The Birth of Jesus in History & Legend (Bart Ehrman)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 окт 2024
- The Michael Shermer Show # 230
In this conversation with the renowned biblical scholar and historian, Bart Ehrman reviews the highlights of his forthcoming live seminar on December 5th from 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. EST, for which you can sign up here: bit.ly/ehrman-...
Cost: $39.95 for early-bird registration through Nov. 28th then $49.95.
Topics include:
· What can we actually know about the birth of Jesus?
· How can we decide whether he was born in Bethlehem?
· Is it possible to reconcile the different Gospel accounts?
· Was the story of the Virgin Birth a later fabrication?
· What is the evidence for (or against) the many details, such as the trip to Bethlehem, the visit of the wisemen, and the “slaughter of the innocents”?
· How many of the most familiar parts of the stories come from later legends?
Shermer and Ehrman also discuss:
· How we know Jesus existed and was crucified
· How these questions are different epistemologically from those about Jesus’ resurrection and the claim that he died for our sins
· How Christians deal with the trinity problem: how can God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit be one and the same and yet separate and different? “God sacrificed himself…to himself…to save us from himself.” How is this possible?
· How Christians answer this question: Why did Jesus have to suffer and die? Why couldn’t God just forgive us for our sins?
· Why was the virgin birth so important to early Christians?
· Why was the resurrection so important to early Christians?
· Anti-Semitism in the early Christian church (“the Jews killed Jesus” or “the Jews killed God”) and why it makes no theological sense (Jesus was Jewish, and if he had to die to save us from our sins, whoever killed Jesus should be thanked)
· Why Jews and Muslims do not believe that Jesus was the messiah
· How Jesus became God and how Christianity grew from a few dozen followers at the time of Jesus’s death to over two billion followers today
· Theodicy and the problem of evil: why does an all powerful, all knowing, all good God allow people to suffer?
SUPPORT THE PODCAST
If you enjoy the podcast, please show your support by making a $5 or $10 monthly donation.
www.skeptic.co...
#michaelshermer
#skeptic
Listen to The Michael Shermer Show via Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, Google Podcasts, Stitcher, iHeartRadio, and TuneIn.
www.skeptic.co...
Thank you Mr. SHerman for posting this talk without commercials.
Michael Sherman is the very first person I have ever seen who puts his finger on one or two of the most fundamental credibility discrepancies in the most basic Christian belief (and then spurs Bart Erhman to discuss the third!) Thanks very much for this.
Bart, or rather his talks, fascinate me. I am so looking forward to this and glad I happened to see the thumbnail. Good stuff like this makes housework so much more tolerable!
Check out his recorded lectures from The Teaching Company.
@@soslothful Thanks
I prefer the Monty Pythons version,The Life of Brian….blessed are the cheese makers.
.... certainly more believable
Never heard of it.
@@stansolo4138 But is it more believable than the universe being formed for no purpose or reason by nothing SOMEHOW 13 Billion years ago, and then around 4 Billion years ago the Earth formed and after millions of years a primordial sludge SOMEHOW formed the first amino acids and cells that eventually became a creature that eventually through Evolution eventually led to humans, who now for some reason argue online and ponder their existence in a meaningless universe about their pointless meaningless lives in a universe that was an accident that will one day disappear into nothing?
Bart does a talk on The Life of Brian - interesting and funny too ruclips.net/video/ZegjCgfiIsk/видео.html
@@kamikazekrush3758 Why does the Universe have to have a meaning?
Wow! What a great conversation! I thoroughly enjoyed this. I laughed along with these two guys so much and had a lot of fun. Very entertaining and informative. Thank you so much to both of you.
The world needs more HONEST & critical scholars like Dr. Bart Ehrman. I'm so glad he has been on so many platforms lately!
Watch Mike Winger's refutations of Bart. If you are interested in the truth it is good to hear all sides. In my observations, Bart chooses how honest to be depending on his audience and what he can get away with
@@ProfYaffle I agree about hearing ALL sides of an idea, argument, concept. Due to this, I am familiar with Mike Winger & much of the reasoning behind his arguments; which I do not find overly compelling, similarly compared with other apologists like: Michael Jones, Sean McDowell, William Lane Craig, Stuart Knetchle. While I believe these mentioned apologists put the most intellectual effort into their arguments, I also believe they show copious amounts of either cognitive dissonance, intellectual dishonesty, or excessive bias. Either way, I find more inconsistencies & inaccuracies in their arguments than in arguments from scholars & academics like: Bart Ehrman, Elaine Pagels, John Collins, Joshua Bowen, Mark Goodacre, Lawrence Krauss, Saun Carroll. The way ideas are selectively expressed & portrayed out of context ("cherry picking") is not something I'm fond of. I don't agree with or approve of everything said/written by the people on "my side" of arguments because I try very hard to be open minded enough to especially criticize those I mostly agree with. I find hyperbole to be the biggest issue I have with people like Bart Ehrman.... I believe he occassionally gets very passionate & overstates something that causes his statement to be received poorly by audience. That's why we should critically analyze all arguments with the same methodology, be open minded to change our views & avoid dogmatism.
@@RyanEhli-MusicAndGuitar : Well said, Ryan!
@@ProfYafflethat is false he presents history unbiased ur being dishonest…..for instance he tells mythicist to stop saying Jesus was a myth
@robbiebobbie2011 you appear to struggle with punctuation.
Bart may well defend some aspects of Christianity. But that doesn't mean he doesn't twist other aspects.
Show me where I have been dishonest.
I’m a Christian and I really appreciate both of these guys.
I have numerous relatives who REALLY believe they see and talk with Jesus on a regular basis. But he never seems to be there when I'm around.
haha.. someone that likely never existed supernaturally cannot 'be around' anybody... but I am guessing you subscribe to that notion.
I've known those types and I'm distantly related to those types don't I feel this
Every day this podcast is getting better, alittle better all the time.
This was a great interview. Shermer did a good job at asking questions and keeping the conversation moving at a good pace.
Ehrman is a true patriot. The way he has taken a blowtorch to the ignorance and stupidity that is Christianity is a gift to this country. No reasonable person can assert the Bible is reliable after seeing Bart obliterate it with evidence. Cannot understand why he has not received the presidential medal of freedom for all of his work in freeing humanity from the nonsense that is religion. A true hero.
Ehrman is hardly the last word on everything he passes judgment on. John Lennox is one who could handle him.
I love Bart…But he’s a tenured professor at a major university and he’s as left and woke as one can be so you can’t really say “patriot”. If he sends 50,000 dollars to Project2025 I’d say patriot haha…but he sends his donations to The Pronoun Warriors Fund so definitely not a patriot. But I still respect him.
@@bestself2438 the irony of your comments is apparently lost on you. Calling yourself a patriot whilst admiring project 2025 is so confounding and ignorant. Project 2025 is a ploy for fascism and theocratic rule. If you think that is “patriotic” then you really need to take some history classes because you are woefully ignorant on the facts.
RUclips has officially been hijacked by Dr. Ehrman's jolly laugh.
Thank you kindly for every question asked and every answer given. Both, the interviewer and guest are greatly appreciated.
My daughter (who was a believer) was raped and it lead to many years of PTSD, physical suffering and ultimately her death at 39. If all things work together for good...it is impossible for me to see it. I am looking forward to the end of life so my pain can also end. Glad I gave up believing I n God before she died so I don’t have any anger towards he who does not exist.
So sorry to hear about your loss. Every life is extremely valuable, especially your own. I'm sure your daughter would not want you to waste yours. Seek out the help you need through professionals with science and reason. Your life and happiness is the best tribute to her memory.
I'm very sorry for your daughter's suffering and your loss of her. Unlike you, I do believe in God and am mostly angry with him for doing so little to help.
@@vaska1999 Thank you for your kind words. It has been surprising to me that I have received a lot more compassion from strangers and non-Christians than I have from Christians and even many members of my own family. ???
I'm so sorry Begie. How tragic and heart breaking. I can't imagine losing my daughter. I'm grateful I don't believe in this silly nonsense anymore. I wish you healing and love.
Yes Begie we love you and sorry for your lost. Life is an experience and an experiment. We learn to adapt to our new normals. I'm sure you will be fine. I know it's hard but know that we love you and support you.
Having read Erman's Did Jesus Exist and Sanders's The Historical Figure of Jesus, I'm grateful to Erman for providing all this scholarship and insight into the foundational elements of Christianity. He works from data, evidence and educated extrapolations to get as close to factual and reason-based conclusions about the Christ figure as anyone logically can.
A historical figure is revealing himself in such a way people are changing religions and are so full of joy and peace.
Two of my favorite you tube notables! Thanks! Hope you both had a great holiday.
Wonderful program. Maybe this answer is weak, but I was taught in my church that all-natural disasters and war and rapes, murder etc. are the works of Azazel and the powers of darkness that overwhelm certain open people. It maintains that God does not send evil. They also teach that God is not all-powerful, all present, or knows all, but we are to pray for His kingdom to come for the current earthly kingdom is ruled by Azazel. Ehrman rocks. We reject the atonement, the resurrection, the Virgin birth, trinity, and deity of Jesus we agree with Bart that all people by treating others with kindness will be welcome in the world to come; if there is such a place.
14:01_ No the Romans did not "crucify everybody for anything" , what an ignorant statement and sadly Ehrman just nods agreement
..good grief.
Good one, Michael -- thanks for having Bart on.
Great interview. I really enjoyed that. Thanks for organizing and uploading.
Note to Michael Shermer - IMO, it seems that you've mellowed in recent times. If you're now having friendly exchanges with Deepak Chopra, then you should also reconsider your previous hostility towards Rupert Sheldrake.
Note to Bart : Richard Swinburne is the Oxford professor you couldn't remember.
Take a shot every time Shermer tells his Ken Miller story.
Or says his wife is from Germany
Or the Copernican principle
"RESURRECTIONS BY DEFINITION ARE NOT PROBABLE" (nervous laughter). I'm not a Christian but why the nervous laughter. I love laughter when appropriate; why does Erhman puntuate statements with laughter. To lighten the tone, embarrassment? Apart from the four gospels there's no independent evidence for Jesus (Greek for Joshua). I guess this is entertainment; Bart's getting paid and no script writer is needed.
Another great lecture series can be found a Centre Place.
In Islamic nations, if you question Islam, bad things will happen to you. We are lucky to have the freedom to question religion in this country. Good conversation.
ruclips.net/video/Ryn8H9Z8lUk/видео.html
Lucky? It should be the norm worldwide in 2021...
@@Raydensheraj I agree but, that is not the reality in which many people live in undemocratic nations.
@@Raydensheraj as we all should have good food, clean water and healthcare ...but you dont get that even in USA. So yeah, i am thankful for what i have.
@UCBPWCn93jDiiesBBXcoG08Q yes fortunate..........@sshole
When I read the Gospels and Acts, I am really taken in by the story -(probably because of wishful thinking,) but I cannot reconcile the story about the Holy Spirit when comparing the theology/belief against actual Church History… Right from the beginning of Acts through to today.
If the Holy Spirit/Comforter was released to guide the Church after Jesus left the Church to carry on the mission, why were there so many early debates about what to believe… why were there so many supposed heretics… why so many denominations… why do so many ministers profess that they are in tune with the Holy Spirit, yet do not bare the biblical fruits to show the Holy Spirit is guiding them… and so on.
I have had a few explanations for the lack of Holy Spirit guidance… but they don’t seem to add up… Just have faith… 😄
learning a lot from Dr Ehrman.
Modern Unitarians today are Universalists. A quip among Unitarians, "The Unitarian Church is a place for atheists to go on Sunday morning. " Humanists .
This space makes it enlightening, expands thought and invites debate. Questions are part of being HUMAN, trying to understand the essence of spirit , a force that is a mystery. Why do bad things happen to good people? Where wa God during the Holocaust? These significant questions hold the human race perhaps more accountable for what they do, instead of leaving it to a deity of sorts.Thank you Michael Shermer and Bart Ehrman 1:03:51
My question for Dr.Ehrman: Are scholars laughing at Dr.Carrier after reading his peer reviewed book "On Historicity of Jesus"? And how do scholars react on your own peer unreviewed book "Did Jesus Exist?".
I want to know too! I personally believe both Carrier and Ehrman have strong case, even when Carrier's case is clearly the least popular among scholars.
Every debate I’ve watch with carrier and a scholar, the scholar didn’t bother reading his book and I suspect Ehrman is the same.
@@amiyourcharm fans of both but I agree.
I wonder why Bart is scared of ever debating Carrier? Carrier has extended the offer many times.
Bart Ehrman is not an expert on the historical Jesus and he'll be the first to tell you that. But he has made his decision based on all the experts he's read. And it seems to be a valid position considering 90% of the experts agree with him.
He wrote "Did Jesus Exist?" specifically for non-scholars because none of the experts were writing books for non-scholars.
Mythicists like to treat Dr
Ehrman the same way creationists treat Darwin. Ehrman is a communicator, he's just interested in making sure laypeople are familiar with the scholarly consensus on biblical studies.
I was recently diagnosed with bipolar 1 and had experienced my first manic episode. All my life I was a man of science. But during this period, I began to believe in different aspects of life. One belief was a belief in God and had "memories " of the afterlife. Another belief was I was the messiah.
I ended up in a mental clinic and began my medication treatment. I'm normal now, but one of the things I learn and believe is humanity belief in the supernatural can be explained by the wiring of our brains. And not only famous religious figures but those claiming some spiritual event, may suffer from a mental illness. Jesus may have been bipolar.
@Paul Prevatt
Totally agree with you. Are you spiritual or atheist or on the fence?
I agree with you. I imagine you have heard some theories that Paul’s vision of Jesus on the road to Damascus was possibly caused by an epileptic seizure. The bright light, etc. are consistent with that.
@@Beegee1952
I have not, but I'll check it out.
And Jesus may also have been imagined as there are many previous stories about other spiritual entities who had events similar to his birth etc. Gilgamesh etc.
What branch of Science were you involved in? I'm not sure about "brain-wiring" but I do know people who are "mentally ill" do not choose to be so afflicted.
@@Longtack55 Just a layman...no degree. I remember a study was done hooking subjects to brain sensors and inhibiting something....and the the people would sense "God". Maybe bipolar and other mental illness does something similar.
I'm back to being myself again but I do admit it was cool/fun/special to have a sense of there being a God or afterlife.
Now I look at people at church and can't relate anymore. Though I understand them or should I say understand humanity more.
Is there a way to listen to the Christmas lectures since i missed the seminar?
There is 8.0 billion people with 2.4 billion (30%) declaring they are Christians and 5.6 billion (70%) declaring they are not. Problem is there is no one Christian unified religion. In fact there are over 350 different religions using over 100 different bibles preaching different interpretations of scripture through 1 million churches. Some believe in a pre-trib rapture while most do not. Most rejoice in song and dance while a few forbid the practice. Some teach Genesis 1 as being the exact word of God while scholars state Genesis 2 contradicts Genesis 1 and both are stories. So if Christians can't agree on Christianity then why should anyone else?
There is no central authority on Christianity trying to police the official doctrine. So it's every man for himself. The Muslims realized this folly, that's why Islamic authorities try to enforce strict adherence to the official Quranic doctrines. If you twist anything in the Quranic narratives, the authorities will hunt you down and put you to death.
Dr. Ehrman is one of my favorites.
I enjoy Ehrman but he needs stop dodging a debate with Carrier. If it's such a push button issue then go school him on the topic. He went at Price so give it a go with Carrier on the topic. Offered $5G and turns it down for sophomoric reasons. Come on Bart
Robert Price's debate with Bart was not one of his best. Neither of them performed their best. I agree that Bart should debate Carrier and other mythicists.
Carrier v. Ehrman…Let’s get
Ready to RUMMMMMMMBLLLLEEE
This was a blast - as pretty much everything Bart Ehrman is part of.
Not feeling his attitude about mythicism vs historicity. "We just laugh at them" is not a good argument, nor is it the kind of thing people say when they have a good argument.
Who is "we"? He is hanging out with other grifters paid by churches.
_"We just laugh at them" is not a good argument, nor is it the kind of thing people say when they have a good argument._
That's precisely what I say, and what my attitude is, toward flat earthers and young earth creationists. But it isn't because their arguments are just too good for me to counter. It's that I'm sufficiently knowledgeable to recognize how utterly outmatched they are, such that going into detail about it point by point just feels unnecessary and frankly a bit ridiculous
@@jackfrosterton2530 I think you missed my point. It's all about context. Sure, it's fine to say that you laugh at flat earthers. I do too. But if you are asked directly what is wrong with their arguments, "we just laugh at them" is an inadequate response.
A lot of people would like to see Bart Ehrman debate Richard Carrier on the historicity of Jesus but he refuses to do it for some reason
There's a debate I would like to watch. Unfortunately it's not going to happen. I think Ehrman is probably right, but he's unable to keep his cool on the historicity topic when challenged. The two have communicated in the past and it devolved into personal attacks, and now it's just bad blood. Ehrman says he only debates "decent human beings" (excluding Carrier). I'm sure Carrier would "win" such a debate though.
And Dawkins refuses to debate creationists
Great conversation. Very enlightening. Two places that I was disappointed:
1. As it pertains to "why did Jesus have to die?", there seemed to be a presupposition that God killed Jesus in order to appease some anger he has towards us. While there are many Christians who believe that (especially in the West), that is a minority view in Christianity, and I would have liked to have heard the topic explored without that assumption.
2. At the very end, Shermer mentioned that maybe, "God just can't do it. He's limited". I think that's a far more plausible explanation and wish it would have gotten more than one passing line.
Dr. Bart. Some guy who is born of a virgin and whose birth was signaled by a star or conjunction of planets and whose birth caused wise men to travel from afar to give him gifts and also caused Herrod to order the slaughter of the innocents and who, in some stories was able to kill people and resurrect people even as a child should cause Jews living near him to reconsider what the messiah would accomplish. At the very least, he should have been treated as a special person or prophet but, for some reason, they seemed to mostly ignore him. What is the reason for that?
The only reason is that the whole birth story thing is made up.
The reason is that those wisemen actually first brought all those things to "Brian." 😊
Well, if suffering and evil are somehow necessary to play out this grand plan that is far beyond human understanding, then why pray? Honestly, sometimes I think all this "barking madness" is just used today as a rationale for having an imaginary friend as an adult. Since we are all ultimately alone, in a sense, I guess I understand desiring the comfort of someone powerful and loving, who has our backs and is there to "save" us, listening to our private pleas and worries. It is kind of a haunting idea, when you think about it.
Awesome chat! Thanks guys!
Instead of asking why God permits evil ask instead why do so many humans do evil. It started in then beginning with Cain. People commit evil not God. Perhaps good is an antidote to evil and people have the moral choice to choose their response. Can evil even exist without good as an alternate choice?
There is not a lot of evidence for a historical Jesus in the first century. Bart keeps laughing off the idea and says there were 4 gospel writers, but there are 4 unknown writers and two copied from the writer of Mark, so they are not independent, and the writer of John probably knew the other gospels before he wrote his.
Paul says he met James, a 'brother of the lord' - but he also says other Christians were brothers, so it might not be his blood brother. He also says Jesus revealed himself to Peter/Cephas and the others, but Jesus revealed himself to Paul but Jesus was dead so they all could have been hallucinations. And he says himself that he does not know the teachings of Jesus from men, which would be unusual if Cephas/Peter lived with Jesus in real life and Paul spent a lot of time with him.
I thought the Romans kept crucifixion specifically for crimes against the state, like treason or slaves revolting.
The Romans crucified a lot of early Christians because they were afraid the Jesus Movement was a form of insurrection to overthrow the Emperor.
@@freddiereadie30 Yes, that's what I am saying. And crucifying hundreds of Jews (remember, there as yet no Christians), the idea that Pilate would spend time debating with Jesus is as likely as George Bush debating with someone in Guantanamo. Wouldn't it stand to reason that if the word got around that this preacher could raise the dead, the Romans would have passed this on to the emperor? Or told him that the dead of Jerusalem rose for a night and met with their relatives?
@@mountbeckworth1
The Jews have been waiting for signs of the coming of the Messiah for centuries. They got tired of waiting & waiting & waiting.
Then suddenly out of nowhere, a guy with great oratory skills came preaching some radical stuffs that can be rattling the basic Jewish doctrines (think of it like Martin Luther rebelling against Catholicism).
So some wise men saw that they could groom this radical guy and make him the Messiah that the Hebrew Bible was talking about and perhaps start a Movement within Judaism.
To convince people to join the Movement, they need to add stories of miracles. And people readily believed stories back then. It's like people today readily believe on fake news they've read on Facebook without verifying the facts.
It so happened that these wise men who cooked up this grooming conspiracy, were well-educated men who spoke Koine Greek. They spread the stories around the communities and it went viral. Until several decades later, compilers & editors decided to stitch these viral stories together and made copies of them.
The rest is history.
@@freddiereadie30 rather, the cult of Titus said that these books foretold Titus... so rejecting that was actually rejecting the Emperor.
Yeah the idea that a jewish crowd would have any say at all in jesus crucifictionc is ridiculous.
"Why can't it be a hangnail?" Dr. E, that was the funniest thing you'd ever said!
What I'd like to know is how did Joseph of Aromatherapy remove the nails ?
thanks for another interesting conversation michael
It would be interesting to have input from a competent physician on the question of whether Jesus died on the cross and what might his contemporaries have witnessed if he didn't.
How would a physician know if he died or not?
@@versioncity1 yeah I’m not sure I understand what this would achieve. Whether he died or not is more of a question of historical validity than a scientific question. Romans crucified people to death all the time during that period, so it’s not as if the possibility he was killed on a cross is hard to believe.
Common practice was to leave the corpses up to be picked at by birds, etc., and scavenged, as insult to injury. Due to a Jewish holiday this is probably not what was done with Jesus, but it's unlikely that he survived crucifixion and managed to scurry away from the cross, lay low and live on the lam.
Please provide the full date, day, month and year.
Utterly delightful conversation, thank you both!
Mathew took his book to the publisher who said go and beef it up. Four revisions later publisher thinks more money if we sell it under assumed names.
Listening to this as I head to a Christmas Eve service with the fam 😂😂 need to balance out the BS I’m about to hear with some real scholarship. Thanks Michael & Bart for the great conversation!
Did they get ya?....At church?.... Did they fix ya? Are you better now?😂
Two strong atheist 💪🏻!!
Good on you both for being so strong!!
😂😂😂 You weak fools. I bet in real life you both wimps
A heeb and a heathen what would you expect them to say
Ah...the family...I can so relate.
@@chuckyoneill9029 Which is which?? lmao
Bart Ehrman's defence of an historical Jesus amounts to a "vast number of independent sources" that "talk about Jesus in the same way". There's actually a single independent source: the gospel of mark. The rest can be traced to that.
What evidence is there Josephus or Tacitus ever read the gospel of mark?
@@aaronclarke7732
Josephus wrote long after the Gospel of Mark. The passage in Book 18 is widely disputed -- a jew wouldn't write this.
Tacitus wrote even later than that.
Have you heard of these alien ships at Roswell? Does my writing that count as *independent proof* that it happened?
This is the thin thread to which Bart Ehrman entrusts his certainty.
@@BlackBeltMonkeySong why does it matter that they were later? That does not prove your claim. You said they were derived from Mark. What evidence is there that they were even aware of Mark? They were both hostile and geographically removed from events. It’s not comparable to Roswell because the claim is that someone lived. Not that aliens crash-landed. It is far more probable that someone lived than that aliens crash-landed in Roswell. It’s more like if a reference in a book was found in Roswell that someone lived 3,168.8 km away of a different religion and that someone formerly in that religion and location who moved to Roswell independently agreed and that there were four biographies from 50 years later written in the area.
How can I be expected to believe an argument based on the reason “a Jew wouldn’t write that?” Why wouldn’t a Jew (who betrayed most Jews alive at the time and became a Roman citizen who could write in Greek) write that? Even if you reject one of his references, there’s another in which he refers to Jesus as the brother of James. Josephus was as independent from Tacitus as a Roman citizen could be from another Roman citizen.
Evidence for Alexander the Great is much more thin. The case mostly rests on tertiary sources claiming he existed from three centuries later by Arrian and Plutarch claiming to be based on earlier sources and some coins and a Romance from the Middle Ages. We have to take Josephus’ word for it that he himself existed. All historical evidence is scanty. The evidence for the historical Jesus is amongst the strongest.
@@BlackBeltMonkeySong I don’t know if you’ve read Josephus btw but he wasn’t any ordinary Jew. He thought of himself as pragmatic in preserving as much as he could of his culture. He thought of fanatical messiah claimants and zealots as dooming Jerusalem. He would’ve perhaps included Jesus in that category in his mind.
@UCc1c7lppG73o9PplrWDArJA time contaminates. Stories get blown out of proportion.
Think about the "open and shut" evidence.
TWO references made LONG after the gospel of Mark (which begets the other gospels).
One reference looks like a forgery, because an observant Jew wouldn't refer to Jesus as the Messiah.
By contrast, you can radio carbon date coins of Alexander the Great. Apparently having physical coins, with images and names on them, that radio-carbon-date to the actual lifetime of the person is... how did you put it... "much more thin" evidence.
God of parking spaces is named Squat, sometimes requires sacrifice of a pedestrian.
Why can't simply saying, "God, if all this IS actually true, I accept it."? Answer: "NO! You have to BELIEVE it's true!"
Christianity is unique because it has changed the lives of so many people personally and historically. I liked listening to a secularist historian like Tom Holland (the historian) realize how much the influence was. Personally I feel happy that the word of Jesus has reached my culture in South America since before colonialism horrible practices were done to pagan gods. Currently I have seen miracles of how the word of Jesus has helped many people with terrible problems in their lives. Currently Jesus God is my strength. 🙌
Please read, "Dear and Glorious Physician" by Taylor Caldwell. She worked on this book for 50 years, a telling of the life of St. Luke, a doctor, researched his life in libraries all over the world The story is remarkable and unforgettable because it gives us facts. These people did exist Luke never met Christ, but he did meet with Christ's mother, Mary, toward the end of her life.
I'm sorry to smash you but your Compound Interest argument is misleading... (intentionally or ignorance?)... to achieve those results you have to "stay invested" and never cash out... so to minimalize the growth of Christianity as explainable as Compound Interest inconsistent with the real world.... it would be a miracle if somebody stayed invested for 2000 years over multiple generations and never cashed out... I think inversely you have proved the amazing growth of Christianity is miraculous... and please don't get confused... it's real... its actually happened
Jesus would have looked so normal to the average people around him then that the Romans needed someone to identify him among the small crowd.
Why are there so many Christians? Leaving aside the forced conversion argument it is really simple - Christianity asks for the least (just believe) and offers the most in return (a place in heaven? It is as simple as that.
Actually, it's simpler than that. The reason there are so many Christians is that there are so many people who are taught that Christianity is true during their earliest years, when they begin to construct models of the real word versus the make-believe. Otherwise, the numbers would be due to conversion from other religions. Instead, you can tell whether a person is Christian, or whatever religion, more or less with accuracy based on what is taught from a young age in their geographical area.
1 John 2:27
But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.
As for the problem of evil - we have Epicurus - “Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”
I’ve read this quote many times before, but why is it attributed to Epicurus? Weren’t the Greeks polytheistic , and did not believe that any one god was all-powerful? I mean,didn’t the various Greco gods often foil each other’s plans and such?
The idea of a god who can do anything they want doesn’t make sense if it came from the writings of an Ancient Greek
Huh. I could have sworn that was Hume haha
@@hexum7 I'm sure the Greeks understood the concept of one supreme God.
@@007EnglishAcademy are you? Why would you think so? It seems like that’s a no-brained because we’ve been taught that since day one, so we don’t question it. But even today, there are major world religions without one god.
God allows evil to exist to test Humankind. Evil emanates from Man due to Free Will and Original Sin.
I’ve learned a lot from Ehrman and enjoy his debates but, please explain to me why he’s comfortable in believing that Paul actually knew Jesus’s brother? Because of that, Jesus as a person must have been real? I’ve never met the boogie man but I knew his younger brother; therefore, the boogie man is real. Am I missing some Ehrman logic?
I think you raise a good question and can't speak for Dr. Ehrman but what I think he argues is that there are too many other historical documents that indicate that the person, Jesus, must have been a real person. It's sort of a weighted argument that lets him lean into his assertion that the man existed.
Ehrman realises his buttons are pushed when challenged about his belief that it is "historically certain" that Jesus existed and was crucified. See 10:45.
The evidence he gives for this "certainty" is beyond weak. 4 biographies written decades later which lack credibility because of their bias, fantasies, inaccuracies and lack of independence? His speculation of reliability of other accounts we don't even know existed (Q, M and L)? That Paul knew Jesus' brother and a disciple because he said so?
He does an ad hominem on mythicists for challenging the existence of Jesus, yet is extraordinarily respectful of Christian beliefs in magic.
Shermer, on the other hand says Jesus "probably existed" ... a far more sustainable view than Ehrman's "certainty".
@@canwelook I agree with you. On the point of Paul knowing Jesus' brother, Richard Carrier suggests that it could be the expression "brother of the Lord," meaning a brother in faith. Whatever Ehrman thinks of this hypothesis, he should give a proper answer to it, and not just wave his hands and say: "But Paul knew his brother!"
I guess in part Bart is the mirror image of the theists. He accepts their working premises but draws contrasting opinions. The mythicists like Carrier, Price, Fitzgerald et al aren't working in the same paradigm.
@@lamalama9717 yes. Apologists are required to start with particular conclusions as indisputable - that Jesus is god, that the bible is the infallible word of God, etc. The apologist's role and duty is to manipulate the facts, interpretations, etc to fit the conclusion. If they don't do this, they are out of a job, unemployed. Ehrman, in my view, has similarly painted himself into a corner. His role, his employment, his income, is dependent on him being decisive and authoritative. He knows we cannot 'know' what happened in history - we cannot test his historical theories like we can test the 'laws' of science. His need to be authoritative is causing him to overreach in his conclusions ... in my view.
37:00 I thought that around that time there were all kinds of people claiming that they were messiahs?
Actually we hear rather little of those, its not like in America today. :-D I know the concept Was laid down and surely used a lot, but actually not that much is realky written down. Also its a big part of the Story of Jesus, the jewish autorities questioning him on this....johann Baptist saying he is deemed by many to be the saviour but he only is one to pave the way for messiah ...Just read bible and uts definately showing this Was something people were vety aware and sceptic of.
@@herzkine Wrong. There were numerous messianic figures leading up to and following Jesus of Nazareth.We hear little of those IN CHRISTIAN WRITINGS. Check out some alternative sources.
Time for Mr. Shermer to invite Dr. Richard Carrier
I don't think it will happen, but I would certainly like it.
I read Dr Ehrman’s book, ‘Misquoting Jesus’, several years ago and can certainly understand his disillusionment with many of the ‘inerrant word of God’ folks, like R. C. Sproul for example, and his frustration with the strict-literalist/creationist types. These folks often make claims that aren’t supported/contradictory - or gloss-over important questions and just say, “believe me”, while they themselves are ‘mere humans’ that offer differing opinions from each other (often while enriching themselves in a conflict-of-interest kind of way - pick “money” or “God”, but, when a conflict comes, you can’t pick both). A few observations while watching this interview:
1. “1 in 8 claim to have seen a dead relative after they died”. What if a whole neighborhood saw the dead neighbor after they died? And for several weeks after? This is an obvious, unaddressed question: yes, the resurrection can’t be proven unequivocally - this is understood about many historical events (see recent stories about evidence of a meteor exploding over the historical Sodom and Gomorrah site) - but it’s captured that hundreds saw Jesus alive after his death.
2. Old vs. New Testament: he makes a comment about them being ‘different Gods’ in the context of believing in Jesus. Really, these are two stories about humanity in its social/moral Infancy vs. the effort to move it into Adulthood. ‘Belief in Jesus or you go to hell’ and the New Testament approach is more about your internal values: changing the nature the individual as well as humanity as a species. It’s not about just ‘going through the motions’, but rather fundamentally transforming an intelligent, often violent and self-destructive animal, that is quite adept at rationalizing (self/societal/species) destructive behavior. And attempting to keep this species from going extinct by their own means: in fact, “living in a Hell of their own making”. This requires a fundamental change in human nature: not just a legalistic one, similar to the Jews then (and today), but at a grass-roots/emotional level. (See ‘The Island of Dr. Moreau’, e.g., by H.G. Wells as a fictionalized illustration of a failed attempt: a metaphor of ‘what if it doesn’t work’).
3. Concerning, “why did Jesus have to die to forgive my sins”: this is more of a philosophical question. C. S. Lewis alludes to it in his book, “The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe”, where God’s infallibility - his character - is challenged by the White Witch, in that she lays claim to Edmund for his betrayal. The Resurrection is, in a way, a ‘literal metaphor’ in which God cements the nature of His relationship with us, as well as his intentions for us, as we strive to grow into moral ‘adulthood’. It is the ultimate message of what we should strive to be, shown through Jesus’ example: “Doing” is much more impactful than “Saying” - not “do as I say” but rather, “do as I do” in order to save the human species.
No mention when was Jesus born ?
Was is it miracle?
How was Mary saved from accusation of adultery ? As she was sinless like Jesus
How much message is of Jesus and how much from trinitarian unknown authors? In the 100 times revised bibles
Jesus was born on Christmas Day, because Jesus is Horus is the Sun, reborn every year at the Winter Solstice. Next question?
@@Silly.Old.Sisyphus Jesus wasn't born , he was invented ... Next question ?
Christmas is a time when were all go a little bit crazy.
It's a time of story telling, usually on the telly these days.
The wizard of oz will be on again and a couple of ghost stories.
It's nice for the kids and a chance to eat, get drunk and sleep a lot.
Merry Saturnalia!
@@onlimi616
Much more fun than sitting on hard seats in a cold smelly building for a two hour Mass.
Love when Bart laughs after making point.
Yeah, he's a nice, good-humored guy. Keeps the tone of highly controversial topics positive and is really enjoyable to listen to.
Rather long video, when history actually barely talks about Jesus. I only see the first more massive reports being of the already established Christian communitiies.
All of these biblical texts depend on, "if a supernatural exists". Let's tackle this issue first. Then, other stuff.
...as always... any Bart Ehrman discussion is always enlightening...my only complaint is so little of this one involved the details of the Nativity history...I suppose Bart wouldn't want to steal his own Thunder from his upcoming Xmas Webinar...at any rate it Shermer was asking the questions...
When I was in Catholic elementary school, Catholics did not believe that Jesus had a brother and Joseph was an old man. This maintained the story of “Holy Mary, Ever Virgin.”
I am no longer a Catholic, but Mary is still my mother.
And Jesus did not have brothers they were cousins early jews called them brothers
So glad that you did this.
Love you man you are great keep it up we need you as a wise professor
Augustine was not black-not many North Africans were. He was from the educated roman colony class. ADNA studies show current Egyptians have 20% sub Saharan ancestry, ancient Egyptians had 5-8% average.
In every interview, Dr. Ehrman "straw man's" the mythicist position, that it looks at obvious mythical embellishments in the NT and inferes that everything is mythological. The truth is that mythicism argues, simply, that an historical Jesus isn't necessary to explain NT theological origins.
The only reason we even hear about a Jesus is because of Polytheist Constantine and his embellishing Propagandist, Eusebius.
Think of Origen before them. He is literally Anathamized by the later Church Fathers and it should be noted that what he taught was quite different than what the more orthodox sects believe today.
And then think of Philo teaching about the logos before the phony story of the life of Jesus. Christians clearly borrowed these concepts from the Hellenistic influences of the day in combination with Egyptian and Zoroastrian tropes mixed with Judaism.
Bart is simply a sellout making money off of liberal gullible Christians.
Really? Because all of the mythicist fanboys are always talking about how Jesus didn't exist, not about how Jesus did not necessarily have to exist. Sounds like they turn the strawman on themselves.
@ Jack Frosterton Yeah, you did what Ehrman does, and staw-manned the issue with a "Fallacy of Equivocation," conflating Carrier's "mythicism" with popular mythicism. Good for you. This is also a "Fallacy of Division," that what's generally true is also true of every Particular in the category.
@ Jack Frosterton There's three posts listed, but I only see two.
Fascinating I love this interview!!
Historians agree that there is not one written eyewitness account of Jesus during his lifetime. Strange since he was famous at birth, because wise men expected to see the future king of Jews who was born from a virgin married mother. Every leading Christian scholar since Erasmus, five hundred years ago, has maintained that the gospels were originally written in Greek from 70 to 140 CE (Mark after the year 70, Luke about 110, Matthew about 130, and John no earlier than 140 CE). This proves that they were not written by Christ's apostles, disciples or by any of the early Christians.
Others say: “There is no proof of the Gospels existing before 130 CE”
Jesus is depicted as hugely popular in the gospels. Yet he is unrecorded by non-Biblical historians.
Paul was the first one to write about Jesus around 60CE; but he, like everyone else, never saw Jesus. He experienced a vision of the resurrected Jesus. Even Paul’s existence is in serious doubt.
John Gresham Machen wrote: The establishment of Christianity as a world religion, to almost as great an extent as any great historical movement can be ascribed to one man, was the work of Paul.
I also read that the history of the first three popes was invented because they never existed.
All myth! Seek the truth!
Your arguments prove nothing. Most ancient history, rests on oral tradition, later transcribed. The Gospels were an exception, transcribed relative soon after the events described.
The first real Pope was Clement...a Flavian. I think he was sixth, and made up the predecessors.
Certainly we have some valid topics here. My favorite is that the Gospels record that Jesus had the authority here on earth to forgive sins. That is made clear. So then, why would Jesus have to undergo such a severe torture for anyones' sins to be forgivern? That does not make sense. Jesus could have (and still can) forgive anyone's sins without the necessity of being scourged and crucified (not nice things.) There seems to be a deficiency in Christian theology. Maybe Jesus' suffering and painful death is not about "our sins being foregiven," but about creating a lesson for humanity.
Bart Erhman tickling Michael Shermer’s ear.
Of course Jeebus exists - I saw him longboarding on the weekend!
They're talking about the historical Jesus, not the Jesus of Christianity. That you can't separate the two is a common problem among ex-fundamentalists turned atheists.
I loved this interview. On suffering apart from the Rabbi's book, there is Theologian Dr Thomas Oord who says God can't stop suffering or evil even if he wanted to. I do like his argument.
As for suffering this is minutely explained in Buddhism.
It may be a better explanation but is it true? Or maybe useful?
@@begshallotsYes it is true. Do you not think knowing where suffering comes from is useful?
@@007EnglishAcademy I have a bunch of different questions about this topic actually. I find Buddhism interesting, especially mindfulness. It depends on what we’re talking about more specifically.
I still think that Ehrman dismisses with suspicious ease issues raised by Richard Carrier, relating to the historicity of Jesus. I'm not a fan at all of Carrier's role in that Atheism+ thing, but this has nothing to do with his scholarly work on this topic. And until I see a proper response by Ehrman or someone else, I still think Carrier has the winning arguments.
Does Dr. Carrier come up in this discussion? (Do you know the time stamp?)
Yeah he usually doesn't provide the argument for historicity, he usually just states that all serious scholars know that he existed, not how or why, just that it isn't a debated point in academia. He has provided the actual argument in his book as well as occasionally in interviews though and I think it's persuasive so I don't know why he doesn't bother communicating it.
@@readynowforever3676 No, he doesn't come up.
@S R He did debate Robert Price so he's not totally opposed to debating mythicists (unless that's changed since then?). He has explicitly said he refuses to debate Richard Carrier after a written argument they had online but that was because Carrier went ad hominem. He also refuses to debate Christian apologist James White due to his "mean streak" so it's not just mythicists.
I think you're right though that he doesn't want to spend a lot of time debating what to him is just a crackpot fringe theory. He has spent a lot of time debating fundamentalists but he used to be one himself so I guess that's different.
@S R that is the problem: mythist can be dismissed as UFOLOGISTS. Then again, they still have the evidence on their side.
Israel was occupied by Rome. When the Roman emperor becomes Christian then all the Roman empire becomes Christian -- The Holy Roman Empire. The emperor becomes the Pope.
always enjoy Ehrman. not entirely sure wire. but ive devoted whole nights to his biz. i guess we all still fight w christians etal on occasion. -JC
Kept drifting off topic toward the end of the interview, but I suppose they couldn't give away too much of the actual lecture. Still an interesting discussion nevertheless.
What an annoying speaker! He cackles in loud laughter at everything, most not funny at all. I'd never pay to seat to hear him speak. All over the place
Thank you!
Great conversation 💕
The Messiah in Isaiah is a different Messiah than the military Messiah. Isaiah was prophesying a universal Messiah that would bring peace to the entire world which hasn’t happened yet, so the Messiah hasn’t come.
Whenever Bart or anyone mentions the suffering of children in developing world countries it bugs me a bit. If you have visited any of the innumerable horrific life situations of adults in developing world countries (for example a Haitian batay in the Dominican Republic) One cannot help but notice that the excruciating trials of adults in these situations is only a worsening of what was once experienced as children. Sure, kids are cute. But the suffering question is so much more easily answered for me when i compare my own to that of my adult counterparts who have endured with little ease since the cord was cut.
Mark is the oldest gospel. But it started with Jesus as an adult. Matthew and Luke wanted to add a birth story. They didn't have one so the both made one up. But they went about it in different ways. I think Jesus was probably born in Nazareth, but they had Mary in Bethlehem for the birth to "fulfill" prophecy
Why do you think they "made one up"? Maybe just added it.
@@2Uahoj Because I think it was written by people who didn't really know. Because they conflict. Because there are just too many unbelievable things going on
@@mantrashak According to a very old oral tradition, Luke knew Mary and had extensive conversations with her, and therefore we have the Christmas story in Luke.
@@2Uahoj How can that be? Nobody knows who wrote the gospels! It might be called Luke, but we've no idea who actually wrote it. And if any of the gospels were written by first hand witnesses, why are they all written in the third person?
@@mantrashak Are you kidding? We have no idea who actually wrote Shakespeare plays, and that was only 400 years ago. We even have no idea who actually wrote JFK's "Profiles in Courage" .
But in terms of Bible research we actually have relatively good evidence.
Funny that these two non-believers exclaimed "oh my God" many times ;-)
"Oh my God" Kind of superficial, aren't you?
Lol, in Mexico we say "adios" which apart from meaning goodby, literaly means "to god"... so I have gone out of my way to say; hasta luego.. which means till later, and does not involve a deity.
Yes but christians have 3 gods
@@Truevideoz : No, they don't. They believe that god is three in one as well as one in three, which makes no sense and they cannot even explain the trinity intelligently.
They believe in Clark Kent.
This is just a lengthy advert
what about al the prophecies in the old testament i did not hear mr Ehrman talk about that
I think it might be difficult to cover every single aspect of religion and theology in a single conversation.....
What’s the difference between Christian paradox’s and Orwellian Doublespeak?
The similarities are confusing me…
Genocide was coined by Lemken not BC of the Holocaust but BC of what he saw done previously to Assyrians in 1933 Assyrian genocide of Semel