I totally understand why you would be surprised that a person would abandon their faith after having the illusion of inerrancy shattered. But some of us were weaned on inerrancy. And we discovered that our faith shattered right along with it.
I too was raised to believe in inerrancy but have very much kept my faith after studying from Bart ❤ I think it’s really sad that so many churches teach inerrancy, it’s so short sighted and damaging. John Dominic Crossan has a quote that goes something like “were the ancients so dumb as to take the scriptures entirely literally or are we so dumb that we take as literally what the ancients meant symbolically. My hunch is it’s the latter” I think the bible is a blend of symbolic/metaphorical truths and literal ones.
@@ramieal-hazar2438 I suspect that there is more to it that has to do with individual traits and tendencies. I was always looking around in church wondering what all the emotionality was about. Not that I never felt any of it. I definitely did. But it seemed to be more about emotional release for some. I didn’t have the same kind of need for it that others seemed to. Eventually it just all started to seem like a performance. Losing faith was a gradual process. Death by 1000 cuts. Inerrancy being shattered was just one of the deep cuts.
That's too bad. The insistence on literalism and inerrancy has probably done more to drive people away than anything else. I remember hearing as a little kid "the Bible is TRUTH, but its not necessarily TRUE." Growing up with that idea and having it in the back of your head makes for an easier time of it when you run into things like modern science, contradictions within the text, questions of authorship and just plain ugliness. You can just set all that aside, read the text figuratively and ask "what are these guys trying to tell people and what can I get out of it?"
@@byrondickens that was where I ended up. Seeing the very human wisdom that was there and appreciating it for what it actually is. I’ve studied the Bible way more as an atheist than I ever did as a Christian. It’s undeniable that it has shaped Western societies in countless ways. And there is a lot of human truth in it. Not much divine that I can ascertain though.
When I was a Christian i went to a few churches that stated the bible as the literal word of god, so in every way flawless.. I never could accept something created by humans could be inerrant, the church would have had to convince me that every writers were some extension of god for me to accept that. What ended up being the final straw for me was finding out about the ancient Mesopotamian flood story. My Christian understanding was that many of the things Jesus did were to show that he was foretold by the old testament, and Noah was one of the main figures he mirrored.. finding out that one of the main Noah stories was copied from a story thousands of years older than the Old Testament and from a completely different religion was something I couldn’t recover from. after I got that chunk in the armor of my faith the veil fell and I just kind of went the same route as Bart, where I couldn’t see a truly good god allowing the world to be as it is.. but the revelation of the flawed nature of the roots of Christianity was definitely what allowed me to open my eyes.
I can't tell you how much I live for these episodes to drop. Love every single one - love all of the knowledge Bart and Megan (and guests) share with us. Some of the best of RUclips!
His peers saying how poorly his book would do reminds me of how out of touch the religious academia is when it comes to peoples "real" spiritual wants and needs. For me Misquoting Jesus was like watching the Matrix for the first time.. just blew my mind. Left the religious cult I was in and started a journey reclaiming lost time and truth in the world. 🤣 True story....
"Knowledge can change faith." Yes, and it should change faith. What we believe should always be subject to change based on new discoveries and new evidence.
Bart Ehrman really subsribes to H.L.Mencken's quote: "We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart."
Always great episodes, and as a lay person I appreciate this one. Always look forward to my Bart & Megan "fix" for the week. And thanks for answering my question!
I absolutely love all of the scholarship and information you present in these podcasts, but I think the most impacting thing that I will take away from this particular episode is Bart saying "Scholars know all this shit- um.. stuff" 😂
Thank you ver much Bart. I have gained so much from your knowledge and expertise. You’ve really opened my eyes and how to understand the world of biblical scholarship. I have bought many of your books. I have so much enjoyed reading them and have watched many of your lectures and debates. You rock Bart. Thank you very much. From the UK 🇬🇧
I think there's something beautiful about a documentary about Jesus/the gospels containing people directly disagreeing with each other and the contradiction is just glossed over and never acknowledged.
Even when I see the title of a new podcast here and don’t really feel interested in the particular topic, I watch it anyway and find out all sorts of stuff that I’m glad to know afterwards.
The greatest challenge of this world is knowing enough about a subject to think you are right, but not knowing enough about the subject to know you are wrong…
Merci pour cette interview Mme Lewis. Une petite question : vers 11:51, le Pr Ehrman évoque une œuvre de Reimarus éditée par Leibniz, sa langue aurait-elle fourché ? Je suppose qu'il voulait parler de Lessing, n'est-ce pas ?
In modern writing, there's the "rule of three" - make a point, elaborate on it, finish it with a "punch line". Sounds like the gospel writers had similar rules when telling stories.
To me, the New Testament sounds unbearably formulaic. I can't see it as great literature no matter how hard I try. For some reason, Jesus has really annoyed me ever since I was a preschooler. Lol
hi Megan - there is a part of this episode (around minute 40) where you say "Editor please put a transition here" - I think that was supposed to be cut out!
@@ramieal-hazar2438 around 15:00 they discuss whether Jesus was poor or not, essentially. To be fair, the narrator says that scholars do not agree. I hadn't noticed that before.
Actually I started Greek on Duolingo so I could read the scholarship about the New Testament, since the scholars love to just throw in Greek without translations. :)
Yonatan Adler's recent book, The Origins of Judaism, presents archeological and text evidence that, among the general Jewish population, observance of Torah commandments, like eating only fish with scales and fins, dates only from the first century BCE. Not that long before Jesus. The Hasmoneans forced compliance on at least some groups. I wonder if that matters for understanding Jesus, his preaching, and the stories about him.
It's a classic, for sure. I must say that I've actually come to prefer 'Godspell', which is gentler and much less angsty in spirit, but Andrew Lloyd Webber is undeniably a master crafter of memorable music.
I like your podcast; but sometimes I wish it didn't feel so sychophantic. While there's already a very high 'me Bart' component in a continuous sales-oriented ploy sort of way to the site, it'd be nice if you pared down the self-centredness incorporated into the 'show'. Other than that, I really like your presentations!
Dr. Bart Ehrman - Please have a debate with Dr. Brant Pitre on your claims and make it public. I see you debate everyone but not good religious scholars. Extend an invitation to him, he will not pass it down.
I imagine that is a fascinating topic. For example there are over 600 Commandments with dozens requiring Capital Punishment. However, in the Hebrew Bible there is no reference to any cases where Capital Punishment was applied. I had read Jewish scholars who assert that in what is term late 2nd Temple period there records indicate next no uses of Capital Punishment by Hebrew authorities for any reason: and following the Destruction of the Temple such was prohibited - rather considered a matter for secular authorities. This posses interesting contention that the idea Hebrew authorities would want to execute anyone for Religious offenses as the Gospels suggest for Jesus is highly unlikely. Prof. E. does argue that any offence would have been Sedition toward Roman authorities. This has later anti-Jewish ideology look more like the basis of the Gospels of Luke and John.
The thing that is intersting is that did the prophets in Old testament really cared about these ritual laws? Say for example Sacrfices. Does God want it or not. Does God desires mercy or Sacrfice?(Hosea) Does God really requires Rituals or Morals?(Micah) It's interesting to talk about
He is Bible scholar not a Historian. He works in a school of Bible studies. He writes on Bible studies. His academic credentials are in Biblical studies. Oh for sure he knows a lot about the history of the writing of the NT. In that he is eminent scholar. He has superior credentials in literally studies too. His writing on such is wonderful and informative. However, no Historian agrees with him with his assertion about history of the Classic near eastern World. This is just not his field.
@@adeelio83 I have learnt much from Prof E. books. He is well deserving of public allocates. It is just that he is intolerant of Historians who dare question his Bible study views. Eg, like many Bible scholar he excepts the Q hypothesis. Whereas as Historians hold this is a supposition based on textual analysis and there are other plausible explanations for how the stories in NT emerged. Equally, Professor E. did some seminal work of the Oral history hypothesis which is still dominant amongst Bible scholars. Professor E. contented this was unlikely as there is no case of a complex story being transmitted by such a means (why he is adamant there are proto- gospels). He is in the minority of the Oral history hypothesis with Bible scholars but Historians seem to except the likelihood of such. This shows how complex such things can be. My beef is Prof E. almost never says we can't actually know. He seems very black and white.
I have seen that too@@xunqianbaidu6917although as we can see in this podcast; on pivotal issues, Prof E. is quite adamant. Eg, he is adamant that Q and other proto-gospels existed. Now they may have, but this cannot be certain. I imagine that this is an ideological attitude as without Q or some link from story to gospels the historical argument is weaken - this is certainly something Prof E asserts as matter of Truth.
To me, the New Testament sounds unbearably formulaic. I can't see it as great literature no matter how hard I try. For some reason, Jesus has really annoyed me ever since I was a preschooler. Lol
"New Testament sounds unbearably formulaic" - what do you mean by "sounds"? Have you only listened to lectures/sermons about it, or have you read any of the 27 books of the NT? One problem with reading any of the 27 books is that they come bundled in a compilation (NT) and nearly all translations are formatted more for quoting or reciting (such as in a sermon) or citation, rather than formatted for reading like a book.
@@TheDanEdwards"Sounds like" can mean "appears to be". Example: if I send someone a text and their reply is "You sound confused", they are saying I seem to be confused. In an informal setting such as RUclips comments it fine to use words in a non-literal way.
@@TheDanEdwards I was actually forced to both read & listen to the Gospels & the rest of the NT several times. Yes, even the Book of Revelation. They used to make kids do that in certain Catholic high schools in my country.
Can u ask megan 2 questions? First if this was 2000bce which Sumerian God would she worship? And ask her if she believes in annuaki? Maybe she is a annuaki like jesus
I like Bart’s reaction to Biblical documentaries that are a mishmash of contradicting talking heads punctuated by a commentary that leaves an incoherent and frustrating vagueness.
Have a discussion with CHATgbt about the Bible. It'll have you rolling with laughter if it doesn't refuse to discuss its algorithm defines a sensitive topic.
@@russellmiles2861it’s also important to look at the politics, race, and sexual orientation of the guy who coded it. That will tell you volumes about how reliable it should be considered.
I wholeheartedly agree: below is a link to Tim Minchin's rendition of Heaven on My Mind that I much like. I do have questions though: Id consider this a popular Musical. I would think this or Godspell Christian musicals. They weren't composed by Christians and I imagined practicing Christians would be troubled if folk took these a Good news. What are your thoughts?
@@russellmiles2861 Both *Jesus Christ Superstar* and *Godspell* are classic works of musical theatre, and though neither was written from a Christian point of view, both have to some extent been embraced by Christians, and re-purposed as devotional works. Neither work includes a resurrection, but a lot of Christians aren't fazed by this. Especially at the amateur level, they often simply tack a resurrection scene onto the end. In my opinion, though, *Jesus Christ Superstar* is essentially an agnostic musical, written from the point of view of two cheeky British schoolboys (Webber and Rice were barely out of their teens when they wrote it). The title song states explicitly the question asked implicitly by the whole show: Jesus Christ, who are you? What have you sacrificed? Do you think you're what they say you are? *Godspell,* on the other hand, is a Jewish view of Jesus, presenting him as a good rabbi, and emphasizing his teachings, while minimizing the historical context. An interesting thing about *Jesus Christ Superstar,* though. When the single of the title song from the original 1970 concept album was released, it's flipside was the orchestral track, "John 19:41," a mournful reprise of the tune to "Gethsemane (I Only Want to Say)," which plays after the Crucifixion scene, ending the show. On the single, however, it is followed immediately by a brief piece of psychadelic music. I suspect that this is a hint of what the music for the Resurrection might have been like, if one had been included.
I think the most confusing thing to me about people who believe or care about this book and yes I get it I was raised catholic. I to was once afraid of death. I to believe there is a creator (in the native American sense), but I could never compare the creator to these gods. The gods do not measure up and I could list the may ways. I understand tradition in ones community, homes, families and friends. However, why do people believe it beyond that?, Why do people sacrifice their lives to and for it. Why do they reject actual proof that what they believe, what they are willing to kill or die for is before them, they refuse the irrefutable facts that what they believe is not true? Why? Would it be to much for them to realize things told to them are not true? I don't understand and I was the guy who gave so much of my life chasing this christian god's "truth"trying to make my self not believe my lying eyes, but the more I searched and learned well it was all made up., I'm terminally ill now and I'm glad I no longer chase that well of lies. I see religion as an obis in my opinion and it's one of the worst kind, because when you stare into it it stares back and sucks out goodness in most people who are deeply involved in it. To me a very good example is religion's own historical proof of the evil that comes from it and who profits from it. Even today the fanatics cry out for flesh for their fantasies in so many horrible ways. Did you know there are sects of Christianity that still want to burn women alive like what was done in this my country US in Salem Mass.? For the same reasons? Do you know if those people were to luck into power they will give their people what they want to sustain power? Flirting with fascism with your religion mixed in is toxic as proven by history. Religion is for cave dwellers, opportunist and monsters in my opinion.
@@ramieal-hazar2438 Exactly and what a conversation that will be. Could go on for thousands of years. Or all I'll here is "As it is written: 'There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands; there is no one who seeks God." Then I'll say exactly and it will either pull the trap-door lever to "hell" or say "you may pass or I think no more about anything or I go where I went the last time I temporally expired and that is fine with me.
Just 5 days back, an entire village of chrsitians, was burnt by muslim fundamentalists in a place called jaranwala in pakistan. I love these shows but so much critical analyses of chrsitianity and no analyses of islam makes a lot of people feel that only christians are fundamentalists. Once in a while please do mention that islamic fundamentalists are as dangerous as christian fundamentalists.
For every Christian that is killed by Muslims, how many Muslims do you think that Muslims kill? For every church bombed, how many mosques? Muslim fundamentalist are indeed dangerous, perhaps even more dangerous, but they're a danger mostly to other Muslims. The same can be said about Christians. For every pogrom and every crusade, how many wars were there between Protestants and Catholics, Catholics and Albigensians etc. etc.
@@edwinlucianofrias16436:54 You know, when Islam comes to have the upper hand in the western countries, and they start applying sharia law throughout in the west, killing and persecuting non-believers when we become minority, you're not going to say they're only dangerous among other Muslims. You are very oblivious, clueless, and doesn't know what you are saying.
I agree that there must be awareness in this religion. Many do not know the fundamentals of Islam, and the tactics they use to conquer countries, and then when that country is weak they can get into attack mode to non-believers, and goodbye beautiful country. It will only happen if Islam gets many converts, and they begin to be majority, and good bye country
@@JeannieSoko This video is about NT scholarship, so ranting on and on about Islam is really a tangent. Your hatred of Muslims is noted. Fine. But in the last 1600 years the role of Christianity in horrors around this planet is also noted. And again, this video is about NT scholarship.
He's not a Quran scholar. That would look like he's just decided to start talking about things other religions do on his channel about a different area of expertise. (This is a way of saying you are being weird at best)
The New Testament is a legal instrument indicating that someone left a propriety behind with instructions as how to run that property. For the Old Testament, Canaan was the property given to the Children of Israel through Moses; for the New, the Roman Empire was the property whose heirs Paul was appointed by God to train and this included the lowly, the slaves, the poor, the orphans and widows, etc... Another valid LEGAL instrument to be used outside the Roman Empire was the New Covenant. A Covenant is a Pact between God and any nation willing to RATIFY the Law of Moses as amended by the Messiah(Christ) as it is written: " I will send them the Messiah, i.e. Christ, a Prophet(Messenger) like you Moses, Him they must listen... " Deut. 18:15-19... For Matthew, a Prophet like Moses as the Messiah(Christ) was supposed to be must put in a place a Covenant like the one Moses mediated. Jesus having set in motion another Covenant in the night of the Jewish Passover, then Jesus is the Messiah foretold by Moses. Matthew made Jesus sojourned in Egypt as Moses did. JESUS IS THE CHRIST(Messiah) FORETOLD IN THE TORAH OF MOSES. What is needed to prove that are testimonials and not another set of inspired Scriptures... The Westerners' scholarship on this issue missed some major points !
I wonder if Bart Ehrman has ever read an uncensored Bible? Bart does your Bible say, in Genesis 1, "In the beginning God (El/Theos/Deus/etc) created heaven and earth" or does it say "In the beginning Elohim created heaven and earth"? If it says God then I'm sorry but you're reading censored nonsense. Now that you're an atheist will you use the NOG translation? It's kinda nice reading the Bible without all the contradictions. Heck, most people think "the Bible itself" is the Word of God hahaha. Spoiler Alert ⚠: Elohim from Genesis 1 is the Word of God (God's Son). The heresy of two powers in heaven was argued for by people with censored Bibles. Dumb. Yahweh Elohim from Genesis 2 is the false Elohim. Not El. Nobody said anything about El. The Bible introduces Yahweh in Genesis 2 as an Elohim, not El haha.
Genesis 2 Names of God Bible 2 Heaven and earth and everything in them were finished. 2 By the seventh day ELOHIM had finished the work he had been doing. On the seventh day he stopped the work he had been doing. 3 Then ELOHIM blessed the seventh day and set it apart as holy, because on that day he stopped all his work of creation. The Creation of Man and Woman 4 This is the account of heaven and earth when they were created, at the time when YAHWEH ELOHIM made earth and heaven.
"Deus" means "God", "Dea" means "Goddess", and "Dei" could either mean "gods" (plural) or "God's" (possessive) based on context. The Hebrew counterparts to the Latin above are El, Elah and Elohim. The Elohist uses the possessive context for Elohim (except when referencing the false Elohim). The Yahwist, Priestly and Deuteronomist use the plural context for Elohim (except when referencing the true Elohim).
I'm the Messiah, I can clear a few things up for you. Jehovah is God, but the Torah is not the word of God. It opens with a mistake, creating the earth before the stars and sun, which is understandable. But it's completely impossible for God to rest, even for a nanosecond. God's mind and will are inextricably intertwined with the creation, you can't take a single breath without God's help. Anyone who had the slightest knowledge of God would know that. Likewise, there was a Fall of the angels, but no original sin, there was never any chance of avoiding the consequences of the Satanic Rebellion. The whole point of this timeline was to deal with the consequences. Monotheism originates with Akhenaten, we can surmise this because of the sheer implausibility of imposing monotheism on all these ancient priesthoods in Egypt. Circumcision comes from Egypt. Monotheism failed after twenty years or so, they reverted to polytheism but a certain segment of the population were persuaded by the idea of monotheism, and they left Egypt in an exodus of sorts. Nonetheless, God has such control that the prophets are often uncannily accurate, as in Jeremiah 11:9 and Daniel 9:11-12 referring to September 11th.
Sar my name is Brijesh I am from India I go to going to be debate by the Christianity which are taking place in my town I face some difficult To face the knowledge of Bible please I want to request you to take the some book from me
I totally understand why you would be surprised that a person would abandon their faith after having the illusion of inerrancy shattered. But some of us were weaned on inerrancy. And we discovered that our faith shattered right along with it.
I too was raised to believe in inerrancy but have very much kept my faith after studying from Bart ❤ I think it’s really sad that so many churches teach inerrancy, it’s so short sighted and damaging.
John Dominic Crossan has a quote that goes something like “were the ancients so dumb as to take the scriptures entirely literally or are we so dumb that we take as literally what the ancients meant symbolically. My hunch is it’s the latter”
I think the bible is a blend of symbolic/metaphorical truths and literal ones.
@@ramieal-hazar2438 I suspect that there is more to it that has to do with individual traits and tendencies. I was always looking around in church wondering what all the emotionality was about. Not that I never felt any of it. I definitely did. But it seemed to be more about emotional release for some. I didn’t have the same kind of need for it that others seemed to.
Eventually it just all started to seem like a performance. Losing faith was a gradual process. Death by 1000 cuts. Inerrancy being shattered was just one of the deep cuts.
That's too bad. The insistence on literalism and inerrancy has probably done more to drive people away than anything else. I remember hearing as a little kid "the Bible is TRUTH, but its not necessarily TRUE." Growing up with that idea and having it in the back of your head makes for an easier time of it when you run into things like modern science, contradictions within the text, questions of authorship and just plain ugliness. You can just set all that aside, read the text figuratively and ask "what are these guys trying to tell people and what can I get out of it?"
@@byrondickens that was where I ended up. Seeing the very human wisdom that was there and appreciating it for what it actually is. I’ve studied the Bible way more as an atheist than I ever did as a Christian. It’s undeniable that it has shaped Western societies in countless ways. And there is a lot of human truth in it. Not much divine that I can ascertain though.
When I was a Christian i went to a few churches that stated the bible as the literal word of god, so in every way flawless.. I never could accept something created by humans could be inerrant, the church would have had to convince me that every writers were some extension of god for me to accept that. What ended up being the final straw for me was finding out about the ancient Mesopotamian flood story. My Christian understanding was that many of the things Jesus did were to show that he was foretold by the old testament, and Noah was one of the main figures he mirrored.. finding out that one of the main Noah stories was copied from a story thousands of years older than the Old Testament and from a completely different religion was something I couldn’t recover from. after I got that chunk in the armor of my faith the veil fell and I just kind of went the same route as Bart, where I couldn’t see a truly good god allowing the world to be as it is.. but the revelation of the flawed nature of the roots of Christianity was definitely what allowed me to open my eyes.
I've learned from experience never to ask a scholar "is it possible that...?" because they will always say, "yeah, it's _possible"_.
It's just scratching the surface of what tremendous job and thought stand behind Bart's laid-back manner of presentation🙂
This world is just so much better for this. thank you, both!
I can't tell you how much I live for these episodes to drop. Love every single one - love all of the knowledge Bart and Megan (and guests) share with us. Some of the best of RUclips!
😊😊 15:40 15:40 😊😊😊😊😊
😊😊😊😊😊😊😊
16:35
😊
I mean whatever he says has been already refuted by Catholic Scholars. So I don’t get a support for him.
His peers saying how poorly his book would do reminds me of how out of touch the religious academia is when it comes to peoples "real" spiritual wants and needs. For me Misquoting Jesus was like watching the Matrix for the first time.. just blew my mind. Left the religious cult I was in and started a journey reclaiming lost time and truth in the world. 🤣 True story....
How convenient
@@ramieal-hazar2438Yes, how convenient that learning about scriptures would imbue you with criticism, you clown.
"Knowledge can change faith." Yes, and it should change faith. What we believe should always be subject to change based on new discoveries and new evidence.
Love this show so much
Me too. I anticipate every episode and catch it within an hour of release.
I couldn't live without it.
I’ve learned so much from Bart and his guests. Thank you for everything you do! Greetings from Puerto Rico 🎉
Epa Borica! Guess I'm not the only one listening to this awesome podcast in our little island. Saludos!
Bart Ehrman really subsribes to H.L.Mencken's quote: "We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart."
Starts at 4:17.
I watch this every week. Keep them coming.
Always great episodes, and as a lay person I appreciate this one. Always look forward to my Bart & Megan "fix" for the week. And thanks for answering my question!
Who is the 1770's scholar he mentioned, he did speak the mans name clearly..
A small correction: after Reimarus' death it was Lessing, not Leibniz, who published his work :)
I absolutely love all of the scholarship and information you present in these podcasts, but I think the most impacting thing that I will take away from this particular episode is Bart saying "Scholars know all this shit- um.. stuff" 😂
that intro music is fire
Fundamentalist Christian apologists hate Bart.
He exposese them.
I doubt they care: they remain highly successful business. I suspect having a Bart, Catholics, Methodist and Jews is useful for their self-promotion.
Thank you ver much Bart. I have gained so much from your knowledge and expertise. You’ve really opened my eyes and how to understand the world of biblical scholarship. I have bought many of your books. I have so much enjoyed reading them and have watched many of your lectures and debates. You rock Bart. Thank you very much.
From the UK 🇬🇧
I think there's something beautiful about a documentary about Jesus/the gospels containing people directly disagreeing with each other and the contradiction is just glossed over and never acknowledged.
Even when I see the title of a new podcast here and don’t really feel interested in the particular topic, I watch it anyway and find out all sorts of stuff that I’m glad to know afterwards.
once one digs into what we actually know and don't know you see the problems with most bible centric minds...
The greatest challenge of this world is knowing enough about a subject to think you are right, but not knowing enough about the subject to know you are wrong…
The most deluded are those who think they know absolutely which is which all the time lol
Merci pour cette interview Mme Lewis. Une petite question : vers 11:51, le Pr Ehrman évoque une œuvre de Reimarus éditée par Leibniz, sa langue aurait-elle fourché ? Je suppose qu'il voulait parler de Lessing, n'est-ce pas ?
Great show! But I remain concerned about the choice of glasses 🙂
She just follows a simple rule: Ask your husband for advice and do the opposite.
@@MatthewQuigley it’s what feminists typically do. Surprised she’s not half naked to “stick it to the man”
@MatthewQuigley -- Why did you imagine a husband is involved at all?
@@mojoman2001 Don’t you know who her husband is?
@@mojoman2001 She has spoken at length during previous episodes about her husband.
Great show! 😊👍
In modern writing, there's the "rule of three" - make a point, elaborate on it, finish it with a "punch line". Sounds like the gospel writers had similar rules when telling stories.
To me, the New Testament sounds unbearably formulaic. I can't see it as great literature no matter how hard I try. For some reason, Jesus has really annoyed me ever since I was a preschooler. Lol
hi Megan - there is a part of this episode (around minute 40) where you say "Editor please put a transition here" - I think that was supposed to be cut out!
Thank you. I also noticed in that Frontline documentary that the scholars contradict one another
Can you think of any examples from the documentary of this? I would be curious. It was quite interesting to watch.
@@ramieal-hazar2438 now I gotta watch again! (I don't mind)
@@ramieal-hazar2438 around 15:00 they discuss whether Jesus was poor or not, essentially. To be fair, the narrator says that scholars do not agree. I hadn't noticed that before.
Actually I started Greek on Duolingo so I could read the scholarship about the New Testament, since the scholars love to just throw in Greek without translations. :)
Konie Greek?
I’m trying to learn some ancient greek with Karl Ruck, “Ancient Greek, A new approach. 2nd ed.” It is difficult because nobody cares in Seattle.
I tried reading it but it was all greek to me
@@jillengland3277How far through are you?
@@gpn962 First chapter still. Practicing alphabet letters. Α-Ω α-ω 😁
I can't help but notice that a large number of names that come up are either German people or people with German names.
The Protestant Reformation played a key role in the rise of critical analysis of the Bible.
Don't mention the war, I mentioned it once but I think I got away with it.
Much obliged for this video.
great again! thanks
How cool are Megan's glasses...
Yonatan Adler's recent book, The Origins of Judaism, presents archeological and text evidence that, among the general Jewish population, observance of Torah commandments, like eating only fish with scales and fins, dates only from the first century BCE. Not that long before Jesus. The Hasmoneans forced compliance on at least some groups. I wonder if that matters for understanding Jesus, his preaching, and the stories about him.
sweet glasses Megan!
Are you ok Bart? What happened at UNC Chapel Hill?
I just came on here to ask about Bart also. Hope all is well.
Shooting was in a Science lab building. He should be ok, but I still worry about the situation as a whole.
I style love Gospel music. And masses and requiems.
The inerrancy of scripture. Seems like a fuzzy concept. Kind of like quantum mechanics, the closer I look the less I know.
Thank you.
Would love to see you get Dan McClellan on your podcast
I liked this video before, but I smashed the Like button when Bart said he loves Jesus Christ Superstar. Such a great soundtrack
I listen every week, and the clip never disappoints.
Can we assume by the fact that scribes were making deliberate changes that they didn't see the scriptures as inerrant?
Love Jesus Christ Superstar.
It's a classic, for sure. I must say that I've actually come to prefer 'Godspell', which is gentler and much less angsty in spirit, but Andrew Lloyd Webber is undeniably a master crafter of memorable music.
The glasses game is so strong, every time.
I like your podcast; but sometimes I wish it didn't feel so sychophantic. While there's already a very high 'me Bart' component in a continuous sales-oriented ploy sort of way to the site, it'd be nice if you pared down the self-centredness incorporated into the 'show'. Other than that, I really like your presentations!
Bart, you say "German philosopher Leibniz," but I think you mean Lessing?
Spinoza was doing analysis of biblical documents in the 17th century. Shouldn’t he be considered one of the originators of biblical scholarship?
A Jew? 😂 no thanks.
@@ramieal-hazar2438 No! Don't listen to the people who wrote the stuff in the first place!
@@byrondickens there’s a reason why kosher politics is waning in it’s influence. Your problem isn’t the bible my friend.
Dr. Bart Ehrman - Please have a debate with Dr. Brant Pitre on your claims and make it public. I see you debate everyone but not good religious scholars. Extend an invitation to him, he will not pass it down.
Where can I find Reimarus' book?! Lol I can only see a 30 page English translation on good reads
Another lovely episode.
There's no smile on her Christian faith😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 but Bart and I are enjoying it to the max
How does a faith smile?
Do you believe she’s actually Christian? I certainly don’t think she is.
I wish you would talk about Christianity, Jesus and the Jewish law
Pretty sure he covers that somewhere!
I imagine that is a fascinating topic. For example there are over 600 Commandments with dozens requiring Capital Punishment. However, in the Hebrew Bible there is no reference to any cases where Capital Punishment was applied. I had read Jewish scholars who assert that in what is term late 2nd Temple period there records indicate next no uses of Capital Punishment by Hebrew authorities for any reason: and following the Destruction of the Temple such was prohibited - rather considered a matter for secular authorities.
This posses interesting contention that the idea Hebrew authorities would want to execute anyone for Religious offenses as the Gospels suggest for Jesus is highly unlikely. Prof. E. does argue that any offence would have been Sedition toward Roman authorities.
This has later anti-Jewish ideology look more like the basis of the Gospels of Luke and John.
The thing that is intersting is that did the prophets in Old testament really cared about these ritual laws? Say for example Sacrfices. Does God want it or not. Does God desires mercy or Sacrfice?(Hosea) Does God really requires Rituals or Morals?(Micah)
It's interesting to talk about
@@swindswinds3387 ask the folk at Sodom I guess
Good point because this small group in the Mediterranean called Jews have destroyed our ancient ways😢😢😢
Bart is an amazing historian.
He is Bible scholar not a Historian. He works in a school of Bible studies. He writes on Bible studies. His academic credentials are in Biblical studies. Oh for sure he knows a lot about the history of the writing of the NT. In that he is eminent scholar. He has superior credentials in literally studies too. His writing on such is wonderful and informative.
However, no Historian agrees with him with his assertion about history of the Classic near eastern World. This is just not his field.
@russellmiles2861 Okay. Great thanks.
@@adeelio83 I have learnt much from Prof E. books. He is well deserving of public allocates. It is just that he is intolerant of Historians who dare question his Bible study views. Eg, like many Bible scholar he excepts the Q hypothesis. Whereas as Historians hold this is a supposition based on textual analysis and there are other plausible explanations for how the stories in NT emerged. Equally, Professor E. did some seminal work of the Oral history hypothesis which is still dominant amongst Bible scholars. Professor E. contented this was unlikely as there is no case of a complex story being transmitted by such a means (why he is adamant there are proto- gospels). He is in the minority of the Oral history hypothesis with Bible scholars but Historians seem to except the likelihood of such. This shows how complex such things can be. My beef is Prof E. almost never says we can't actually know. He seems very black and white.
But sadly he doesn't have the balls to say Christians are a bunch of idiots
I have seen that too@@xunqianbaidu6917although as we can see in this podcast; on pivotal issues, Prof E. is quite adamant. Eg, he is adamant that Q and other proto-gospels existed. Now they may have, but this cannot be certain. I imagine that this is an ideological attitude as without Q or some link from story to gospels the historical argument is weaken - this is certainly something Prof E asserts as matter of Truth.
Does one need to have Zoom or something to attend the upcoming conference?
To me, the New Testament sounds unbearably formulaic. I can't see it as great literature no matter how hard I try. For some reason, Jesus has really annoyed me ever since I was a preschooler. Lol
"New Testament sounds unbearably formulaic" - what do you mean by "sounds"? Have you only listened to lectures/sermons about it, or have you read any of the 27 books of the NT? One problem with reading any of the 27 books is that they come bundled in a compilation (NT) and nearly all translations are formatted more for quoting or reciting (such as in a sermon) or citation, rather than formatted for reading like a book.
@@TheDanEdwards"Sounds like" can mean "appears to be". Example: if I send someone a text and their reply is "You sound confused", they are saying I seem to be confused. In an informal setting such as RUclips comments it fine to use words in a non-literal way.
@@TheDanEdwards I was actually forced to both read & listen to the Gospels & the rest of the NT several times. Yes, even the Book of Revelation. They used to make kids do that in certain Catholic high schools in my country.
Can u ask megan 2 questions? First if this was 2000bce which Sumerian God would she worship? And ask her if she believes in annuaki? Maybe she is a annuaki like jesus
I think she’s an active christian.
I like Bart’s reaction to Biblical documentaries that are a mishmash of contradicting talking heads punctuated by a commentary that leaves an incoherent and frustrating vagueness.
Just sitting and watching everybody arguing about the Q gospel/ the source .. till they come up with a discovery that Gospel of Barnabas was the one 🙂
Bart is the Man!
Fascinating…I wonder if AI will be used to study the text of the Bible.
Episode 472 of naked bible podcast already has !
@@johnstewart3244 I will check that out. Thx
Have a discussion with CHATgbt about the Bible. It'll have you rolling with laughter if it doesn't refuse to discuss its algorithm defines a sensitive topic.
@@russellmiles2861it’s also important to look at the politics, race, and sexual orientation of the guy who coded it. That will tell you volumes about how reliable it should be considered.
Jesus Christ Superstar is still amazing after all these years!
I wholeheartedly agree: below is a link to Tim Minchin's rendition of Heaven on My Mind that I much like.
I do have questions though: Id consider this a popular Musical. I would think this or Godspell Christian musicals. They weren't composed by Christians and I imagined practicing Christians would be troubled if folk took these a Good news.
What are your thoughts?
@@russellmiles2861 Both *Jesus Christ Superstar* and *Godspell* are classic works of musical theatre, and though neither was written from a Christian point of view, both have to some extent been embraced by Christians, and re-purposed as devotional works. Neither work includes a resurrection, but a lot of Christians aren't fazed by this. Especially at the amateur level, they often simply tack a resurrection scene onto the end. In my opinion, though, *Jesus Christ Superstar* is essentially an agnostic musical, written from the point of view of two cheeky British schoolboys (Webber and Rice were barely out of their teens when they wrote it). The title song states explicitly the question asked implicitly by the whole show: Jesus Christ, who are you? What have you sacrificed? Do you think you're what they say you are? *Godspell,* on the other hand, is a Jewish view of Jesus, presenting him as a good rabbi, and emphasizing his teachings, while minimizing the historical context.
An interesting thing about *Jesus Christ Superstar,* though. When the single of the title song from the original 1970 concept album was released, it's flipside was the orchestral track, "John 19:41," a mournful reprise of the tune to "Gethsemane (I Only Want to Say)," which plays after the Crucifixion scene, ending the show. On the single, however, it is followed immediately by a brief piece of psychadelic music. I suspect that this is a hint of what the music for the Resurrection might have been like, if one had been included.
5:09
Christ, Christianity, conceived in sin. Deut. 22, The 10 Commandments.
So sorry Bart about your faculty member.
I think the most confusing thing to me about people who believe or care about this book and yes I get it I was raised catholic. I to was once afraid of death. I to believe there is a creator (in the native American sense), but I could never compare the creator to these gods. The gods do not measure up and I could list the may ways. I understand tradition in ones community, homes, families and friends. However, why do people believe it beyond that?, Why do people sacrifice their lives to and for it. Why do they reject actual proof that what they believe, what they are willing to kill or die for is before them, they refuse the irrefutable facts that what they believe is not true? Why? Would it be to much for them to realize things told to them are not true? I don't understand and I was the guy who gave so much of my life chasing this christian god's "truth"trying to make my self not believe my lying eyes, but the more I searched and learned well it was all made up.,
I'm terminally ill now and I'm glad I no longer chase that well of lies. I see religion as an obis in my opinion and it's one of the worst kind, because when you stare into it it stares back and sucks out goodness in most people who are deeply involved in it. To me a very good example is religion's own historical proof of the evil that comes from it and who profits from it. Even today the fanatics cry out for flesh for their fantasies in so many horrible ways. Did you know there are sects of Christianity that still want to burn women alive like what was done in this my country US in Salem Mass.? For the same reasons? Do you know if those people were to luck into power they will give their people what they want to sustain power? Flirting with fascism with your religion mixed in is toxic as proven by history. Religion is for cave dwellers, opportunist and monsters in my opinion.
I guess you will find out when you die whether you are right or not.
@@ramieal-hazar2438 Exactly and what a conversation that will be. Could go on for thousands of years. Or all I'll here is "As it is written: 'There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands; there is no one who seeks God."
Then I'll say exactly and it will either pull the trap-door lever to "hell" or say "you may pass or I think no more about anything or I go where I went the last time I temporally expired and that is fine with me.
I swear this lady has different glasses and hair in every episode.
What do you expect from a confused Christian😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Be wise she’s a typical liberal who insists their attention seeking behaviour is just them be authentically “individual”
I wish you would cut out the warm up chit chat at the beginning.
Just 5 days back, an entire village of chrsitians, was burnt by muslim fundamentalists in a place called jaranwala in pakistan. I love these shows but so much critical analyses of chrsitianity and no analyses of islam makes a lot of people feel that only christians are fundamentalists. Once in a while please do mention that islamic fundamentalists are as dangerous as christian fundamentalists.
For every Christian that is killed by Muslims, how many Muslims do you think that Muslims kill? For every church bombed, how many mosques? Muslim fundamentalist are indeed dangerous, perhaps even more dangerous, but they're a danger mostly to other Muslims.
The same can be said about Christians. For every pogrom and every crusade, how many wars were there between Protestants and Catholics, Catholics and Albigensians etc. etc.
@@edwinlucianofrias16436:54 You know, when Islam comes to have the upper hand in the western countries, and they start applying sharia law throughout in the west, killing and persecuting non-believers when we become minority, you're not going to say they're only dangerous among other Muslims. You are very oblivious, clueless, and doesn't know what you are saying.
I agree that there must be awareness in this religion. Many do not know the fundamentals of Islam, and the tactics they use to conquer countries, and then when that country is weak they can get into attack mode to non-believers, and goodbye beautiful country. It will only happen if Islam gets many converts, and they begin to be majority, and good bye country
@@JeannieSoko This video is about NT scholarship, so ranting on and on about Islam is really a tangent. Your hatred of Muslims is noted. Fine. But in the last 1600 years the role of Christianity in horrors around this planet is also noted. And again, this video is about NT scholarship.
He's not a Quran scholar. That would look like he's just decided to start talking about things other religions do on his channel about a different area of expertise.
(This is a way of saying you are being weird at best)
The New Testament is a legal instrument indicating that someone left a propriety behind with instructions as how to run that property. For the Old Testament, Canaan was the property given to the Children of Israel through Moses; for the New, the Roman Empire was the property whose heirs Paul was appointed by God to train and this included the lowly, the slaves, the poor, the orphans and widows, etc... Another valid LEGAL instrument to be used outside the Roman Empire was the New Covenant.
A Covenant is a Pact between God and any nation willing to RATIFY the Law of Moses as amended by the Messiah(Christ) as it is written: " I will send them the Messiah, i.e. Christ, a Prophet(Messenger) like you Moses, Him they must listen... " Deut. 18:15-19...
For Matthew, a Prophet like Moses as the Messiah(Christ) was supposed to be must put in a place a Covenant like the one Moses mediated. Jesus having set in motion another Covenant in the night of the Jewish Passover, then Jesus is the Messiah foretold by Moses. Matthew made Jesus sojourned in Egypt as Moses did. JESUS IS THE CHRIST(Messiah)
FORETOLD IN THE TORAH OF MOSES. What is needed to prove that are testimonials and not another set of inspired Scriptures...
The Westerners' scholarship on this issue missed some major points !
Bart Ehrman inspired me to become a Muslim. Inshallahlahlalhahllalha
I love the look on her face when Bart explains the truth about religious vomit and I thought tax law confuses people😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
I wonder if Bart Ehrman has ever read an uncensored Bible?
Bart does your Bible say, in Genesis 1, "In the beginning God (El/Theos/Deus/etc) created heaven and earth"
or does it say "In the beginning Elohim created heaven and earth"?
If it says God then I'm sorry but you're reading censored nonsense.
Now that you're an atheist will you use the NOG translation? It's kinda nice reading the Bible without all the contradictions.
Heck, most people think "the Bible itself" is the Word of God hahaha. Spoiler Alert ⚠: Elohim from Genesis 1 is the Word of God (God's Son).
The heresy of two powers in heaven was argued for by people with censored Bibles. Dumb.
Yahweh Elohim from Genesis 2 is the false Elohim. Not El. Nobody said anything about El. The Bible introduces Yahweh in Genesis 2 as an Elohim, not El haha.
Genesis 2
Names of God Bible
2 Heaven and earth and everything in them were finished. 2 By the seventh day ELOHIM had finished the work he had been doing. On the seventh day he stopped the work he had been doing. 3 Then ELOHIM blessed the seventh day and set it apart as holy, because on that day he stopped all his work of creation.
The Creation of Man and Woman
4 This is the account of heaven and earth when they were created, at the time when YAHWEH ELOHIM made earth and heaven.
"Deus" means "God", "Dea" means "Goddess", and "Dei" could either mean "gods" (plural) or "God's" (possessive) based on context.
The Hebrew counterparts to the Latin above are El, Elah and Elohim.
The Elohist uses the possessive context for Elohim (except when referencing the false Elohim).
The Yahwist, Priestly and Deuteronomist use the plural context for Elohim (except when referencing the true Elohim).
*"I wonder if Bart ever read an uncensored bible"*
you cannot make up this level
if ignorance
Bart reads the original greek sources
@@ready1fire1aim1god means “Quinn Sine.”
Is Megan a man? I'm totally confused?
I'm the Messiah, I can clear a few things up for you. Jehovah is God, but the Torah is not the word of God. It opens with a mistake, creating the earth before the stars and sun, which is understandable. But it's completely impossible for God to rest, even for a nanosecond. God's mind and will are inextricably intertwined with the creation, you can't take a single breath without God's help. Anyone who had the slightest knowledge of God would know that.
Likewise, there was a Fall of the angels, but no original sin, there was never any chance of avoiding the consequences of the Satanic Rebellion. The whole point of this timeline was to deal with the consequences.
Monotheism originates with Akhenaten, we can surmise this because of the sheer implausibility of imposing monotheism on all these ancient priesthoods in Egypt. Circumcision comes from Egypt. Monotheism failed after twenty years or so, they reverted to polytheism but a certain segment of the population were persuaded by the idea of monotheism, and they left Egypt in an exodus of sorts.
Nonetheless, God has such control that the prophets are often uncannily accurate, as in Jeremiah 11:9 and Daniel 9:11-12 referring to September 11th.
Sar my name is Brijesh I am from India I go to going to be debate by the Christianity which are taking place in my town I face some difficult To face the knowledge of Bible please I want to request you to take the some book from me
You said it man, nobody fks with the jesus........8 year olds dude