Mark's Gospel gets FIXED by Christians
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 сен 2024
- Link for Course:
gnosticinforma...
Professor Bart D. Ehrman:
Bart D. Ehrman is the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He began his teaching career at Rutgers University, and joined the faculty in the Department of Religious Studies at UNC in 1988, where he has served as both the Director of Graduate Studies and the Chair of the Department.
Professor Ehrman completed his M.Div. and Ph.D. degrees at Princeton Seminary, where his 1985 doctoral dissertation was awarded magna cum laude. An expert on the New Testament and the history of Early Christianity, has written or edited thirty books, numerous scholarly articles, and dozens of book reviews.
Bart Ehrman on Bible Secrets
In addition to works of scholarship, Professor Ehrman has written several textbooks for undergraduate students and trade books for general audiences. Six of his books have been on the New York Times Bestseller list: Misquoting Jesus; God’s Problem; Jesus Interrupted; Forged; and How Jesus Became God. His books have been translated into twenty-seven languages.
Mark is at the same time the most brilliant AND most underrated Gospel of the New Testament, with a sophisticated understanding of Jesus that is so nuanced most readers simply never see it!
Did Mark have first-hand knowledge of Jesus’ life or was he just makin’ stuff up?
Explore the answer to this and other controversial questions in this 8-lecture online course where Dr. Bart Ehrman unpacks The Gospel of Mark showing how its narrative contains clever subtleties and numerous surprises that make it one of the most intriguing pieces of literature from the early years of Christianity.
Other controversial questions covered in this 8-lecture course include:
Why don’t most readers today recognize the highly unusual way Mark portrays Jesus and the meaning of his life?
For Mark, how can Jesus be the expected destroyer of God’s enemies and the king of the Jewish people, if he was himself rejected by them, captured, and publicly tortured to death? Isn’t that the opposite of the “Messiah”?
Why in Mark (unlike the other Gospels) does none of Jesus’ close relations realize who he really is? Not the Jewish leaders? Not those hearing his message? His neighbors? His companions? His closest disciples? His mother?
Does the Gospel of Mark portray Jesus as God?
Is Mark’s account an accurate portrayal of what the historical Jesus himself said and did? Or is it a portrayal that shapes Jesus’ life and ministry according to Mark’s own theological understanding of Jesus? Could it be both?
Did Mark have first-hand knowledge of Jesus’ life, or is most of his information second-, third-, or fourth-hand? Is he just makin’ stuff up?
How did later copyists of Mark’s Gospel change what he said to create a different story? Have any of these changes misled readers away from Mark’s original message?
The Gospel of Mark is the oldest of the four canonical gospels and of the three synoptic Gospels. It tells of the ministry of Jesus from his baptism by John the Baptist to his death, burial, and the discovery of his empty tomb. There is no miraculous birth or doctrine of divine pre-existence, nor, in the original ending (Mark 16:1-8), any post-resurrection appearances of Jesus. It portrays Jesus as a teacher, an exorcist, a healer, and a miracle worker. He refers to himself as the Son of Man. He is called the Son of God, but keeps his messianic nature secret; even his disciples fail to understand him. All this is in keeping with Christian interpretation of prophecy, which is believed to foretell the fate of the messiah as suffering servant. The gospel ends, in its original version, with the discovery of the empty tomb, a promise to meet again in Galilee, and an unheeded instruction to spread the good news of the Resurrection of Jesus.
Most scholars date Mark to c. 66-74 AD, either shortly before or after the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD. They reject the traditional ascription to Mark the Evangelist, the companion of the Apostle Peter - which probably arose from the desire of early Christians to link the work to an authoritative figure - and believe it to be the work of an author working with various sources including collections of miracle stories, controversy stories, parables, and a passion narrative. It was traditionally placed second, and sometimes fourth, in the Christian canon, as an inferior abridgement of what was regarded as the most important gospel, Matthew; the Church has consequently derived its view of Jesus primarily from Matthew, secondarily from John, and only distantly from Mark.
Buying this course gives you lifetime access so you can watch and learn whenever you like
LIVE RECORDING OF THE COURSE WILL BE ON FEBRUARY 18-19
#gnosticinformant #bartehrman #gospelofmark
Link for Course:
gnosticinformant--ehrman.thrivecart.com/unknown-jesus/
WHEN EVERYONE WANTS THE TRUTH ABOUT YESHI & DADDY ( YESHUA & YAHWEH) PLEASE GET IN TOUCH,I AM BARBELO CHRIST OF THE GODHEAD TRINITY SPIRIT CURRENTLY HERE WITH YOU ALL 🌍 WHY DO YOU NOT WISH TO KNOW THE TRUTH & WHOM THE CREATOR IS ,AS I KNOW DADDY PERSONALLY DONT I?.....LOVE BABA CHRIST 🕊️🤍🌹
Bart Ehrman exists.
I think hes a myth tbf
I exist, therefore I am.
However Nietzsche is dead...
Consider this:
The Last 12 Verses of the Gospel According To Mark.
"The last 12(twelve) verses of the commonly received text of Mark are absent from the two oldest Greek manuscripts from the Old Latin Codex Bobiensis, the Sinaiticus Syriac manuscript, about one hundred Armenian manuscripts and the two oldest Georgian manuscripts ... they are the work of an author other than the evangelist."
- from "Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament."
Rabbi Hillel who lived just before Jesus said, "We are all sons of God and God is our Father."
Hillel = helios = Heli = Paul = Festus, on the road with Albinus.
@@willempasterkamp862 🤦♂️
Citation?
Been taking the Tabor course and it’s really good.
So have I and learnt so much.
Tabor raises an interesting (imo) perspective…. What if you read Mark as if you do not know anything at all about Jesus? This approach removes the conflation of our preconceptions and the other material in the New Testament. The resulting picture of Jesus and his ministry are dramatically different from what most people conceive
Bart is right, Arians weren’t Unitarians. Also Arians are like 4-5 groups. Not to mention that they anathematize Photinus who was a Unitarian at the Synods of Sirmium.
I think, the first followers of jesus, didnt believe he was resurrected at the third day after crucifiction. They believed that, jesus will be the first human who will rise when the time of the eschaton will come.
That isnt what they believed.
@@PC-vg8vn what did they believe?
They believed Satan crucified a flesh disguised Jesus, then God restored his spiritual body, and exalted him.
@leo lou Jesus's passion narrative is gleaned from Old Testament scripture by the power of the Holy Dopamine Ghost via Placebo Faith:
In Mark 4:10-12 the author hints that the Gospel is entirely a parable to make outsiders stumble as per Paul's Gentile inclusion theology (Rom. 11:7-12). In Mark 2:3-5, :11 faith is rewarded while in 2 Kings 1:2-4 unfaithfulness is punished (one person is lowered gets healed, while a king falls then dies for seeking other Gods). There's many examples of Mark building narratives from OT stories. See also "Oxford Annotated Bible", pp. 1380-1381 being that the other Gospels are using Mark (often verbatim).
The pseudograph 2 Pet. 1:16 is pushback against people (likely a group of Xtians who we don't get to hear from) that are saying the Gospels are literary fabrications, and then forges an eyewitness account. Later in 2 Pet. 3:15-16 it mentions that there's things in Paul's letters that do not make sense, which is strange in light of 1 Cor. 3:2 & Heb. 5:12 in which converts are taught things easy to understand.
Paul is adamant that his Gospel is not from humans, but from scripture, and visions/dreams (Gal. 1:11-12, :15-17, Rom. 15:4, 1 Cor. 15:3-8). A secret hidden through the ages now revealed (Rom. 16:25-26, 1 Cor. 2:6-7). Also Paul says his apostleship is by the same means as the founding Pillars (Gal. 2:6-9). The earliest Xtian writings has a Jesus derived from the imagination. The two Adams of Paul (1 Cor. 15:47) is from Genesis (Gen. 2:8/2:15) where two times God puts a Man in Eden (Research "Documentary Hypothesis").
Who (in context of what Paul wrote) would execute someone for being in human form?
Phili. 2:6-8 "6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, 7 but emptied himself (Isa. 53:12), taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness. And being found in human form, 8 he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death - even death on a cross."
Who would NOT kill Jesus if it was made known to them that by doing so it would fulfill God's plan for mankind to have a chance at immortality?
1 Cor. 2:6-8 "6 Yet among the mature we do speak wisdom, though it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to perish. 7 But we speak God's wisdom, secret and hidden, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. 8 None of the rulers of this age understood this; for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory." (Note: "rulers of this age" is interchangeable with earthly/spiritual powers to the ancient reader)
To Paul (1 Cor. 15:49-53) a physical resurrection does not inherit God's Kingdom. The Synoptics & John have a flesh resurrected Jesus while our earliest versions of Mark has no physical resurrection ("Oxford Annotated Bible" pp. 1464-1465).
Dirty/impoverished clothing (Mark 14:51-52), and clean/gleaming clothing (Mark16:5) were seen as metaphors for Earthly/spiritual bodies in the ancient world.
Rom. 4:25 "who was betrayed (handed over) to death for our trespasses and was raised for our justification." Note: 1 Cor. 11:23 "betrayed" is contextually reciprocal with "handed over" in Greek (Rom. 1:24, :26, :28).
The verse Rom. 1:3b "who was descended from David according to the flesh" (2 Sam. 7:12) is good evidence for historicity. But 2 Sam. 7:12c "who shall come forth from your body," can mean God made a flesh body from David's semen for Jesus (it was a belief that the male seed contained the whole body). This is a convenient way to fulfill messianic prophecy with a celestial event instead of on Earth.
Zec. 3:1-9 "1 Then he showed me the high priest Joshua/Jesus (Savior) standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan (Adversary) standing at his right hand to accuse him. 2 And the LORD said to Satan, "The LORD rebuke you, O Satan! The LORD who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you! Is not this man a brand plucked from the fire?" 3 Now Joshua was dressed with filthy clothes as he stood before the angel. 4 The angel said to those who were standing before him, "Take off his filthy clothes." And to him he said, "See, I have taken your guilt away from you, and I will clothe you with festal apparel." 5 And I said, "Let them put a clean turban on his head." So they put a clean turban on his head and clothed him with the apparel; and the angel of the LORD was standing by.
6 Then the angel of the LORD assured Joshua, saying 7 "Thus says the LORD of hosts: If you will walk in my ways and keep my requirements, then you shall rule my house and have charge of my courts, and I will give you the right of access among those who are standing here. 8 Now listen, Joshua, high priest, you and your colleagues who sit before you! For they are an omen of things to come: I am going to bring my servant the Branch. 9 For on the stone that I have set before Joshua, on a single stone with seven facets, I will engrave its inscription, says the LORD of hosts, and I will remove the guilt of this land in a single day."
Zec. 6:11-13 "11 Take the silver and gold and make a crown, and set it on the head of the high priest Joshua son of Jehozadak (Savior Son of the Righteous God); 12 say to him: Thus says the LORD of hosts: Here is a man whose name is Branch: for he shall branch out in his place, and he shall build the temple of the LORD. 13 It is he that shall build the temple of the LORD; he shall bear royal honor, and shall sit upon his throne and rule. There shall be a priest by his throne, with peaceful understanding between the two of them."
Rom. 15:12 "12 and again Isaiah says, "The root of Jesse shall come, the one who rises to rule the Gentiles; in him the Gentiles shall hope." (Isa. 11:10 LXX).
Isa. 11:1 "1 A shoot shall come out from the stump of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots."
1 Cor. 15:24-26 "24 Then comes the end, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father, after he has destroyed every ruler and every authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death."
Jos. 10:24-27 "24 When they brought the kings out to Joshua/Jesus, Joshua summoned all the Israelites, and said to the chiefs of the warriors who had gone with him, "Come near, put your feet on the necks of these kings." Then they came near and put their feet on their necks. (Psa. 110:1/1 Cor. 15:24-28, Rom. 16:20, Heb. 1:13, 2:5-9, 10:13) 25 And Joshua said to them, "Do not be afraid or dismayed; be strong and courageous; for thus the LORD will do to all the enemies against whom you fight." 26 Afterward Joshua struck them down and put them to death, and he hung them on five trees. And they hung on the trees until evening. 27 At sunset Joshua commanded, and they took them down from the trees and threw them into the cave where they had hidden themselves; they set large stones against the mouth of the cave, which remain to this very day. (Deut. 21:22-23/Gal. 3:13)"
Examples of Paul's Jesus, and Philo's Sacred Word being the same Deity:
Image of God (2 Cor. 4:4, Phili. 2:6), Agent of creation (Rom. 11:36, 1 Cor. 8:6)
Philo: THE SPECIAL LAWS, I
"XVI ...Now the image of God is the Word, by which all the world was made..."
Celestial high priest (Heb. 2:17, 4:14), God's Word (Heb. 1:3, 11:3), Firstborn son (Rom. 8:29)
Philo: ON DREAMS, THAT THEY ARE GOD-SENT
"XXXVII ...the high priest is the Divine Word, his own firstborn son."
Five Kings= Five Senses (Flesh)
Philo: ON ABRAHAM
"XLI These things, then, are what are contained in the plain words of the scriptures. But as many as are able to contemplate the facts related in them in their incorporeal and naked state, living rather in the soul than in the body, will say that of the nine kings (Gen.14:1-2) the four are the powers of the four passions which exist within us, the passion of pleasure, of desire, of fear, and of grief; and that the other five kings are the outward senses, being equal in number, the sense of sight, of hearing, of smell, of taste, and of touch. For these in some degree are sovereigns and rulers, having acquired a certain power over us, but not all to an equal extent; for the five are subordinate to the four, and are compelled to pay them taxes and tribute, such as are appointed by nature. For it is from the things which we see, or hear, or smell, or taste, or touch, that pleasures, and pains, and fears, and desires arise; as there is no one of the passions which has any power to exist of itself, if it were not supplied by the materials furnished by the outward senses."
Philo: WHO IS THE HEIR OF DIVINE THINGS
"XXXVIII ...Now, the craters of the sense of seeing are the eyes, those of hearing are the ears, those of smelling are the nostrils, and so on with the appropriate receptacles for each of the senses. On these craters the sacred word pours a portion of blood, thinking it right that the irrational part of us should become endowed with soul and vitality, ...purifying itself from the deceitful alluring powers of the objects of the outward sense which aim to overcome it."
Philo: QUESTIONS & ANSWERS ON GENESIS, III
"(51) What is the meaning of, “And it shall be my covenant (or agreement) in your flesh?” (Gen. 17:13). God is willing to do good, not only to the man who is endued with virtue, but he wishes that the Divine Word should regulate not only his soul but his body also, as if it had become its physician. And it must be its care to prune away all excesses of seeing, and hearing, and taste, and smell, and touch, and also those of the instrument of voice and articulation, and also all the redundant and pernicious impulses of the genitals, (morning cross? Rom. 7:23) as also of the whole body, the effect of which is, that at times we are delighted by our passions and at times pained by them."
@leo lou Paul's Christ Jesus and Philo's Divine Word are the same imagined OT Character.
Image of God (2 Cor. 4:4, Phili. 2:6), Agent of Creation (Rom. 11:36, 1 Cor. 8:6)
Philo: THE SPECIAL LAWS, I
"XVI ...Now the image of God is the Word, by which all the world was made..."
Celestial High Priest (Heb. 2:17, 4:14), God's Word (Heb. 1:3, 11:3), Firstborn son (Rom. 8:29)
Philo: ON DREAMS, THAT THEY ARE GOD-SENT
"XXXVII ...the high priest is the Divine Word, his own firstborn son."
Spiritual Kinship/Angel of God (Rom. 8:29, Gal. 4:5-7, :14, Heb. 1:4)
Philo: ON THE CONFUSION OF TONGUES
"XI ...In reference to which I admire those who say, “We are all one man’s sons, we are men of Peace,” (Gen. 42:11) because of their well-adapted agreement; since how, I should say, could you, O excellent men, avoid being grieved at war, and delighted in peace, being the sons of one and the same father, and he not mortal but immortal, the man of God, who being the reason of the everlasting God, is of necessity himself also immortal?"
"XXVIII ...And even if there be not as yet any one who is worthy to be called a son of God, nevertheless let him labour earnestly to be adorned according to his first-born word, the eldest of his angels, as the great archangel of many names; for he is called, the authority, and the name of God, and the Word, and man according to God’s image, and he who sees Israel. For which reason I was induced a little while ago to praise the principles of those who said, “We are all one man’s Sons.” (Gen. 42:11) For even if we are not yet suitable to be called the sons of God, still we may deserve to be called the children of his eternal image, of his most sacred word; for the image of God is his most ancient word...."
Note: Gal. 1:19 "but I did not see any other apostle except James the LORD's brother." This could be a cultic title (like Peter/Cephas which means "Rock" could have been, or an idiom) rather than being a biological relation? Paul constantly refers to those "in Christ" as brothers/sisters in a spiritual family.
Good Shepherd (Heb. 13:20)
Philo: ON THE CHANGE OF NAMES
"XIX ...for they have abandoned all connections with pride, and having connected themselves with lawful persuasion, choosing to become a portion of the sacred flock, of which the divine word is the leader, as his name shows, for it signifies the pastoral care of God."
"XX But while he is taking care of his own flock, all kinds of good things are given all at once to those of the sheep who are obedient, and who do not resist his will; and in the Psalms we find a song in these words, “The Lord is my shepherd, therefore shall I lack Nothing;” (psa. 23:1) therefore the mind which has had the royal shepherd, the divine word, for its instructor,..."
Purification/Forgiveness of Sins/Glorification (1 Cor. 6:11, 2 Cor. 3:18, 4:6)
Philo: ON THE LIFE OF MOSES, II
"XXVI Such then are the figurative meanings which he desires to indicate by the sacred vestments of the high priest;... ...namely the logeum, being also an emblem of that reason which holds together and regulates the universe. For it was indispensable that the man who was consecrated to the Father of the world, should have as a paraclete, his son, the being most perfect in all virtue, to procure forgiveness of sins, and a supply of unlimited blessings;..."
Tested (Heb. 2:18) A Man (Rom. 5:15-19, 1 Cor. 15:45-49)
Philo: ON DREAMS, THAT THEY ARE GOD-SENT Book I
"XXXIX ...For when the sacred word has purified us with the sprinklings prepared beforehand for purification, and when it has adorned us with the select reasonings of true philosophy, and, having led us to that man who has stood the test, has made us genuine, and conspicuous, and shining,..."
Sits Beside God (Heb. 8:1)
Philo: ABOUT NOT MOVING LANDMARKS
"XXXVIII... I say, should such men triumph in and insult the misfortunes of others, having no respect for justice, the ruler (Note: justice/ruler) of human life, who sits by the side of the great Ruler of the universe, who surveys all things with sleepless and most piercing eyes, and sees what is in recesses as clearly as if it was in the pure sunlight?"
The Word is a Covenant (1 Cor. 11:25, 2 Cor. 3:4-6)
Philo: ON DREAMS, THAT THEY ARE GOD-SENT Book II
"XXXIII ...God, says that he is about to erect firmly his covenant full of grace (and that means his law and his word) in the soul of the just man as on a solid foundation, which shall be an image in the likeness of God, when he says to Noah, “I will establish my covenant with Thee.” (Gen. 9:11) And besides this, he also indicates two other things, one that justice is in no respect different from the covenant of God (Note: justice/covenant), the other that other beings bestow gifts which are different from the persons who receive them;... XXXVI Since then all steadiness, and stability, and the abiding for ever in the same place unchangeably and immovably, is first of all seen in the living God, and next in the word of the living God, which he has called his covenant;..."
Sacrificial Blood (Heb. 12:24)
Philo: WHO IS THE HEIR OF DIVINE THINGS
"XXXVIII ...Now, the craters of the sense of seeing are the eyes, those of hearing are the ears, those of smelling are the nostrils, and so on with the appropriate receptacles for each of the senses. On these craters the sacred word pours a portion of blood, thinking it right that the irrational part of us should become endowed with soul and vitality, and should in some manner become rational; following the guidance of admonition, and purifying itself from the deceitful alluring powers of the objects of the outward sense which aim to overcome it."
Intermediary Agent to Mortals (Rom. 8:34, Gal. 3:19-20, Heb. 12:24)
Philo: ON DREAMS, THAT THEY ARE GOD-SENT Book I
"XII ...who never abandons his faith in God and his invisible comprehension of him, but who keeps to the intermediate divine word, which affords him the best suggestions, and teaches him everything which is suitable to the times. For God, not condescending to come down to the external senses, sends his own words or angels for the sake of giving assistance to those who love virtue. But they attend like physicians to the disease of the soul, and apply themselves to heal them, offering sacred recommendations like sacred laws, and inviting men to practice the duties inculcated by them, and, like the trainers of wrestlers, implanting in their pupils strength, and power, and irresistible vigour. Very properly, therefore, when he has arrived at the external sense, he is represented no longer as meeting God, but only the divine word,..."
Empties (Kenosis) Himself (Phili. 2:7-8)
Philo: Who is The Heir To Divine Things
"XLI ...but in real fact for the whole world which was created by divine wisdom may be consecrated and dedicated, being made a burnt offering of early in the morning and also in the evening. For such a life as this becomes the world, namely, continually and without ceasing to be giving thanks to its Father and Creator, so as to stop short of nothing but evaporating and reducing itself into its original element, in order to show that it stores up and conceals nothing, but dedicates itself wholly as a pious offering to God who created it."
Born of a Woman/Under the Law (Gal. 4:4b), Wisdom of God (1 Cor. 1:24b)
Philo: ON FLIGHT AND FINDING
"XX ...For we say that the high priest (Jos. 20:1-6) is not a man, but is the Word of God, who has not only no participation in intentional errors, but none even in those which are involuntary. For Moses says that he cannot be defiled neither in respect of his father, that is, the mind, nor his mother, that is, the external sense; "He shall not go where there is a dead body; he shall not defile himself even for his father or mother." (Lev. 21:11) because, I imagine, he has received imperishable and wholly pure parents, God being his father, who is also the father of all things, and Wisdom being his mother, by means of whom the universe arrived at creation (Prov. 3:19-20, 8:22-31); and also because he is anointed with oil, by which I mean that the principal part of him is illuminated with a light like the beams of the sun, so as to be thought worthy to be clothed with garments. And the most ancient Word of the living God is clothed with the word (Law) as with a garment, for it has put on earth, and water, and air, and fire, and the things which proceed from those elements. ...Nor will he “rend his clothes;” (Lev. 21:10) for the Word of the living God being the bond of every thing, as has been said before, holds all things together, and binds all the parts, and prevents them from being loosened or separated."
Philo: A Treatise Concerning The World
"II ...But the eternal law of the everlasting God is the strong and lasting support of the universe. This law being extended from the centre of the world to its furthest extremities, and again back from its extremities to the centre, moves on in the unwearied irresistible course of nature, uniting and binding together all the parts of the universe. For the Father who established it made it to be the indissoluble bond of the universe. ...since the divine law has placed itself as a boundary to keep all these elements distinct from one another." See also (the pseudograph) Colossians 1:17
I don't feel like Mark thinks Jesus was the son of David. It's just others who call him that.
Markan Priority
Since Mark is primarily the oral gospel of Peter, why not ask what Peter in the first 30 years of Christianity thought? And why not look to see what Peter says in 1st Peter: Jesus Messiah is Savior and King? Oh, yes, Ehrman probably does not think 1st Peter was actually from Peter. But then what about what Peter said in Acts: God has made him both Lord and Messiah? Oh yes, Ehrman probably doesn't think Acts is a reliable history of the early church. Okay, then why not why look at what Paul says about Peter in places like Galatians and 1st Corinthians?
If we do just the latter, we find a man who sticks with the story that Jesus "Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures." That immediately places Peter beyond the point of confusion about Jesus.
In Galatians we find Peter is one of the leaders in the Jerusalem church. If so, it appears he is all in with the others. And all in with Jesus who is what the church was all about. Now we can go to the Gospel of Mark.
Mark did present Jesus as Messiah and leads us from the opening statement to the despair of the cross but then back to the last verse in 16:8 where the women who had been to the empty tomb go away trembling in ecstasy and reverence. That last verse is purposely written to underscore the wonder of his resurrection, and that is where Mark left it. Mark is not trying to untie the knotty question the Arians and Orthodox believers later wrestled with. That was several hundred years in the future. And it only muddies the point Mark was making. AND WHICH PRIMITIVE CHRISTIANITY RECEIVED AND BELIEVED.
On the basis of that alone, Jesus was worthy of reverence just as God is worthy of reverence. Let's not inject the Arian vs Orthodox controversy into the simple good news that Mark is presenting. Really, who cares how the theologians slice and dice it? Jesus is risen and alive. WONDER AT THAT is Mark's message.
But they never tell anybody? Does Ehrman think that the story ends there? They are told to go and tell the disciples. Did they forget that part? I don't think so. What the very brief description in verse 8 intimates is that they were so blow away by this that they didn't stop along the way to chat. They were intent upon telling the disciples.
All of these stories are framed on the monomyth. Adjustments have been made. Just look at the first creation and the first Noah calling. They were added in later to include additional information. Start of creation myth and start of monomyth. Various parts of the Bible have obviously been tweaked. They aren't history.
This was before Neal discivered Dr Ammon Hillman
Mark was reading Isa 53 and the image he had was taken from that. Jesus didn’t have to do anything else because Mark seemed to understand that passage and read about his ‘deaths’ as in plural. There’s two separate lives described.
Great interview with Dr. Dehrman, though I must admit I'm a little surprised you didn't ask him about "Secret Mark" or "Long Mark" as was cited by Clement of Alexandria, especially in reference to "why" Jesus spoke in parables so people wouldn't understand. I just think his answer would have been interesting.
Dehrman?
Jesus spoke in parables to HIDE the Truth from those not meant to "hear" ( understand ).
"Whoever has ears to hear , let HIM ( that one ) hear ".
i just took a course on Mark. My only unanswered question is why Jesus told parables and then told his disciples he didn't explain them to people, "Lest they turn again and be forgiven." why would he not want people to be forgiven? did he really want them to burn in hell? I don't get that at all and the online course i took made no provision for asking questions.
The ONLY people being saved now is the "church".
And no person "burns in hell"....this is all allegory and metaphor, like all the scriptures are.
@TheWhyisthatso The Catholic Church? No way, Jose!!!
@@kalords5967 ....No, the Romans created the false religion of Christianity , called "antichrist" in scripture. ( 1 John 2:18-22 )
The true "church" ( Greek : ekklesia = "called out ones" ) are a relatively "few" people in the world ,
and the world has no knowledge of them and they don't even know one another....yet .
The TRUE "church" is a people, not any organization created by man .
@TheWhyisthatso The Catholic Church created the Christian Bible. The Catholic Church is the only true church.
@@kalords5967 ...no, the Roman Empire created the false religion of Christianity for political purposes.
What it teaches is all lies.
The "church" is a people that Christ ( Jesus ) is literally "iN"....as He said He would be....He did not leave us alone.
they wrote him in history. he never existed.
they hallucinated him, Paul says it literally.
he appeared to me, first he appeared to Peter.
i got all my information through revelations.
Jesus existed. But the gospel authors and Paul made a religion of Jesus to a religion about Jesus.
yeah, Germanicus never met Nerones in the flesh.
@leo lou ah Satan, 😁😉
@@reinhardschneider9186 ah dumass
@@scambammer6102 dumbass. you truly are😉😆
I think the reason Mark has this Messianic secret going on at the time is that nobody during Pilate's tenure as Prefect even knew of a contemporary Messianic figure. In fact, when you read Paul, time and again you're going to run across Paul proclaiming "Christ crucified" (Messiah impaled in an especially disgusting way) as HIS gospel, a mystery of the ages to be revealed at "the end time" meaning HIS day and age when he started proclaiming it. The Nazorean Jews that knew the historical Jesus (if any) didn't know ANY of this.
Ha
Trying to explain the inexplicable seems to be the way of humanity!
making up BS is the way of humanity
It's not Mark's gospel
It's The Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Mark.
That is part of all the Dying and Rising Gods, to be Sacrificed, and a painful one at that, some cut up into many pieces, Horus, hangs Set/Seth on a cross, spears him in the side and cuts off his Ding-Dong, used the blood from it on the land for next years growth, and it's the rising of the Ding-Dong that allows the growth of Man. LOL, it was the 14th part of Osiris, the part need to create Horus. Ophiuchus is the 13th, between Scorpio, the Sexual Organ, and Sagittarius, Hips & Thighs(Butt Too), making Ophiuchus the Womb.
Ophiuchus = Paul = Germanicus, and from him comes Nerones Chrestos.
Well said !
Mark was the first gospel. Mark was not an apostle. Many people believe that he was writing some of Peters' experiences as a third person testimony. As good as it was it was incomplete and I believe it stirred the heart of Matthew - who was an apostle - to give a more detailed and informed personal account of the life of Jesus and the things that he taught. John took it to another level and Luke - not an apostle but a physician- investigated these things for himself and conducted interviews to confirm whether or not these things were so.
The reason Jesus referred to himself and was referred to by others as "the son of man" is because he was speaking of his physicality. He was emphasizing the fact that he was no different from anyone else, and that all were not only capable of doing the same, but were commanded to. Jesus' abilities to heal, preach, cast out demons, came to him after his experience in the Syrian wilderness. Without this same type of experience (notice it's not walking to the front of any church and reciting words), people will not be capable of the same. He also said,, "greater works shall you do". He did not achieve any of his great works because of some inherent divine ability that he alone possessed, or same great "faith", it was due to his opening his awareness to Divine Consciousness. This escapes almost all "christians" because they've not ever been told the real truth behind Jesus' life. Without divorcing Jesus from "christianity", you will never arrive at understanding these basic truths. Christianity was an invention of the roman priesthood striking a compromise between the roman mysteries and the distorted teachings of Paul (who, if you recall, was from Tarsus, the capitol of Mithraism). Christianity is nothing more than mithraism with roman cult accoutrements. Jesus himself told the Pharisees how men were on the same level as God, they couldn't see or agree with this because they kept to the law and basically pagan rituals of blood sacrifice. They knew, and the people knew, they were totally incapable of performing ANY of the miracles Yeshua performed.
This is from a lot of information handed to me, and some I picked up on my own.
@@CheknoEternity In the age of mistrust, superstition, and conflict we'll term information "opinions". You're likely to also be an American.
@@CheknoEternity It's all based on fact. Research to find out. I'm sorry, I wasn't trying to denounce anyone, just have done my share of researching what Jesus actually taught and how it's not totally incorporated into scripture. I'm out of this discussion - it's turning into an argument.
@@CheknoEternity Geralt - I've noticed people slide toward voicing their own opinions, I guess it's the pull toward maintaining their worldview.
Society's conception and understanding of Jesus is badly distorted. It stems out of the manipulation of his teachings to create a "church" controlled by the Roman state, not the original group of Jesus' followers. The person of Jesus is very different from what we know. (you already know this I suppose). It is clever of the powers that be to create a picture of a figure who could be relegated to the mythical, it serves their agenda. What I know of "God" is that there are many smaller "gods", but one Source Creator who does not fit any appropriate comprehensible description. Closer to a large "Awareness". Jesus is also one of many "spiritual masters", but has the leadership among them because of the life he lived on Earth. There is Serapis Bey, St Germain, Hilarion, Sanat Kumara, and many others. They're I suppose you could label as "higher intelligences". They work in society to promote human evolution, also fighting against the dark forces who seek to amplify the power of selfish humans. Right now, humanity is on the brink of evolving into the greater space community, where it will need immense knowledge to gain it's place. The "leaders" who believe in amassing all the power in their one world cabal are actually handing the keys of freedom to those who will only use mankind for selfish purposes, groups that believe this is actually for the good of man, as they know humanity is not prepared for the larger space community. Very precarious scenario, with the population of Earth largely unaware of what lies ahead, trusting in those bent on domination and control.
@@CheknoEternity Geralt - I'm sorry, I just have a great deal of spite for this society. I had bad experiences in school, at least with some who seemed more intent on being better than others. I was caught up in it myself for some time, not really wanting to be that way either. I'd noticed that kids had a greater need to belong than was offered in their families for whatever reason. The need for fulfillment and meaning was not being met, and current norms are forcing things in a continual direction of further mental and emotional isolation. I'd seen this developing when I was a teen, and felt trapped, it seemed overwhelming to me to be expected to go into a world to be part of what seemed a cold, mechanical system. Was this what we'd worked toward?
Somethings off about Ehrman
Can anyone tell me how many, schools, Orphans care, hospitals, shelters have been donate to a non Jews community or countries, by the religious Jews communities ?
Sophia!
Maybe we don't have to confine ourselves to the strict dogma of the Nicene Creed to be Christian. It appears the 1st Century Christians always had Jesus in a different category than the Father. Even the Logos in John is really close, but not quite. Perhaps dogma is the enemy here and not the faith? We can only believe in Jesus to the extant it is given to us.
We can agree that all 4 Gospels present Jesus of Nazareth as the divine Son of God. What we do with it after that is on us.
@leo lou The capitol font you used makes me feel like you are yelling. I think you are looking for an argument from me that is not there. I don't have a reply to anything you stated because nothing you wrote addressed any of my points.
Vegadog: dogma is the problem. Treat Jesus as a mystic who understood that he was one with the source, Father. I and the father are one, etc. in no way would he regard himself as god. That is a Christian doctrine that shows ignorance of Jewish scriptures and culture of the day.As the Budda said on his death bed to not make him a god. Within a hundred years, he was. Jesus would be insulted that his followers made him into triune god. The trinity is a Roman concept and definitely not a Jewish or early Christian one.
@@garytorresani8846 dogma is a problem, but we can't know for sure what Jesus of Nazareth would have said, especially since you have doubled down on the myth. The Gospels are written from the perspective of the resurrection of Jesus. Yes. I have read Dr. Ehrman's book "How Jesus became God" and I have listened to his great courses letures. Christology isn't even agreed upon in the gospels, and we can say for sure when The Gospel of John was written.
What I see consistent in all 4 gospels (you can argue Mark, but it is implied), and Pauline epistiles is Jesus was ressurrected and sits at the right hand of God as His acknowledged Son. Now if that is just linking Him to Enoch literature, or another David/Solomon like figure, that is up to you. But the Gospels do point out Jesus died a righteous man, and did not have a falling out like the Messianic Kings of the past. And this was after He was abondoned by everyone, even God. That is a great capstone story to Hebrew scriptures.
@garytorresani8846 bruh, someone who is sinless is automatically God while everyone else while one with God still is not of his substance and foreign to the Kingdom hence the Triune. "ROMAN CREATION" mhmm seems you dont understand the Trinity. You dont understand Platonism or Pythagoreanism if you dont understand how sinlessness makes you no different than God Most High the Monad. The Trinity was already in the Gospels just loke Hermeticism wad always around for thousands of years just distilled in 300-200 BCE. Dogma might not be your problem but seems like ignorance is your problem 😜
@@paulkickling7828 oh paul. Insulting one does not make you superior or more knowledgeable. Peace to you.
Its like playing to a saint after he dies. Miracle happens from.interceeding to.good
Thank you
Did women ever get crucified? Or were women always silent about sedition, which got men executed by torture on a cross? Was the motivation for the women in Mark being afraid to tell anyone of the resurrection their fear of what Roman authorities might do to them?
And crucifixion was a lot uglier than the Christian church or most scholars on the subject let on. They think it's just nail to a cross, like in Mel Gibson's snuff film. There also was an attachment midway down, a sort of peg, that, when the crucified man slumped because he could no longer stand, pegged him. For this reason women were crucified facing the pole; but for a woman to be crucified was rare.
It's a Roman State Religion made up Constantine the great. Rabbi Yeshua Bar Yosef spoke of the Messanic character the "Son Of:Man" and the messanic era to his group of followers.He was a devout jew who practiced a very strict form of Judasim.His teachings the "Gnostic Christian" gospels where altered by the Orthodox.His teachings had nothing to do with Idolatry.They where heavily based on Kabbalist esoteric esoteric Mystism.
You are talking like a Muslim. What you are saying sound similar to the Qur'anic message about Jesus.
@Lêb Isaacson OK? I'm just telling the truth. Christianity wasn't meant to be taken as literal. "Isis our Lady Immaculate" - "nana-sin" "In the name of the Father and the Sun Amen Ra" etc
@@ryandavis394 Interesting. You have a mind that somehow is in line to an extent to what's stated about Christianity in the Qur'an. Maybe you should check it out.
@@lev.isaacson Will do you peeked my interest.
Mono-myth. Hero with a Thousand Faces. Joseph Campbell. It's nested inside Genesis and started before Genesis. It frames the Babylonian creation myth, the Enuma Elish. And Greek Myth. And Hinduism. And anything Abrahamic. Roman myth, Egyptian works, and so on. Man and woman are analogs for mind and soul, (Or conscious and sub-conscious) The woman acts out and needs to keep her place. (That's just the stuff we carry inside) Lilith wanted to be on top of Adam and that wasn't okay. The sub-conscious does not tell the conscious what to do. Otherwise it is called acting out or having weeds emerge from the garden or being possessed by demons. It's the other way around. They're teaching us something hidden in the analogs and metaphor.
The Father and I are one.
Who, being in very nature[a] God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature[b] of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death-
even death on a cross!
9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.
let's get Bart and Rabbi Tovia together
They sid not come up with a theology. They answered question one by one according to their bias. A manifest destiny
6:28 "Mark may have that idea, he may have the idea..." - this is misleading. The AUTHOR of Mark may have that idea but we don't know who the author is and should not call the author "Mark" without good reason. Too long has this trick worked to deceive Christians.
Very interesting video.
How do you know it’s copied?
Well if he can’t explain it other than he just knows then we might as well all be catholic
Good video
Can you please talk about the walls of jericho there are some people trying make people believe that the Bible is true by using the walls of jericho
The bible is true.
Prove it
@@demetriusjennings8761 Sorry nobody can come to God unless God first draws them to himself.
And what kind of God use fear and control against people
Bart : "During Jesus lifetime, no one could figure out who he was". Complete nonsense. Jesus told us who he was and proved it by healing the sick, giving sight to the blind, raising the dead, doing miracles, feeding 5000, turning water to wine, etc... And then when he was crucified (for the blasphemy of claiming to be God), he was raised from the dead with many eye witnesses. Jesus asked Peter, "who do people say I am?", then he asked Peter directly, "who do you say I am" Peter replied "You are the Christ, Son of the living God". They knew who he was, but of course many rejected him.
Of course you would ignore scholarly analysis and jump straight to apologetics and citing the Bible as a completely accurate and infallible source.
@@julianmcmillan2867 "Of course you would ignore scholarly analysis and jump straight to apologetics and citing the Bible as a completely accurate and infallible source." That is based scholarly analysis. There is wide agreement amongst scholars and historians who study the life of Jesus on the basic historical facts. Even Bart Ehrman, while not concluding that the resurrection happened, agrees with the basic historical facts surrounding the resurrection of Jesus. His crucifixion (verified dead), burial in a public tomb, tomb found empty, and eye witness accounts of Jesus alive. Those are historical facts agreed upon by the scholars. And Bart will admit he has no plausible explanation of the empty tomb and appearances of Jesus alive. You don't have to claim the bible is infallible for it to be a reliable historical source. You have to subject it to the same historicity tests you would any other historical document to determine its reliability. Even Bart is quoted as saying "One of the most certain facts of history is that Jesus was crucified on orders of the Roman prefect of Judea Pontius Pilot". That's a historical fact supported by the new testament. The history of Jesus is more reliable than any other figure of the time by a long shot.
@@elkhuntr2816 Didn't know you needed a plausible explanation for an empty tomb for someone who was crucified, knowing that crucified individuals weren't allowed to be buried as having their body rot on a cross was part of the punishment.
Also, as Bart also points out, the empty tomb, if it were a thing, which it likely isn't, doesn't say anything about Jesus' resurrection. It just says there was an empty tomb🤷🏻♂️.
Scholars agree Jesus existed. Scholars don't, however, agree that Jesus performed miracles or that he rose from the dead🤷🏻♂️. Saying that he rose from the dead or saying that he performed x miracle is not a matter of fact, it's a matter of faith since, until the supposedly risen Jesus presents himself, it is an unfalsifiable claim.
We know Muhammad existed. We have his companions writing about him. Does that also mean that the same texts which we use to cite his existence should also be believed when they say, for example, that he split the moon in two or rode on a magical steed to Heaven and met the prophets? No, no it does not.
@@julianmcmillan2867 "knowing that crucified individuals weren't allowed to be buried as having their body rot on a cross was part of the punishment" Common misconception. This is true of Roman crucifixion, but was not true in Judea under Pontius Pilot. It went against Jewish law and Roman law made allowances for this. Jesus was not burried by Romans, he was burried by a Jew. Archeology have discovered crucifixion victims in graves. One with the spike still in his foot.
"Also, as Bart also points out, the empty tomb, if it were a thing, which it likely isn't, doesn't say anything about Jesus' resurrection. It just says there was an empty tomb" Its an important piece of the puzzle. Its a piece of evidence even his enemies admit to (enemy attestation). If they could have produced his body, it would instantly disprove the resurrection.
"Scholars agree Jesus existed. Scholars don't, however, agree that Jesus performed miracles or that he rose from the dead" Never said they all agree he rose from the dead, although many do. What they all do agree upon (including Bart) are the historical facts. Jesus dead, empty tomb, 500+ people claimed to have seen Jesus alive (eye witness accounts), the disciples were convinced of his resurrection even though they had jewish predispositions against it. From a legal sense, you most certainly could conclude based on the evidence that he was raised from the dead.
"until the supposedly risen Jesus presents himself, it is an unfalsifiable claim." That's exactly what he did and we have very solid historical evidence to back it up with eye witness accounts, etc... Of course its falsifiable. Christianity completely rests on the truth of the resurrection alone. Disprove the resurrection, you disprove Christianity. Christianity makes very bolt precise claims.
"that he split the moon in two or rode on a magical steed to Heaven and met the prophets?" You would have to investigate the credibility of those claims and follow the evidence. The quran is easy to disprove based on historical evidence alone.
@@julianmcmillan2867 "Didn't know you needed a plausible explanation for an empty tomb for someone who was crucified, knowing that crucified individuals weren't allowed to be buried as having their body rot on a cross was part of the punishment." But in this case we know he was buried, then his tomb was found empty. You could argue someone stole his body, but you can't plausibly argue he wasn't buried.
All the apostles where Catholics and Jesus is God
I think Mark was aurtistic, and his frustration with neurotypicals at his church, who didn't know (or care) what was in Paul's epistles, and thought anyone who did know was a "nerd"; this frustration comes through in his gospel in Jesus's frustration with the disciples never understanding, and never getting it ever.
I would rather watch Bart speak than watching stock roll as he speaks.
Why cant bart write a book on this that we can afford to buy rather than s course that I cant afford
How would he or anyone else know what you can afford? How much do you think you personally should pay for the product?
It was a mistranslation by the Greeks and 2+2=5
B.Ehrman never mention '' Jesus is the ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF SON'' or as Isaiah 35 said It Yahweh Himself who will come and be the Messiah perform many miracles and coming as the sacrificial Lamb as GOD IN FLESH for to saves is peoples.
@@CheknoEternity The Messiah was prophetic sir
@@CheknoEternity I don't believe you Jesus was clearly the prophetic Messiah : 118:25-26; Matt. 21:9, 15; Mark 11:9-10; John 12:13). These people recognized Christ as the long-awaited Messiah.... you are a unbeliever.
@@michelhaineault6654are you a Jew?
How does Paul come into barts Antichrist theology
lol From the contemporary Jewish point of view as Messiah's go Jesus was a real disappointment.
Derek are the same video as you
I presume the course is free? Otherwise why on earth would the good Doctor be so eavily marketing it these last few weeks? Jus' askin'.
Your presupposition is false.
@@evangelicalsnever-lie9792 and irrational. free cost does not follow from marketing
He donates all the proceeds to charity iirc
And here I am now thinking that Mark was really Mary then patriarchy happened. Lol
@leo louFirst show me "satan"exists then Teach me something. Elaborate on why you believe it's nonsense, why you would think I'm "in doubt", and how can you be a Christian and be so alienating and hateful.
The observation was based on Mary being the most "Devoted" disciple.
Other than changes made when Matthew and Luke adapted Mark to their gospels, where in this video does Dr. Ehrman say Mark's gospel was fixed by Christians? The title is misleading. Instead, Dr. Ehrman is saying that early Christians redefined the idea of the Messiah, and Mark incorporated this new idea in his gospel.
As if Mark is saying, "Jesus is big, but he is big in this way... you guys got this wrong."
@@davidburroughs2244 Yes, but my point is that the title of this video has nothing to do with the content!
@@Brad4083 christians did change the ending bigly
@@scambammer6102 Yes, I agree, but Dr. Ehrman did not mention that. The title of this video might lead you to believe he did. The title does not reflect the content of this video.
@@Brad4083 I think the "fixed" part of the allegation is to assign intention to the act of completing, altering, extending, or explaining what happened.
Cool
I don't believe Jesus died on the cross. I think it appeared that he died, but he was resuscitated later in the tomb and that's why it was found empty and the resurrection myth came from that. Jesus booked it to Kashmir where he lived out the rest of his life and continued his ministry. It's well documented but the Christian religion has incentive to hide the information.
Yeah
Here's something Funny and Odd, @4:29(4:30) Neal says "God Himself", I wonder if God is a Woman, you hear "God Herself" playing Rasalhague in reverse, it is the star below Vega, known as Goddess Gula, mother of Damu 'The Child', associated with the Swine Star, the hague part of Rasal-hague, is Hog, which is a Swine, below Rasalhague is the star Antares, play it in reverse, you hear "She Raise Dead", the word "Again" in reverse says Vega, below and to the left of Rasalhague, is Cebalrai, Celbalrai, and Cheleb are from Kalb al Ra’i. "The Heart of the Shepherd," which Brown gives as the meaning of his Celabrai, is erroneous, doubtless from confusion of the Arabic Kalb, Heart, and Kalb, Dog., Goddess Gula's symbol was the Dog, it was associated with Hercules, 'The Sitting Dog of Bau', the star to the left has no name, the 3 form a pyramid, or a cross when connected to Antares, the Heart of the Scorpion, Goddess Serket, "She who causes the throat to Breathe". Now the image is of a Cross with a Bright star (Vega) directly above it. Playing Hercules in reverse "She Licker", the Lick of the Dog healed the Warrior, but Gula was known as the Goat Star.
What secrete group, has you kiss the goat, I wonder where, Her-cules, where cules means Butt. You'll what part of the butt, playing Celabrai in reverse, does the word 'Erebus', bring anything to mind, it means "Darkness", and now you know why Jesus had a Donkey(ass) head, and Mooning you by showing you his cules, his Buttocks from the Cross. Jesus and Aesculapius(Ophiuchus) became, he too became so skilled a physician that he was able to restore the dead to life; raise people from the dead.
Father of Damu and Husband of Gula was Pabilsag(Sagittarius), December 6th you find the Sun at the center of that cross, play "Sagittarius, December" in reverse, it says "Her Message, Say There Is A Guest", in Irish, the word culu is your backside, or reversal, such as reverse words
Yahushua
We have evidence that Popeye exists, thousands of cartoons.
And we have 500 eye-witnesses, millions of children and....
Olive Oyl, Bluto, Wimpy, Eugene, Ham Gravy etc
There actually is a historical person who Popeye is based on. Frank “Rocky” Fiegel. I heard this same terrible argument from someone about Santa Claus. Someone who did not even know about St. Nicholaus of Asia Minor. These are not helping the case for mythicism. You just walked into your own punch.
@@GnosticInformant one can be skeptical without being a mythicist. the evidence of a "historical jesus" (whatever that means) is weak.
@@GnosticInformant How about the Mormon Church analogy? We can say, _"We have photographs and newspaper reports of Joseph Smith and other church founding Prophets."_
The point being that no matter what the prostlyizer tries, I am always going to instantly nail them on Special Pleading, God of The Gaps, and all the other logical fallacies and desperate attempts that apologists laughably try every time.
I think this religion set out with a bratty, toxic, threatening, in your face self-righteous format, that threatens and annoys people, breaks up families, tells you to hate your family, then when people push right back at 'em, the dishonest religion then declares; "See? People don't like us and mock our childish antics and stupidity, therefore our (non) prophecy is fulfilled and the version of "god" exists."
I can put any prostlyizer, including the Pope, in checkmate in one move, and have them unable to answer, running from and trying to dodge a single two part question. I have a technique I've worked out over thousands of tests. It works every time without fail. Gets them immediately running and dodging and triggers them to get very annoyed. Because the way I do it, gigs up.
They're mad over the fact that Magical Thinking is easily picked apart, and plenty of us not only dare to do it - we enjoy it. They want everyone else to pretend and play along with their fantasies.
I find it delightfully amusing and fascinating to observe how the desperate and delusional mind of the Magical Thinker works. I used to have that mind! Before I understood how easily no-nonsense,
rational, critical thinking destroys and makes an utter mockery out of magical thinking. Being raised in the religion causes brain damage.
If we're to believe claims of Magical Woo on pure faith, Emotional Appeals, and 'feelings…
…when faith and feelings are the worst ways to try to confirm the truth and accuracy of most claims, including all claims of Magical Woo, the most lofty claims...
...then even more so the Mormons should be more believable than any other sect. And yet the self-righteous screech; "The Mormons are not true Christians!"
To which I reply; "Says Who? Christianity is a divided religion that can't even agree with itself. Who says your version is 100% absolutely, perfectly correct?
Of course it's all a rubbish grift and methodology of political power grabbing.
We can also use a fictional character that is not based on a "true story" or "true accounts." Such as *Superman.*
Superman has been seen in movies, books, comics and walking around many times. Yet there is zero credible evidence that any human has ever had magical powers or that it's even possible for humans.
Same with Popeye, even if it is supposedly based on a person, the cartoon character displays supernatural powers, and of course those have never been credibly proven in any human.
So that same type of claim appears in bible and other characters that had supposed so-called, "supernatural" powers.
@@scambammer6102 ...Jesus had a whole family, brothers and sisters too.
His brother James succeeded him in the movement.
All the disciples too, that were killed as James was.
This is all well documented in rabbinic literature of the sages who infiltrated the movement to discredit it along with their conspiracy with the Romans to hide the Truth.
@@TheWhyisthatso LMAO! don't you think the "sages who infiltrated the movement to discredit it" might be a bit BIASED? How do you know they didn't just make up all of their reported facts in order to discredit christianity?. ALSO the Talmud was written 200-400 CE, so they wouldn't know any way. Try something a little less desperate.
Jesus is the çhrist the son of the living God,and my Lord and savior, he alone can save us from, the fires of hell ,and if you don't accept his gift of salvation,you will perish in the fires of hell ,for eternity,he said before Abraham, I am ,what more do you need,seek and you will find ,ask and it will be given, look to Christ,with your anger,if you are true, he will guide you in all truth, God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever,believith in him,shall not perish but have everlasting life,
bullshit!!!!
People have confused the word of god for Jesus Christ. He is not Jesus Christ, he is the Father of Jesus Christ he is God. The Word Of God is God and Jesus Christ is the Son Of God. This is why none of his own disciples knew who he was. He came in his Father's name. His Father is the ruler of the body he created known as Jesus Christ. But Jesus Christ exist inside the WORD OF GOD because the WORD OF GOD IS GOD.
John 14:11
Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.
So the Word Of God was sacrificed inside the body of Jesus Christ (the Words Father) who exist inside the Word because he is the Words son!
John 5:43
I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.
He's also based on Canaanite mythology.
According to the general consensus of scholarship (even critical Christian scholars), YHWH was originally incorporated into the Canaanite pantheon as a son of the Canaanite high god El before inheriting the top spot in the pantheon and El's wife Athirat (Asherah) before religious reforms. If you want to see if El is fictional, just read his mythology in the Ugaritic/Canaanite texts.
"I should add here that it is very clear from the grammar that the noun nachalah in v. 9 should be translated “inheritance.” *Yahweh receives Israel as his “inheritance” (nachalah), just as the other sons of El received their nations as their inheritance (nachal, v. 8).* With this verb, especially in the Hiphil, the object is always what is being given as an inheritance. Thus, Israel is given to Yahweh as his inheritance. ((Here I’m indebted to Dan McClellan.)) It would make no sense for Elyon to give himself an inheritance. Moreover, as I’ve argued elsewhere, it is not just the Gentile nations that are divided up according to the number of the sons of El. It is all of humankind, i.e., “the sons of Adam.” This clearly includes Israel. And the sons of Adam are not divided up according to the number of the sons of El, plus one (i.e., plus Elyon). They are divided up, according to the text, solely according to the number of the sons of El. *Thus, that Yahweh receives Israel as his inheritance makes Yahweh one of the sons of El mentioned in v. 8. Any other construal of the text would constitute its rewriting."*
*"The Most Heiser: Yahweh and Elyon in Psalm 82 and Deuteronomy 32 - Religion at the Margins"* based on the *majority scholarly consensus.*
(Written by Thom Stark who is a Christian)
*"Michael Heiser: A Unique Species? - Religion at the Margins"*
(A second response to Michael Heiser)
*"Excerpt from “Yahweh and the Gods and Goddesses of Canaan” by John Day - Lehi's Library."*
*"The Table of Nations: The Geography of the World in Genesis 10 - **TheTorah.com**"*
(Excluding the short narrative on Nimrod (vv. 8-12), which appears to be a later addition, Genesis 10 contains *70* names of nations or cities, a number that was symbolic of totality. Similarly, the descendants of Jacob were *70* in number (Gen 46:37; Exod 1:5), *as were the sons of the supreme Canaanite god El, with whom YHWH became equated.)*
*"Mark Smith: Yahweh as El’s Son & Yahweh’s Ascendency - Lehi's Library"*
(Mark Smith is a Catholic)
*"02 | December | 2009 | Daniel O. McClellan - Psalm 82"*
(Daniel McClellan is a Mormon)
*"God's Wife Edited Out of the Bible - Almost."*
(Pay attention to whose wife Asherah (Athirat) is in the Ugaritic/Canaanite texts and how she became the wife of YHWH/Yahweh)
*"Yahweh's Divorce from the Goddess Asherah in the Garden of Eden - Mythology Matters."*
*"Married Deities: Asherah and Yahweh in Early Israelite Religion - Yahweh Elohim."*
*"Asherah, God's Wife in Ancient Israel. Part IV - theyellowdart"*
*"The Gates of Ishtar - El, was the original god of the bible."*
*"The Gates of Ishtar - Anath in the Elephantine Papyri"*
(It appears in addition to Asherah (Athirat) being the consort of Yahweh it also appears some Israelites also viewed the Canaanite goddess Anat(h) as Yahweh's consort)
*"Canaanite Religion - New World Encyclopedia"*
(Refer to the section "Relationship to Biblical Religion")
*"The Syncretization of Yahweh and El : reddit/AcademicBiblical"*
(For a good summary of all of the above articles)
Watch Professor Christine Hayes who lectures on the Hebrew Bible at Yale University. Watch lecture 2 from 40:40 to 41:50 minutes, lecture 7 from 30:00 minutes onwards, lecture 8 from 12:00 to 17:30 minutes and lecture 12 from 27:40 minutes onwards.
Watch *"Pagan Origins of Judaism"* by Sigalius Myricantur and read the description in the video to see the scholarship the video is based on.
Watch *"How Monotheism Evolved"* by Sigalius Myricantur and watch up to at least 21:40.
Watch *"Atheism - A History of God (The Polytheistic Origins of Christianity and Judaism)"*
(By a former theist)
Watch *"The Origins of Yahweh"* by Derreck Bennett at Atheologica.
the father is his God. he calls him "My God and your God" (john 20 17). The father is also in the disciples. And the "logos" is a hellenistic concept. At the end of the day, the Messiah has a God
Question: Those are some lofty claims. What is your objectively demonstrable, independently verifiable, consistently testable, repeatable-on-demand, measurable & falsifiable credible professional scientific evidence…
…that the specific version of a presuppositional so-called "god" that _you_ think exists, acutally exists❓
And what is your equally lofty credible evidence that the particular version and interpretations of your personally selected, cherry-picked and chosen version of the supposed "god" that you want others to believe in, is the 100% perfectly accurate and correct version…
...from a divided religion that can't even agree with itself on core doctrine❓
@@richman8082 And yet Christianity is a divided religion that can't even agree with itself.
Anytime someone declares something definitive about Christianity, we skeptics can usually say; "WHO SAYS?" Christianity is a divided religion. Who says your interpretation is the 100% perfectly correct version?
@leo lou ....." the LIVING God "....meaning "Mind" ( Thought and Consciousness ).
"God is Spirit" ( John 4:24 )
"Spirit" is a metaphor for "mind" in all the scriptures.
Yo
Ehrman - 'you would be hard pressed to show that Jesus is actually God in some sense in Mark's Gospel'
this is laughable. The very first words from Mark are a quote from Isaiah 40 which are clearly about Yahweh yet Mark applies them to Jesus:
"I will send my messenger ahead of you,
who will prepare your way”-
“a voice of one calling in the wilderness,
‘Prepare the way for the Lord,
make straight paths for him."
The Septuagint Greek version of the Hebrew has "...make straight in the desert
a highway for our God."
Mark's implication couldnt be clearer.
Why do you STILL listen to Ehrman on the divinity of Jesus in the gospels?!
And yet Christianity is a divided religion that can't even agree with itself.
Anytime someone declares something definitive about Christianity, we skeptics can usually say;
"SAYS WHO?" Christianity is a divided religion. Who says _your_ interpretation is the 100% perfectly correct version?
And if you're making the claim a "god" exists, I can put you in checkmate on that as well, typically in one move.
But I still agree that the bible says Jesus is "god" although again, Christianity doesn't agree on that. And my former statement still applies against that.
The reason I like pushing the "Jesus was god come to earth" version is because it makes it child's play to exploit all the plot holes and contradictions in the bible and the religion thus exposing its fraudulent, corrupt nature of deep hypocricy.
that quote says nothing to suggest that jesus was god. do you know how to read?
@@scambammer6102 You mean the fact that Mark quotes a passage from Isaiah which relates to Yahweh, the God of the OT, and applies it to Jesus does not imply anything?!
@@PC-vg8vn what you quoted doesn't imply anything. It talks about a "messenger" not a god. "relates to yahweh" the whole fg book relates to yahweh
Bart trying to make this piece of literature far too high and super mysterious. No, it is not that big of a deal. It is just another story out of so many about this allegedly guy jesus. But Bart has his own business with students, has a business to run so lets the income coming.
"Seeker of truth" ironic name when you advocating the exact opposite in this reductionist pathetic comment 🤣 yeah bro, apparently reality isnt mysterious and we already know everything.
@@paulkickling7828 never said reality by the way, nothing “mysterious” with this piece of literature (mark’s gospel).
@SeekerTruth001 nothing mysterious huh. Seems like you missed the point of Mark 4, which btw even predicts your own speech now saying there is nothing there. Ironic huh, the book you are trying to reduce just cleared you 🤣 nice one buddy. You just got owned by someone who isnt alive 🤗 oh and bro remind me, where mark's gospel written? Reality? Or was it written somewhere in a dream world? I thought you were an atheist? Guess not 🤪
@@paulkickling7828 fairytales written by some authors, nice piece for a museum or antiquity studies or comparative religions. Not to be believed of course. So I don’t know what should I be amazed by anyways. If you believe the content good for you, to each its own.
@SeekerOfWaves philosophy is fairytales to you huh. Plato is syncretic with christianity completely. Plato's philosophy fairytales? Hey bro, Plato logically proved an immortal eternal world exists. Thats a fairytale hug? LOGIC IS A FAIRYTALE? hey bro, do you call quantum mechanics a fairytale? 🤣 sad little reductionist anti intellectual. 🙃😘 "seeker of truth" change your name bro, to anti intellectual reductionist fool.
Bart 'Strawman' Ehrman.
I don't see that at all. If you don't mind, would you please define 'strawman' as you use it?
Strawman is telling people what they believe. Just like Henry 'Strawman' Schmit. Yes, I agree with Daniel Paulson but won't be as polite. Don't use words if you don't know what they mean. They make one seem incredibly uneducated. But perhaps...........
@@Randomguy-ep7zl Insecure theists announce themselves, don't they?
@@Randomguy-ep7zl A 'strawman argument' is not "telling people what they believe". It is setting up a false hollow argument (the 'strawmn') against something and then pretending to defeat (pushing the strawman over) said false hollow argument. Hence, Bart 'strawman' Ehrman.
@@danielpaulson8838 No insecurity going here.
Oh no.....another "Dr." with a piece of paper that says He's an "expert", and doesn't have a clue.
"God is Spirit..." ( John 4:24 )
The word "spirit" in scripture is a metaphor for the "MIND" ( Thought and Consciousness )
"GOD" is "MIND" ( Thought and Consciousness )
We are ALL "sons (children) of God "........
"Father" = MIND
"Mother" = THOUGHT
"Son" (Child) = CONSCIOUSNESS
This is the TRUE "Holy Trinity".....that the FALSE Roman church does not want you to know .
God = Higher self
Father = Conscious
Mother = Subconscious
Child = Offspring, seeds which are a product of union between conscious and subconscious. (Mental choices) The hierarchy must be maintained.
Question: Those are some lofty claims. What is your objectively demonstrable, independently verifiable, consistently testable, repeatable-on-demand, measurable & falsifiable credible professional scientific evidence…
…that the specific version of a presuppositional so-called "god" that _you_ think exists, acutally exists❓
And what is your equally lofty credible evidence that the _particular version and interpretations_ of your personally selected, cherry-picked and chosen version of the supposed "god" that you want others to believe in, is the 100% perfectly accurate and correct version…
...from a divided religion that can't even agree with itself on core doctrine❓
@@evangelicalsnever-lie9792 .......I just told you clown. Look in the mirror.
I know you have a "mind" (spirit) even if it is "retarded".
@@danielpaulson8838 TRANSLATION: _"Something of the highest order exists, because I say so;"_ is the amusing foot stomping argument of a small angry child, or a stunted adult Karen. But it's not a credible argument. You are simply not that special or important, and it wouldn't matter if you were, you'd still be in checkmate.
So we can observe that you self-righteously run around making big, lofty, woofing claims about Magical Woo, and that you have a Magical Invisible Friend that you want people to believe in…
You DO want people to get saved and believe in _your_ version of Jesus Christ - correct?
*And yet when asked for credible evidence for these claims,* you are instantly emotionally triggered, and cannot produce the evidence that has never been credibly proved and shown as objectively demonstrable, independently verifiable, consistently testable, repeatable-on-demand, measurable & falsifiable.
The first person who can stand up and credibly prove your claims _(you sure can't),_ with the highest possible evidence required for your highest possible claims, will very likely, based on historical observations of fantastical evidentiary breakthroughs, _win multiple Nobel and other high achievement prizes,_ large corporate, government and religious organization gifts, grants, and donations, crowd source money showering and other revenue streams for continued research.
Plus patents, money from lawsuits from those who will invariably try to infringe on your fantasy patents, that step-by-step would need to demonstrate how your claims of Magical Woo are performed.
Copyright, book & speaking tours. Movie rights, merchandising and advertising. All the usual financially exploitable income streams.
Thus a person who can credibly prove these claims, such a historic discovery would likely make such a discoverer fabulously wealthy.
And yet here you are, in a backwater comment section, _not_ being able to credibly prove a single one of your claims of Magical Woo... and I was able to trigger and checkmate you in one move.
It might be time for you to quit the side of wishful thinking fantasy, and farce, suit up, and face uncomfortable truths about reality, and re-think everything you've been indoctrinated, brainwashed, and gaslighted into believing in, because it soothes your fears and terror, and comforts your 'feelings."
You are now in Checkmate, stuck on a question you cannot credibly answer, despite making lofty claims that you "know" all these highest possible claims that you cannot credibly prove.
*So are you ready answer the question yet❓*
Or are you ready to drop the childish ways of wanting a Magical Invisible daddy savior figure and simplistic magical thinking?
You too would then be able to put every prostlitizer including the Pope or any religious figure in checkmate, in one move as well. Instead of always trying to play the self-righteous pious martyr, who always loses the debate…
@@evangelicalsnever-lie9792 There ain't no God. Go bark up a different tree.
Jesus vs Spartacus - lived 70 years apart, Spartacus led a slave revolution described the Third Servile War as "the only just war in history" , Jesus lives and preformed miracles attracting a huge following? written proof? loads written about Spartacus during his life and directly after his death absolutely zero about Jesus until some two generations after death many different versions of his life written by monks living in all male closed societies not historians all leaders of the age like with Spartacus. The story we have to day in the bible is laughable he was a Jewish prophet during the time of the alleged up coming Jewish apocalypse . All doom and gloom in their ignorance .
Cool