. That rarely comes up in the dozen books by him that I’ve read, and many hours of his lectures I’ve listened to.
The "this generation will not pass away until..." was a chapter that struck me as a young believer, too. My pastor told me that we needed to properly determine what "generation" meant. I liked my little church and my helpful, non-judgemental pastor, but I found the discussion a bit disappointing.
That does sound disappointing. FWIW, as "predicted" in the Olivet Discourse, Jerusalem was both surrounded and destroyed during the Roman-Jewish War which ended on the 14th of Nisan, 73 CE/AD - exactly 40 years (or "one generation") _to the day_ after the crucifixion would have happened - with the fall of Masada. The commander of the legions at that time was General Titus Flavius. He was the son of man (his father, Vespasian Flavius, was a military commander when he was born), and also the son of god (during the Roman-Jewish War was the "Year of the Four Emperors" when Nero passed without an heir, leaving the Imperium in crisis until the Senate elected Vespasian as Emperor, and later, as god). Titus would succeed his father, and was also deified. I hope you find this information worthwhile to ponder. And please fact check it with Wikipedia or academic sources if any of it seems to fantastic to have been "overlooked."
@@MarcillaSmith Odd -- you appear to be saying that the prophecy in question (one that has been used to carry a LOT of weight in Christianity over the past 1700 years or so) DID come to pass, but the fulfillment is achieved by claiming that the "second coming" part of the prophecy was not referring to the Christ figure but to Titus. That just seems like a weird dodge of the problem created by the NT text.
@@MarcillaSmith Since the average lifespan in the area around Jerusalem in 30 CE was less than 30 years, claiming that 40 years is a generation is simply wrong. If jesus followers were adults in 30 CE, they would have to have lived to at least 61 years by the time the Temple was destroyed. That would make them among the very oldest of the old at that time - equivalent to those 105+ in the current-day US. IS this your idea of a generation?
@@petercollins7730 That's an incorrect analysis of population statistics from what I have seen. The majority of the reason for lower AVERAGE lifespans in the time was due to an extremely high infant mortality rate. The median lifespan was also somewhat shorter, but I think only around 10 years or so shorter, not 40 years. And anyway, the real problem as Dan said is that the part of Jesus coming again in the clouds in his glory was also supposed to happen in that generation.
Bart Ehrmam is a brilliant scholar who presents the data in a professional way. He isn't out to destroy anyone else's faith, but to give them the scholarly consensus on various aspects of the New Testament.
Only the best skeptics bring up the Oliver discourse prophecy… wow, I had no idea I was the “best skeptic” within 6 months of “accepting Christ,” and being a devoted Christian… good grief
If every word of scripture must always be true, no matter what, it every tenant of doctrine must be upheld no matter how harmful or weakly supported by the text, then impartial scholarship is an exestinal threat to your beliefs.
I love how the video author shows a clip of Dr. Ehrman explaining how Christians have trouble with the unfulfilled prophecy and have to reinterpret the prophetic statements, and then says Dr. E is wrong by doing exactly that.
Ehrman CAN'T "destroy Christianity," because he's dealing in matters of biblical scholarship, not theology. He's merely telling people what the Bible actually says, not what anyone should believe about it.
Yeah but so many Christians don't know (and are afraid of) what the Bible actually says. If they knew a lot would not be Christians anymore. Hence all the lying necessary to perpetuate religion.
What this creator doesn't realize is that Bart routinely frustrates critics of Christianity and the Bible by coming to its defense when he believes the evidence bears it out. The creator also doesn't understand that Bart's audience is overwhelmingly non-fundamentalist; anyone who wishes to have a non-questioning view of Christianity will almost certainly not be attending his workshops.
It always confuses me when fundamentalists speak slander against nonbelievers or supposed nonbelievers. Isn’t that bearing false witness against your neighbor?
Bearing false witness is OT. More critically for NT Christians it might be: Matthew 7:1-2: "Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." That is, the point of hypocrisy in this creator's pronouncements is judgement.
“…until ALL these things take place” isn’t at all cryptic or hard to understand. When ALL those things didn’t take place followers of Christ should have said “Oh well, that was a nice idea but clearly wrong” and walked away. Instead they did what almost every doomsday cult has always done - they doubled down on their nonsense. Jehovah’s Witnesses, I’m looking at you. Seriously, how many generations can your leaders pull the same old trick on before you wise up? 🤷
Another Millerian 19th century failed End Times denomination. But JWs are one flavor of the Christianity Kool-Aid. It's all BS because it's based on mythology. Inherently ambiguous and contradictory mythology.
Yes Bart the great deceiver :) .. Honestly, I have watched many videos from Bart, and his intent is not at all to draw people away from Christianity, he just wants to share the datas and the facts as they are common consensus, and to those that value truth, this is a great thing to engage, even if they disagree..
Apologists exist to keep true believers from looking at contradictory information. "There's nothing to see here, folks." I was fooled by them for years, thinking, oh, I guess our dogma is attacked by evil forces and clearly, we have answers to every criticism. But the truth eventually gets out, especially when you're open to DIRECTLY examining contradictory information. Bart Erhman, Dan McCellan and many other scholars are well worth your time to understand Bible topics.
Thanks for doing this. Bart is a fine scholar of true intellectual integrity and is the last person in his field to deserve being trashed in that way. I'm glad he has effective defenders like you.
Why is it assumed that someone who is agnostic atheist is automatically assumed to be trying to destroy religion? As an ex-Mormon, that is a very hurtful thing flung at me by friends and family who still believe.
Obviously I can't speak for someone else but I suspect it's more that Bart Ehrman is a former Christian. In my experience many religious people are more harsh on apostates. If someone was never religious it's easier to write off their criticism as just uninformed. But that doesn't really work for a former believer. So they often impune their motivation.
Non-belief, especially the non-belief of a person who used to believe the same things you did, represents a threat. It's a demonstration that it is possible to come to different conclusions about your beliefs. For the person whose belief deals with terror management regarding death, community inclusion and assorted anxiety coping mechanisms, this is a very big threat. Couple that with the fact that everybody doubts their supernatural beliefs (since, ya know, "invisible sky daddy" does stretch credulity quite a bit even for believers) non-belief effectively confirms your own doubts and calls into question your own reasoning process. And that's all just for non-belief. A christian encountering hindu polytheism still has the escape hatch of "Well, they believe in something supernatural, I think they're just wrong about what it really is." So they still get to retain their sense of being correct about the supernatural even if it's at the expense of adopting conscious or unconscious patronizing views of other beliefs. Agnostic atheism represents the ultimate threat. It's a demonstration that not only is your belief in question but that the fundamental beliefs underlying it are also in question. It's not just the god that's on the chopping block, it's the whole assumption of supernatural causation, that any and every god should be abandoned. In a way, I kinda agree with their reactionary sentiment. I think agnostic atheism does destroy religion. Simply existing as an option to the rhetoric and claims of religion forces people to grapple with the difference and thus grapple with their belief system. We've seen that as the internet has proliferated and access to tools needed to build a better understanding of supernatural beliefs increases, religiosity is decreasing. The thing the reactionary theist gets wrong is the assumption of an active goal. Agnostic atheists just exist for the most part. It's the theists who are actively threatening their own beliefs by continuing to engage with agnostic theism as a concept.
if a person will arise, whether Jew or Gentile, and perform a sign or wonder and say that God sent him to do any of the following, he is a false prophet: a) add a Divine commandment, b) withdraw a Divine commandment, c) explain a Divine commandment in a manner that differs from the tradition received from Moses, or d) declare that the Divine commandments of the Torah are not forever, but rather were given for a limited time.
Archeologists can't find a trace of evidence for Moses nor King Solomon. But they have found that Israel was never a great empire. Amazing people believe this crap.
Bart’s life’s work and position is to try to understand the New Testament as much as possible. It would be nice if most Christians had that same motivation or level of respect for the New Testament
I look at religion videos more for schadenfreude than enlightenment, so here I am. Something I DO love to learn about is language and how it's so badly abused. Thus, I had a moment of absolute pleasure when Dan says "you can't eat your cake and have it too". The usual version is misspoken, to say "you can't have...eat it". That's stupid. Of course you can have it -- then you can eat it. BUT, you truly can't EAT it AND have (possess) it, since it would already be gone. Dan actually listens to his language, even the tried-and-true old expressions, he evaluates it, and then expresses what he actually means -- even if that means restoring a cliche to the way it's supposed to be. (Look up "gild the lily") For this, I'm happy to know he's out there.
So that creator said the argument made can only be made by the most competent skeptics. 😂 Literally every skeptic I know points out those unfulfilled prophesies. And let me tell you, that ain’t really an elite group.
When humans issue titles on 'scholarship', it is to be expected that these who have these titles will come out with something controversial to make them stand out and get people's attention. There is a 'Bible scholar' who claims that Moses, David and even Jesus didn't exist. The Bible did prophecy of teachers whom people will hang on to because these teachers tell them what they LIKE TO HEAR. Not the truth, though. 2 Timothy 4:3,4.
After I learned about The Rapture, I always suspected that we already missed it and were spending our time rationalizing how we weren't already in hell. I think the perfectionism of Christianity scarred my soul.
critical scholarship IMPROVES people's faith lives and devotion in so many ways. It actually deepens faith because it crumbles all the fake nonsense that masquerades as truth. Bart Ehrman may destroy fundamentalist Christianity, but he has greatly contributed to the overall quality and accountability of Christianity.
"The believer begins to see not that the prophesy was incorrect, but that the group merely misunderstood it in a material, earthly manner...By doing so, the group saves the prophesy from failure, retains its close connection to cosmic history, and provides the condition under which its work can continue...The payment for such a spiritualization is low, the mere admission of a slight error in perception, a readily acceptable human behavior. The price is small compared with the loss of both face in the community and the intimate relationship with the cosmos implied with admitting that the prophesy might have failed. For the group, prophesy does not fail-it is merely misunderstood." J. Gordon Melton
It is crazy to look at what early Christians were actually saying in those initial writings and realize how eerily similar it appears to the exact same failed predictions of the imminent end times going on to this very day.
Bart isn’t saying anything new or controversial. He’s providing knowledge that hasn’t been widely available to laypeople because it would anger Christians like you. The truth shall set you free. If the truth points away from the Bible being inerrant then the Bible is errant. And believers that value honesty just need to accept that
To an apologist, the end position is that the Bible is true. Therefore attacking or discrediting the messengers like Bart who point out critical discrepancies is fair game
Christian apologetics are highly concerned with the significant drop in traditional faith and participation in Christianity by Millenials and Gen Z. There has to be a reason, so it has to be all those evil atheists. It can not be the fact that people simply are not falling for the same old drivel about believe or burn. In fairness to Bart, the apologetics are also attacking Jewish rabbis, such as Tovia Singer, for causing large numbers of Christians to renounce Christianity and become Noahides or convert to Judaism. The wailing and gnashing of teeth from the apologist camp is quite pleasant to my ear.
Wait they think that is the hardest argument for a Christian to respond to? The delay in Jesus' return? Seriously? Oh you sweet summer child, that's not even close, especially for an evangelical.
Also, something else worth noting. I think there are some Christians who seek to control others who can’t stand the internet exists, and it allows Christians to decouple from organized religion and religious cults and allows them to follow God on their own genuine faith and convictions without the harm that organized religion often causes. So it’s not just atheists like me that Bart and Dan help, it’s Christians who still have faith but are on a journey of deconstructing from abusive churches as well.
Yeah, Bart's an easy target. With religious adherence falling to historic lows and small churches closing their doors in many now-overserved areas, the faithful will be finding their scapegoats anywhere they can.
Of what use is a religion which must be defended with lies and misrepresentation? In my 65 years, i have never met a Christian who was both well informed about the bible and honest about it. Most are strangely unaware of exactly what is written and the rest lie about it.
It's interesting just how much crossover this video has with the current content from James Tabor and MindShift RUclips channels. This kind of prophecy fulfilment apologetics must be in vogue at the moment.
The video being critiqued got another thing wrong: The hardest, most concrete argument against Christian fundamentalism is not the lack of Jesus' return per se, it's the lack of fulfillment of the major messianic prophecies concerning the final days as found in Hebrew Scripture. This problem does not depend on what Jesus or Paul said or meant about his return. Jesus simply did not fulfill the visions concerning peace on earth, divine justice, the universal knowledge of God, the restoration of Israel, etc. which Israel's prophets taught would characterize the Messiah's coming and the ultimate future.
The amount of Christian apologists who come on here who tried to debunk people like Dan and others who are just presenting information with clarification who continue to demonstrate their ignorance and deliberate dishonesty is appalling
How do we send in questions? Im curious about the statement regarding Jesus preaching socialism and want to know more. Is this factaul? Would like an academic perspective.
The only thing missing was Dan smackin "this creator" on the nose with a rolled up newspaper and telling him "Bad! Bad! Apologist...go to your crate. You can come out when you want to be honest."
Gentry's book Before Jerusalem Fell places Revelation's date at 65-66AD during Nero's reign Full Preterism (meaning a spiritual second coming ending the jewish age in AD70) fits the prediction perfectly Jerusalem was predicted to be utterly destroyed and it happened in 70AD just as he said
Not sure why the verse two verses later is never noted in these discussions on either side of the debate … “But of that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone.” There is a parallel from potentially another tradition in Acts 1: So when they had come together, they were asking Him, saying, “Lord, is it at this time You are restoring the kingdom to Israel?” He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or epochs which the Father has fixed by His own authority.” Acts 1:6-7 The fall of Jerusalem would seem to signal the end of the world for the first Christians, which may explain the concatenation of prophecies, but Jesus may very well have been making distinctions between events. It would better explain the oddity of Jesus saying that everything would take place within a generation followed by the claim that he doesn’t know when it will happen…only the Father does.
I go looking for these guys on their channels and I can't find them. I am pretty sure I wouldn't spam them, but Dan leaves the channels off of his for a reason.
Understanding that the concept of reincarnation can surface in more than one form, such as the intellectual reincarnation of the Antikythera device, reincarnation in ancient Egyptian religion was the belief that the body or the soul/spirit of the deceased would be reborn into a new form. So if we take the Book of Sirach (OT) into account, then the second coming of Jesus might have already occurred (NT). Would this be a fair assessment or hypothesis?
Bart is extremely knowledgeable and I enjoy watching and listening to him. That said, he is biased. Of course he is! He is human like the rest of us. And because he is, he puts a slant on his work, perhaps subconsciously perhaps not but whatever the case, it is obvious to me from watching him that he does. Still, I like him, I just don't buy into what he says hook-line-and -sinker. Rather, I get some good information. Not all good, some good, some not.
Hold on, I thought Mark's gospel is about the impending destruction of Jerusalem. It's Matthew who also adds "the end of the age", which is open to interpretation. Maybe the original Christians at first thought it was about the second coming. But that's not how it panned out. The end of the then current age did arrive where the Son of Man did come in the clouds (in heaven) a la Daniel to approach the ancient of Days and gain power and authority. That's why Christians say he is seated at the right hand of God. The "angels sent to gather the elect" refer to the gospel going out to the earth via human messengers. This can be seen as a re-interpretation with respect to what the first Christians believed, but obviously since what they thought didn't happen, which Matthew was fully aware of, their interpretations was obviously incorrect. Doesn't make the scripture incorrect, just that our first interpretation was wrong so we look for an interpretation that matches observable fact.
Christians like the guy Dan is responding to can’t stand that there are former evangelicals who have studied the bible extensively and turned atheist because of it.
This amazes me. If christians claim have God/ Holy Spirit himself living in them. How in the hell can a mere human deceive you. This just proves u are delusional.
The Bible’s Patriarchal Age is likely a story about the Martu Yahmu tribe (Yahmad Dynasty) and their assignment to Canaan as a vassal to the God-Emperor of Ur line that begins with Narram-Sin. The tell? They translate their theophorics wherever they travel to the local word for God - Abba-El becomes Ab-ram, Ishma-dagon becomes Ishma-el, Jacob-Har (Horus) in Egypt becomes Jacob-el in Edom and Yak-Baal in Palestine. Abba-El means High Father, just like Ab-ram means High Father- they are just nomads translating. Abba-El is the patriarch of the Habiru - his lineage ancestor is the subject of a sculpture called King of the Habiru, the flood Canaan during Akhenaten’s reign. Moses is an example of a removed theophoric - he is likely Thutmose the Overseer of the Foreign Lands and Frontier Lands for Akhenaten, who is addressed as God by Jerusalem’s mayor. Continuing the oversight of the Levant by the East, Nabataea was closely involved with Judaea’s politics after Alexander the Great’s conquest, and it is likely that Jesus is the son of a handmaiden and a divine king per the Babylonian Talmud codification of offering an engaged Jewish virgin to a foreign official. Dr. Ehrman has a great mind and it’s helped me to discover these hypotheses
Hey Dan - It's Chris Huntley on the Bart Ehrman team. I've worked with a couple of your colleagues at Didaskaloi, (Robyn and Candida), but haven't had the fortune to meet you yet. I just wanted to say I thought you did a fantastic job on this video, as well as the follow up one. It's much appreciated!
Thanks so much for the kind words, Chris!
it's great that you had the time to respond this way. Clearly your work to destroy Western Civilization is a big task and must leave you time poor
@@tomfrombrunswick7571lol 😅
@@tomfrombrunswick7571Christcuckoldry isn't western civilization.
@@tomfrombrunswick7571 Christianity and religion in general are doing a fine job of that on their own without help of those who seek the "correct as possible" interpretations of the text rather than blind assumptions based on that which furthers their ideology. Ridding the world of these ridiculous assertions will make western civilization more civilized.
In the evangelical world of charlatans, conmen, frauds and hucksters making MILLIONS by lying to believers about healing, causes of sin, and preaching hate, Bart Ehrman doesn't even come close to deceiving anyone by having an academic and logistical critique of the scripture.
This^^^
I would say amen, but as I’m an atheist I’m not sure that’s entirely apt …but you get my sentiment! 👏
Kenneth Copeland is the epitome of what you describe, a disgusting individual!
well said.
Yes💯
Not sure what you are saying here. I hold a PhD in Theology with a focus on Biblical Interpretation, and I can honestly say that Bart rarely is critiquing scripture from an objective platform. More often than not, his arguments are built upon his background in a more fundamentalist upbringing (which is distinctively different from Evangelicalism).
If one man was capable of destroying an entire religion, that doesn't speak highly of the faith of this accuser
100% this, but I guess that video creator / other Christian apologists, and fear mongers, have zero confidence in the alleged promise of Jesus to his disciples in Matthew 16:18.
Christian Apologists use Bart Ehrmen like they use the Bible. Useful when it agrees with them i.e ,there was a historical Jesus, but easily dismissed when they dislike an interpretation of scripture.
Bart overstates the evidence for a historical Jesus- the one thing they go to him for is likely wrong
Totally agree with your statement!!!
Kind of hilarious that evangelicals would call bible scholars "deceptive". Such lack of self-awareness.
Pharisees were Bible scholars and had it wrong. Not all Bible scholars are equal. You should know this
Christians don't need Bart to be deceived..
So true…..since they are already deceiving themselves.
All reddit atheists need is a handbag full of insults to throw at the people they pathologically despise... because thats all they have
Being deceived by cognitive biases isn't an insult, nor is calling religion delusional, because that is the pure definition of delusion. If you feel insulted, that's life, you don't apologize for all of the natives murdered or children molested or women dying because they can't have abortions...
@joe5959 Not really, no. A lot of atheists are actually former believers and know the Bible and its history better than believers, hence *why they're atheists.*
@@joe5959 Atheists do not pathologically despise christians, they pity your demographic. To say that they pathologically despise you people really shows what an inflated and centric ego yourself and chistians collectively have. If anybody pathologically despises others,it is christians when it comes to their attitude towards their fellow man who happen to not believe as christians do.
On his podcast and various videos, Bart has consistently maintained that he is not there in his lectures nor through his podcast to deconvert Christians. Megan Lewis is a Christian and works with him to produce his videos. Bart himself has stated his closest friends are Christians who are scholars themselves like Jeffrey Siker. And they all share that same love of wanting to know what the bible is saying and its history.
One thing I learned is that deconversion happens on part of the person themselves. One's spiritual journey is their own to take, and how willing one is to listen to opposing viewpoints and evaluate one's beliefs. And that's difficult, whether you are a Christian, non-Christian or atheist.
I think Bart put it best when he stated that the Christians back then didn't have a bible, much less a canon bible, yet still called themselves Christians. They lived in a world where letters spread under different names with varying different theologies. Yet those people back then still called themselves Christians. If ancient Christians could call themselves Christians without espousing biblical inerrancy or canonicity, why not modern Christians?
Modern Christians do.
But the idiots screaming hate seem to be the only people recognized as Christians in modern society.
A better question is why are sane Christians ignored? What does society pretend they don't exist?
We believe in science and history and archeology.
That the earliest Christians didn't have a Bible to call "inerrant" is a great point that never occurred to me.
Ah yes - arguing for why the Bible cannot be the ultimate Christian authority, while still clutching to his Evangelical presumption that it must be, while explaining how unreliable it is. This is the essence of Bart Ehrman the public academic.
@@MarcillaSmith?
Either you haven't listened to much of him, or you have misunderstood him?
He's an atheist. He does not believe in any god at all. I've never seen him clutching to Evangelicalism theology.
@@MarcillaSmith -while still clutching to his Evangelical presumption that it must be
I don't recall Bart ever saying that it must be. As I've mentioned, the early Christians didn't have an evangelical presumption that the bible was the ultimate authority. Biblical inerrancy wasn't a thing then since there was no bible.
Several religions have certain texts that are indeed still a core part of the religion. But the followers don't treat it as inerrant. Just writings of the followers before them. And neither do they treat them as the sole authority.
Destroy Christianity by agreeing with most of the positions of Christian biblical scholars whilst being an atheist?
Bart Ehrman’s reasoning for atheism/agnosticism is because of the problem of evil. He doesn’t believe critical study of scripture/ancient world is sufficient for atheism.
This guy is the ashiest!
@@MrMortal_RaI think they means that Dr. Erhman agrees with scholarly consensus that there is evidence that a 1st Century apocalyptic rabbi named Jesus existed. He clearly states that as a historian he has no historical evidence for the supernatural claims made about said 1st century teacher.
@@MrMortal_Ra Not at all. Bart is a fairly conservative scholar he isn't really outside of the mainstream or in real conflict with his theistic colleagues. I think it is silly to think he is trying to destroy Christianity.
I watched a lot of videos on YT with Bart Ehrman and it seems to me that he makes fun of the Christian faith a bit. He decided not to believe, although being a professional teacher, he teaches reliably and allows everyone to make a choice whether to believe or not. I respect him for that. Despite everything, he spreads biblical knowledge, even without believing in what he teaches.
In this day and age, the creator is threatening the safety of Bart. He is committing stochastic terrorism by impugning the man's motivations, creating alarm as to his threat to Christianity, and his supposed religious error.
With the likes of qanon wildly overrepresented by christians, there are plenty of wacko christians out there.
I love Ehrman. ❤
Bart and Dan, two of my favorite scholars on RUclips!
Thanks for what both of you do
The New Testament/Old Testament One-Two punch :)
Right off the first statement of what this Creator said about Bart is so laughable😅😅😅
Thanks Dan for reaction videos.
It's wierd, to me, that Christian Apologists think they're exempt to the prohibition of false witnessing
I love the creapy music he uses to make people think Barth is evil
Kinda touches at a problem in media that has been around for a while, but has been happening quite a lot more recently. The fact that media is becoming more and more emotionally manipulative. If you find yourself feeling some emotion while consuming any media, it's best to stop right then and there and think "why am I feeling this way?". If you engage meaningfully in that exercise you'll often find yourself confronting your biases.
@@nasonguy I agree. Sublimal messages are also used from time to time.
For example take a look at the U2 concert in Las Vegas inside the sphere from 2023. Read the text displayed on the wall. Many words there are just 1 frame long and by that if you don't pause the video and walk it frame by frame you can't see it but you subconsciousness will still register it. It contains some really n..sty stuff which has nothing to do with the songs. It contains religious stuff as well like for example: "Social Media is the Anti-Christ", "666" and so on.
@@nezz0r That's something else entirely, and is very reminiscent of the satanic panic.
@@nasonguy
True. The question is still why is such garbage displayed on the wall as sublimal messages?
Edit: And there is stuff worse than this displayed there. Combinations of the word school and gun. and so on.
darth barth
Thanks, again.
Bart is only destroying 'Christianity' for the grifterrs and control freaks.
Bart is a great and humane man. He also speaks to open another's mind, never to harm.
Think of how weak this religion is if a mere mortal such as Bart Ehrman could destroy it so effortlessly. Their reactions to Bart indicate their own disbelief in the fundamental aspects of their faith. They can't just sing about an almighty god who created this world and then, engage in these styles of attack.
Think of it this way. If somebody accused you of not being you, wouldn't you laugh? It would be trivial to produce the documents, the people who know you, your first boyfriend/girlfriend, the trail of your youthful behaviors that you wish were never shown ... The list goes on and on about how to prove who you are. Even if you didn't have the documents, if you were an American citizen, the NSA probably has a thick folder on each of us.
So a person who believes a more literal fundamentalist version of this faith should be able to laugh it off as implausible. Why would they need to fear when they have a god on their side?
@@jenniferhunter4074Bart hasnt really destroyed anything. The camps of biblical scholarship/historians are split, and he is a textual critic.
Its very easy to see past the facade these people put up in an attempt to attack Christianity. Many claims bart has said has been debunked.
My advice for anyone looking for answers. Is to not refer to these modern critics, but to do the digging on your own and make your own assessment of whether this is the path you want to walk.
@@joe5959 I think the problem you have with Bart Ehrman is that he isn't an apologist who manipulates the data to support a Christian world view. No offence, but your feelings do not matter. You really should look up the biblical scholarship rather than listening to apologists.
Ehrman is an academic. Not a kook. Not somebody who profits by grifting on gullible evangelical Christians. He has his bonafides. If you're going to pretend his expertise and credentials don't matter, you will have to dismiss any supporting experts for "your side". Fair's fair.
In addition, all we have are the texts. Of course, textual criticism will be the main source for studying the historical Christianity. We're not time travelling.
Nothing I've seen from Dr. Ehrman implies he's anything but a well-respected academic in the field of biblical studies. He has worked at reputable academic institutions. I am sorry but this is unbecoming of evangelical christians to smear others. It's petty. It's silly.
Bart doesn't need to deliberately destroy Christianity. He merely deals in evidence.
Data and critical thinking kill religion.
How fragile is the Christian faith and christians minds, that one scholar alone can mean such a threat they are portraying.
C’mon. The Church has been through everything imaginable and it's still here. Anyone can be deceived if not careful. Anyone who chooses to believe Bart will have to answer to God. The Bible says we are to work out our salvation with and trembling.
This guy is big mad at Ehrman.
Read Ehrman’s books. Listen to his podcasts. He’s focusing on the scholarship regarding the New Testament and early Christianity. He’s not telling people that it’s false. That rarely comes up in the dozen books by him that I’ve read, and many hours of his lectures I’ve listened to.
The "this generation will not pass away until..." was a chapter that struck me as a young believer, too. My pastor told me that we needed to properly determine what "generation" meant. I liked my little church and my helpful, non-judgemental pastor, but I found the discussion a bit disappointing.
That does sound disappointing.
FWIW, as "predicted" in the Olivet Discourse, Jerusalem was both surrounded and destroyed during the Roman-Jewish War which ended on the 14th of Nisan, 73 CE/AD - exactly 40 years (or "one generation") _to the day_ after the crucifixion would have happened - with the fall of Masada.
The commander of the legions at that time was General Titus Flavius. He was the son of man (his father, Vespasian Flavius, was a military commander when he was born), and also the son of god (during the Roman-Jewish War was the "Year of the Four Emperors" when Nero passed without an heir, leaving the Imperium in crisis until the Senate elected Vespasian as Emperor, and later, as god). Titus would succeed his father, and was also deified.
I hope you find this information worthwhile to ponder. And please fact check it with Wikipedia or academic sources if any of it seems to fantastic to have been "overlooked."
@@MarcillaSmith Odd -- you appear to be saying that the prophecy in question (one that has been used to carry a LOT of weight in Christianity over the past 1700 years or so) DID come to pass, but the fulfillment is achieved by claiming that the "second coming" part of the prophecy was not referring to the Christ figure but to Titus. That just seems like a weird dodge of the problem created by the NT text.
@@MarcillaSmith Since the average lifespan in the area around Jerusalem in 30 CE was less than 30 years, claiming that 40 years is a generation is simply wrong. If jesus followers were adults in 30 CE, they would have to have lived to at least 61 years by the time the Temple was destroyed. That would make them among the very oldest of the old at that time - equivalent to those 105+ in the current-day US. IS this your idea of a generation?
@MarcillaSmith Yeah, no. Nice dodge though at trying to get Jesus off the hook.
@@petercollins7730 That's an incorrect analysis of population statistics from what I have seen. The majority of the reason for lower AVERAGE lifespans in the time was due to an extremely high infant mortality rate. The median lifespan was also somewhat shorter, but I think only around 10 years or so shorter, not 40 years.
And anyway, the real problem as Dan said is that the part of Jesus coming again in the clouds in his glory was also supposed to happen in that generation.
Bart Ehrmam is a brilliant scholar who presents the data in a professional way. He isn't out to destroy anyone else's faith, but to give them the scholarly consensus on various aspects of the New Testament.
If anything I'd say he's way too accommodating and sugar-coating to Christianity in how he says things that Christians tend not to like,
Only the best skeptics bring up the Oliver discourse prophecy… wow, I had no idea I was the “best skeptic” within 6 months of “accepting Christ,” and being a devoted Christian… good grief
If every word of scripture must always be true, no matter what, it every tenant of doctrine must be upheld no matter how harmful or weakly supported by the text, then impartial scholarship is an exestinal threat to your beliefs.
people like that creator want certainty, not nuance. Fundamentally, it is an entirely different mindset from scholars like Dan and Bart
I love how the video author shows a clip of Dr. Ehrman explaining how Christians have trouble with the unfulfilled prophecy and have to reinterpret the prophetic statements, and then says Dr. E is wrong by doing exactly that.
Ehrman CAN'T "destroy Christianity," because he's dealing in matters of biblical scholarship, not theology. He's merely telling people what the Bible actually says, not what anyone should believe about it.
Yeah but so many Christians don't know (and are afraid of) what the Bible actually says. If they knew a lot would not be Christians anymore. Hence all the lying necessary to perpetuate religion.
Most Christian have little interest in biblical scholarship.
So are you saying that christians do not believe what the bible actually says?
🎤 drop
I’m an advocate of both you and Bart. I’m glad to see this!
What this creator doesn't realize is that Bart routinely frustrates critics of Christianity and the Bible by coming to its defense when he believes the evidence bears it out. The creator also doesn't understand that Bart's audience is overwhelmingly non-fundamentalist; anyone who wishes to have a non-questioning view of Christianity will almost certainly not be attending his workshops.
It always confuses me when fundamentalists speak slander against nonbelievers or supposed nonbelievers. Isn’t that bearing false witness against your neighbor?
yes but lying for gawd has always been cool, didn't you know.
Bearing false witness is OT. More critically for NT Christians it might be:
Matthew 7:1-2:
"Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
That is, the point of hypocrisy in this creator's pronouncements is judgement.
It still applies, OT or not. @@BabyHoolighan
You think Christians care that much about that stuff? Why is there sexual abuse then?
@@thedarknessthatcomesbefore4279 Rahab lied for God and God was so pleased.
Also, ask this creator what number Bart is thinking of, now.
“…until ALL these things take place” isn’t at all cryptic or hard to understand.
When ALL those things didn’t take place followers of Christ should have said “Oh well, that was a nice idea but clearly wrong” and walked away. Instead they did what almost every doomsday cult has always done - they doubled down on their nonsense.
Jehovah’s Witnesses, I’m looking at you. Seriously, how many generations can your leaders pull the same old trick on before you wise up? 🤷
Another Millerian 19th century failed End Times denomination.
But JWs are one flavor of the Christianity Kool-Aid. It's all BS because it's based on mythology. Inherently ambiguous and contradictory mythology.
I'm not even an Atheist but I love Bart because of his knowledge, can't hate him.
Yes Bart the great deceiver :) .. Honestly, I have watched many videos from Bart, and his intent is not at all to draw people away from Christianity, he just wants to share the datas and the facts as they are common consensus, and to those that value truth, this is a great thing to engage, even if they disagree..
Another in the long line of those who don’t like the message, so they attack the messenger.
Apologists exist to keep true believers from looking at contradictory information. "There's nothing to see here, folks." I was fooled by them for years, thinking, oh, I guess our dogma is attacked by evil forces and clearly, we have answers to every criticism. But the truth eventually gets out, especially when you're open to DIRECTLY examining contradictory information. Bart Erhman, Dan McCellan and many other scholars are well worth your time to understand Bible topics.
Thank you dan I appreciate you using the cake expression correctly
Coincidentally I was looking at buying some of Bart Ehrman's books, the other day. Cool toknow where you stand on his work.
Thanks for doing this. Bart is a fine scholar of true intellectual integrity and is the last person in his field to deserve being trashed in that way. I'm glad he has effective defenders like you.
Why is it assumed that someone who is agnostic atheist is automatically assumed to be trying to destroy religion? As an ex-Mormon, that is a very hurtful thing flung at me by friends and family who still believe.
Obviously I can't speak for someone else but I suspect it's more that Bart Ehrman is a former Christian. In my experience many religious people are more harsh on apostates. If someone was never religious it's easier to write off their criticism as just uninformed. But that doesn't really work for a former believer. So they often impune their motivation.
Non-belief, especially the non-belief of a person who used to believe the same things you did, represents a threat.
It's a demonstration that it is possible to come to different conclusions about your beliefs. For the person whose belief deals with terror management regarding death, community inclusion and assorted anxiety coping mechanisms, this is a very big threat.
Couple that with the fact that everybody doubts their supernatural beliefs (since, ya know, "invisible sky daddy" does stretch credulity quite a bit even for believers) non-belief effectively confirms your own doubts and calls into question your own reasoning process.
And that's all just for non-belief. A christian encountering hindu polytheism still has the escape hatch of "Well, they believe in something supernatural, I think they're just wrong about what it really is." So they still get to retain their sense of being correct about the supernatural even if it's at the expense of adopting conscious or unconscious patronizing views of other beliefs.
Agnostic atheism represents the ultimate threat. It's a demonstration that not only is your belief in question but that the fundamental beliefs underlying it are also in question. It's not just the god that's on the chopping block, it's the whole assumption of supernatural causation, that any and every god should be abandoned.
In a way, I kinda agree with their reactionary sentiment. I think agnostic atheism does destroy religion. Simply existing as an option to the rhetoric and claims of religion forces people to grapple with the difference and thus grapple with their belief system. We've seen that as the internet has proliferated and access to tools needed to build a better understanding of supernatural beliefs increases, religiosity is decreasing. The thing the reactionary theist gets wrong is the assumption of an active goal. Agnostic atheists just exist for the most part. It's the theists who are actively threatening their own beliefs by continuing to engage with agnostic theism as a concept.
if a person will arise, whether Jew or Gentile, and perform a sign or wonder and say that God sent him to do any of the following, he is a false prophet: a) add a Divine commandment, b) withdraw a Divine commandment, c) explain a Divine commandment in a manner that differs from the tradition received from Moses, or d) declare that the Divine commandments of the Torah are not forever, but rather were given for a limited time.
Archeologists can't find a trace of evidence for Moses nor King Solomon. But they have found that Israel was never a great empire. Amazing people believe this crap.
The classic apologetic of “this is what the Bible says, but that’s not what it means”
Bart’s life’s work and position is to try to understand the New Testament as much as possible. It would be nice if most Christians had that same motivation or level of respect for the New Testament
He's so deceitful with all his true facts that we don't want to hear.
Truth is so important! Thank you for your work here.
I look at religion videos more for schadenfreude than enlightenment, so here I am. Something I DO love to learn about is language and how it's so badly abused. Thus, I had a moment of absolute pleasure when Dan says "you can't eat your cake and have it too". The usual version is misspoken, to say "you can't have...eat it". That's stupid. Of course you can have it -- then you can eat it. BUT, you truly can't EAT it AND have (possess) it, since it would already be gone. Dan actually listens to his language, even the tried-and-true old expressions, he evaluates it, and then expresses what he actually means -- even if that means restoring a cliche to the way it's supposed to be. (Look up "gild the lily")
For this, I'm happy to know he's out there.
Low hanging fruit but it needed to be done either way. Thank you for explaining the obvious to people just in case they didn't know it.
So that creator said the argument made can only be made by the most competent skeptics. 😂
Literally every skeptic I know points out those unfulfilled prophesies. And let me tell you, that ain’t really an elite group.
👏 thank you Dan!
When humans issue titles on 'scholarship', it is to be expected that these who have these titles will come out with something controversial to make them stand out and get people's attention.
There is a 'Bible scholar' who claims that Moses, David and even Jesus didn't exist.
The Bible did prophecy of teachers whom people will hang on to because these teachers tell them what they LIKE TO HEAR. Not the truth, though. 2 Timothy 4:3,4.
Thank you for defending Bart.
After I learned about The Rapture, I always suspected that we already missed it and were spending our time rationalizing how we weren't already in hell. I think the perfectionism of Christianity scarred my soul.
critical scholarship IMPROVES people's faith lives and devotion in so many ways. It actually deepens faith because it crumbles all the fake nonsense that masquerades as truth. Bart Ehrman may destroy fundamentalist Christianity, but he has greatly contributed to the overall quality and accountability of Christianity.
"The believer begins to see not that the prophesy was incorrect, but that the group merely misunderstood it in a material, earthly manner...By doing so, the group saves the prophesy from failure, retains its close connection to cosmic history, and provides the condition under which its work can continue...The payment for such a spiritualization is low, the mere admission of a slight error in perception, a readily acceptable human behavior. The price is small compared with the loss of both face in the community and the intimate relationship with the cosmos implied with admitting that the prophesy might have failed. For the group, prophesy does not fail-it is merely misunderstood."
J. Gordon Melton
It is crazy to look at what early Christians were actually saying in those initial writings and realize how eerily similar it appears to the exact same failed predictions of the imminent end times going on to this very day.
Bart isn’t saying anything new or controversial. He’s providing knowledge that hasn’t been widely available to laypeople because it would anger Christians like you.
The truth shall set you free. If the truth points away from the Bible being inerrant then the Bible is errant. And believers that value honesty just need to accept that
Thank you for your work.
"This is true."
Sassy!
To an apologist, the end position is that the Bible is true. Therefore attacking or discrediting the messengers like Bart who point out critical discrepancies is fair game
To attack a meticulous scholar like Bart with inauthentic claims is an appeal to an audience that is not intellectually self sufficient. How ugly.
Is it my imagination or has attacks on Bart Erhman ramped into rage-o-sphere lately? What could account for this?
Could it be his words attack their "narcissistic" religion?
Christian apologetics are highly concerned with the significant drop in traditional faith and participation in Christianity by Millenials and Gen Z. There has to be a reason, so it has to be all those evil atheists. It can not be the fact that people simply are not falling for the same old drivel about believe or burn.
In fairness to Bart, the apologetics are also attacking Jewish rabbis, such as Tovia Singer, for causing large numbers of Christians to renounce Christianity and become Noahides or convert to Judaism.
The wailing and gnashing of teeth from the apologist camp is quite pleasant to my ear.
He has an impact, but also has become more outspoken and more known.
Because he speaks the truth
I've been reading Erhman since the late 90's, so did apologists just get a library card?
Wait they think that is the hardest argument for a Christian to respond to? The delay in Jesus' return? Seriously? Oh you sweet summer child, that's not even close, especially for an evangelical.
YESSSSS, finally I get the correct: "eat their cake and have it too" tytyty hehe
I like how these evangelicals talk a big game but never try to debate scholars face to face.
Also, something else worth noting. I think there are some Christians who seek to control others who can’t stand the internet exists, and it allows Christians to decouple from organized religion and religious cults and allows them to follow God on their own genuine faith and convictions without the harm that organized religion often causes. So it’s not just atheists like me that Bart and Dan help, it’s Christians who still have faith but are on a journey of deconstructing from abusive churches as well.
Yeah, Bart's an easy target. With religious adherence falling to historic lows and small churches closing their doors in many now-overserved areas, the faithful will be finding their scapegoats anywhere they can.
Dude never blinks. Can't decide if he's AI.
Great assessment.
Of what use is a religion which must be defended with lies and misrepresentation?
In my 65 years, i have never met a Christian who was both well informed about the bible and honest about it. Most are strangely unaware of exactly what is written and the rest lie about it.
Ask a Christian to demonstrate John 14:12-14 and suddenly you can hear the grasshoppers chirping. 🤷♂
The journey through faith is such a wolf's ride when you learn the languages and the history.
It's interesting just how much crossover this video has with the current content from James Tabor and MindShift RUclips channels. This kind of prophecy fulfilment apologetics must be in vogue at the moment.
That music 😂
I know, it's so ominous 😂
When your sorry excuse for a worldview isn't working, go for ad hominems. Every Christian playbook ever.
The video being critiqued got another thing wrong: The hardest, most concrete argument against Christian fundamentalism is not the lack of Jesus' return per se, it's the lack of fulfillment of the major messianic prophecies concerning the final days as found in Hebrew Scripture. This problem does not depend on what Jesus or Paul said or meant about his return. Jesus simply did not fulfill the visions concerning peace on earth, divine justice, the universal knowledge of God, the restoration of Israel, etc. which Israel's prophets taught would characterize the Messiah's coming and the ultimate future.
The "this is true" had me.
that "This is true" is a solemn as it is good comedy
My wife told me Mike Heiser was deceiving Christians. So I dug further and discovered Bart Ehrman. 😃
The amount of Christian apologists who come on here who tried to debunk people like Dan and others who are just presenting information with clarification who continue to demonstrate their ignorance and deliberate dishonesty is appalling
How do we send in questions? Im curious about the statement regarding Jesus preaching socialism and want to know more. Is this factaul? Would like an academic perspective.
The only thing missing was Dan smackin "this creator" on the nose with a rolled up newspaper and telling him "Bad! Bad! Apologist...go to your crate. You can come out when you want to be honest."
Gentry's book Before Jerusalem Fell places Revelation's date at 65-66AD during Nero's reign
Full Preterism (meaning a spiritual second coming ending the jewish age in AD70) fits the prediction perfectly
Jerusalem was predicted to be utterly destroyed and it happened in 70AD just as he said
If your religion is true, then a human can never waiver your conviction in your dogma. Is Bart stronger than your god?
What has happened to legend of the wandering Jew? has this fallen from favour?
Not sure why the verse two verses later is never noted in these discussions on either side of the debate … “But of that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone.”
There is a parallel from potentially another tradition in Acts 1:
So when they had come together, they were asking Him, saying, “Lord, is it at this time You are restoring the kingdom to Israel?” He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or epochs which the Father has fixed by His own authority.”
Acts 1:6-7
The fall of Jerusalem would seem to signal the end of the world for the first Christians, which may explain the concatenation of prophecies, but Jesus may very well have been making distinctions between events. It would better explain the oddity of Jesus saying that everything would take place within a generation followed by the claim that he doesn’t know when it will happen…only the Father does.
It was lying apologists that were instrumental for my deconversion from Christianity after 25 years as a fundamentalist.
This was great, but vertical video makes me sad.
I go looking for these guys on their channels and I can't find them. I am pretty sure I wouldn't spam them, but Dan leaves the channels off of his for a reason.
Trust Data. Don't trust Lore.
-Dr. Noonien Soong
Love the hoodie.
Understanding that the concept of reincarnation can surface in more than one form, such as the intellectual reincarnation of the Antikythera device, reincarnation in ancient Egyptian religion was the belief that the body or the soul/spirit of the deceased would be reborn into a new form. So if we take the Book of Sirach (OT) into account, then the second coming of Jesus might have already occurred (NT). Would this be a fair assessment or hypothesis?
Bart is extremely knowledgeable and I enjoy watching and listening to him. That said, he is biased. Of course he is! He is human like the rest of us. And because he is, he puts a slant on his work, perhaps subconsciously perhaps not but whatever the case, it is obvious to me from watching him that he does. Still, I like him, I just don't buy into what he says hook-line-and -sinker. Rather, I get some good information. Not all good, some good, some not.
What is the consensus of the time of writing of Mark based on?
Wondertfull!
I just come here to see what the deceived and heretics have to say.
If Bart Ehrman's goal is to destroy Christianity, someone really ought to tell his Christian wife
The title is quite funny - there are many who sees Bart as a christian apologist. Very interesting academic.
Hold on, I thought Mark's gospel is about the impending destruction of Jerusalem. It's Matthew who also adds "the end of the age", which is open to interpretation.
Maybe the original Christians at first thought it was about the second coming. But that's not how it panned out. The end of the then current age did arrive where the Son of Man did come in the clouds (in heaven) a la Daniel to approach the ancient of Days and gain power and authority. That's why Christians say he is seated at the right hand of God. The "angels sent to gather the elect" refer to the gospel going out to the earth via human messengers.
This can be seen as a re-interpretation with respect to what the first Christians believed, but obviously since what they thought didn't happen, which Matthew was fully aware of, their interpretations was obviously incorrect. Doesn't make the scripture incorrect, just that our first interpretation was wrong so we look for an interpretation that matches observable fact.
Can you share the link to the original video so we can report it as false news/harassment? 😂😂
Christians like the guy Dan is responding to can’t stand that there are former evangelicals who have studied the bible extensively and turned atheist because of it.
This amazes me. If christians claim have God/ Holy Spirit himself living in them. How in the hell can a mere human deceive you. This just proves u are delusional.
The Bible’s Patriarchal Age is likely a story about the Martu Yahmu tribe (Yahmad Dynasty) and their assignment to Canaan as a vassal to the God-Emperor of Ur line that begins with Narram-Sin. The tell? They translate their theophorics wherever they travel to the local word for God - Abba-El becomes Ab-ram, Ishma-dagon becomes Ishma-el, Jacob-Har (Horus) in Egypt becomes Jacob-el in Edom and Yak-Baal in Palestine.
Abba-El means High Father, just like Ab-ram means High Father- they are just nomads translating. Abba-El is the patriarch of the Habiru - his lineage ancestor is the subject of a sculpture called King of the Habiru, the flood Canaan during Akhenaten’s reign.
Moses is an example of a removed theophoric - he is likely Thutmose the Overseer of the Foreign Lands and Frontier Lands for Akhenaten, who is addressed as God by Jerusalem’s mayor. Continuing the oversight of the Levant by the East, Nabataea was closely involved with Judaea’s politics after Alexander the Great’s conquest, and it is likely that Jesus is the son of a handmaiden and a divine king per the Babylonian Talmud codification of offering an engaged Jewish virgin to a foreign official.
Dr. Ehrman has a great mind and it’s helped me to discover these hypotheses
This guy missed the black background, lighting from underneath, and a gloomy melody to make it more dramatic and ominous! LOL
Or, that generation is still with us.