Dr. Magness is exactly the type of professor I always loved having for my classes in college. Not just well informed and a great communicator, but also a practitioner in her field, not just an ivory tower academic whose career is based entirely on reading the works of others and responding to them.
Interesting presentation. I wanted to study archeology in college but one professor (who ran the mandatory "intro" course) was so bad he turned me off to the whole field. I went in another direction. Too bad I didn't get to learn from someone like Jodi.
In the book, "Walking the Bible", the author tries to visit the most famous sites from the Bible. Author, Bruce Feller, describes visiting a monastery near 'Mount Sinai'. In the courtyard he said there is a hedge the monks claim to be the original burning bush. A few years ago it caught on fire. He noticed there is a now fire extinguisher behind it. It sounds like if God has something to say they will quickly shut him up.
Jodi Magness!! Best dig director I've ever worked for!! (actually, the only dig director I've ever worked for! 😆) Proposed tshirt: I Survived 10 Seasons At Huqoq! 20:11 ... the British drama tv series The Detectorists had an episode about just that, the Grail is not what you think! It's a great episode, funny and poignant! 33:50 ... my wife and I have read her book on Masada, an excellent book! Very excited to hear about this new book on Jerusalem (my wife has a birthday in March...hmmmm 🤔)
I have heard that we have actually only found 1 crucifiction nail. It was stuck in an ankle bone. People who disagree but really like each other are the best company.
Highly doubt it's from Jesus and if it was able to be tied back to Jesus that would completely destory Christianity as we know it but I highly doubt is from Jesus.
@@MegaAnimeforlife Er, no. The two nails found so far have come from a random Jewish guy (the ankle bone) and what may be the remains of Antigonus, last king of the Maccabees (the wrist). Nothing to do with Jesus.
I think I’ve watched everything from TGC/Wondrium that either of these two has done, plus who knows how many hours on RUclips watching interviews and other taped lectures and talks of various kinds. Could listen to either of them all day 🙂
If you're thinking of genizas, they aren't really garbage pits but special disposal areas for writing that contain the tetragrammaton or other ways of referring to God. The problem is that, because that's what they are, the contents of a geniza would be very heavily biased towards Jewish society and specifically Rabbinic Judaism's understanding of it. A better find would be a proper sealed library in the desert, something like the Library of Ashurbanipal but with papyri and parchment. Like a bigger version of Nag Hammadi.
As a historian, I’d say we’re more the puzzle builders, trying to stick together the pieces that the other branches have discovered. And I emphasize the distinction because we do our work on the foundation excavated by material historians like Dr. Magness.
I can imagine people 10,000 years in the future excavating our time and discovering how we used dog poop as currrency (or worshipped dog poop), which is why we stored it in plastic bags to preserve forever.
I suppose the plastic bags themselves may last quite a long time, but I doubt the contents will. Try this experiment: Put an egg-salad sandwich in a ziplock bag. Don’t freeze it or refrigerate it. Leave it in your pantry for a year, then remove the sandwich and examine it carefully. In my opinion, future archeologists are, rather, going to very interested in the indestructible high E, B, and G strings from classical guitars. These will survive long after all other traces of our civilization have disappeared, and the archeologists won’t know what to make of them.
This was a very interesting preview on Jodi’s lecture. I just watched a James Tabor Video which covers some of the same topics. I’m curious how Jodi’s interpretations agree with James Tabor’s. I might have to sign up for the lecture to find out.
Tabor has two sides. His academic side is very rigorous. His storymaker side isn't so much. It's kinda crazy when you start comparing his academic writings to his published articles on looser journals. Right now he's retired, so his storymaker side is more visible and he gets full airtime for his more fringe ideas.
Want to hear about Sepphoris, please. An hour's walk from Nazareth; Jesus would have been exposed to many religious, spiritual, and philosophical ideas there.
Dr. Magness. It might be helpful, in your lecture/s to distinguish between the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hammadi scrolls. A lot of people seem to think they are the same things or conflate the two. 🙂
I know that the Chinese Archaeologists found the original 1st century neon plastic sign that said "Welcome to Nazareth" in both English and Mandarin Chinese. They also have the Stop signs reading STOP.
Dr. Ehrman can you do an episode about the church fathers and how it relates to naming the gospels as well as the claims of the church fathers meeting the apostles
Archeaology in Israel is somehow Zionist? Stop. As somehow who has supported the Palestinian cause for longer than you've been alive, stop. You're being absurd. Did being a social scientist in segregationist America mean one was endorsing segregation? Did being a physicist in fascist Germany imply one was a fascist?
I paid for the two day course but am unable to access it! Can someone please help me with how to get to it? I feel frustrated cause it shouldnt be this hard. I am seeing free podcasts, shorts, and where to pay for it, but not having any luck with watching the full two days I have paìd for. Thank you to any empathetìç person to help me.
Having studied some archaeology I have high regard for Jodi Magness and am looking forward to the course and her book. On another note can you tell me what is your theme music? I recognize a baroque piece but I am not familiar with it. Thanks.
Science is certainly more objective than other non-scientific disciplines, but I don't think you can measure objectivity as a binary. Objectivity is a goal for scientists, but they are all still humans that practice it as a discipline. While this may be seen as opening a line of attack for apologists or otherwise science-denying folks, it is actually the opposite - science allows for the opportunity to be wrong without your worldview falling apart, without embarrassment. Being wrong isn't a sign or corruption or evil influence, it signifies growth.
i think what she said is accurate. yes there are objective components, but interpretations are not objective. if there were only objective components then all debates would just be over which facts are true or exist, not over the best way to interpret the evidence
26:00 well I'm not convinced there was a single specific Jesus in history, and I think I'm being misrepresented not once but twice here, potentially. Firstly, I like Bart Ehrman enough to enjoy his podcast every week. I learn a lot from him. I have some criticisms of his style and I don't agree 100% with all of his opinions but so what? That doesn't mean I don't like him. I think he's done a real service bringing the scholarly mainstream consensus to a wider audience. And secondly, I'm not sure that the rational claim is that Nazareth didn't exist. For me, the question would be whether it was inhabited in the supposed time of Jesus. I'm certain it was inhabited by the end of the first century, when the gospels were written. Perhaps it even housed a community of diasporic Jews after the war, maybe those responsible for the gospel of Mark since it's the earliest mention of Nazareth in history, and since it clearly has a message that Jesus would meet his followers in Galilee after the end of the story. But "the first century" and "in the time of Jesus" are very different things, despite the overlap. So that's not the claim, though I am sure there are less well informed people who may mistakenly make this claim, it seems disingenuous to just say that "mythicists" say this.
Yes, it's a bit immature of him to go on this "Mythicists don't like me" He's narrow-minded on mythicism but he's spot-on on forgery and so on. Somehow he fails at bringing things to their natural conclusion. That doesn't mean people don't like him, only that he's a bit silly on that subject.
Dr. Magness, please be aware that zoom/video lectures can amplify hand and head motions. Constant motion can be distracting. Thank you for sharing and your immense enthusiasm and energy.
I've met many people who say how much they know about the Bible but they have never read the Bible other than a very select number of passages given to them by fundamentalist preachers to prove the prejudice of the preacher.
Literary dependence doesn't mean they are recording the same event, but borrowed the narrative. If you get two different but similar tellings of the story of Robin Hood, it doesnt mean it's not just a story. It is physically impossible for the Noah story to be literally true. Regional floods are sufficient to explain the source material.
@@SeekingVirtueAI hear there’s a flood layer in Uruk, I suspect those people experienced a flood so catastrophic and widespread that they we’re talking about it for the next however many thousand years and it evolves into these myths. Of course the animals but everything else in the story is pretty far fetched as well, like each of Noah’s sons was a completely different race for instance, of course they had no idea how many animals and environments there actually were. I suppose satan was transporting monkeys and such to South America and turning rats into kangaroos for Australia to throw us off.
That's all very well, but it doesn't get us closer to salvation. We need to make a sacrifice in order to be saved. I don't mean slaughter, I mean donation !
My understanding is that Nazareth was a Roman garrison town at the time of Christ. While I see Christ as an historical figure I tend to agree with the Arian heresy, that he was a man upon whom the Spirit of God descended (???). I think he was heavily influenced by the Essene notion of a pierced messiah which led him to his death on the cross. His resurrection is purely an issue of faith.
Arian Heresy is the idea that Jesus was a created lower divine being with substance similar to God but not the same. The one you're thinking about is the later Nestorian Heresy. Also, Nazareth wasn't even a town in Jesus' time. It was a podunk village. Its importance and size have been severely overrated thanks to Jesus. There's no way in heck you could set up any kind of military garrison in Nazareth of Jesus' time. The smallest possible effective military formation of the era would have outnumbered the village's population. AFTER the time of Jesus, specifically after the First Jewish War, many Judaeans of the upper middle class moved to Galilee. That influx on migrants was what turned Nazareth into a town that could later be garrisoned. It was actually a fairly wealthy little town in the Roman era, especially after Christianity took over the Empire.
You're talking about time spans of a couple centuries and I'm trying to recall matters from my college days in history classes 40 years ago. Thank you for the update. I generally subscribe to the following: Christ was essentially an Essence. Stoked up on their teachings (apocalyptic) and fresh from a baptism, vision ala John the Baptist, and a period of time in the desert (a vision quest), he was ready to preach. I think he was also suffering from delusions. The Essence pierced messiah belief led him to the cross where he died, did not pass go and did not collect $200.
@@agentoffortune74 What you say is the current majority view for scholars of the historical Jesus based in Israel, with the exception that they no longer think he was an Essene proper. He was sharing the Essenes' belief system and sect-specific understanding of a suffering messiah, but not exactly one. I don't remember who coined this term, but "Essenoid" is sometimes used by scholars to describe this sort of person. 40 years ago academia hadn't finished translating and disseminating much of the sectarian writings of Qumran. Now we know that the Qumranites would probably have stoned Jesus if he tried telling them some of the things attributed to him in the Gospels. It turns out that real Essenes were really anal in the way they committed to Torah observance. My favorite example is that they have special rules on how to prepare insects for consumption, which also sort of explains why John was eating grasshoppers. They would probably have seen Jesus as a heretic corrupting their teachings. Some of the sayings of Jesus in the Gospels also hint that he was influenced by the Pharisaic Hillel school, which was known for their relaxed and flexible attitude towards interpreting the Torah, and was therefore strictly opposed by the Essenes. So, quasi-Hillelite Essenoid rabbi who went a bit too far with his delusions of grandeur is one way to look at the historical Jesus.
So . . . Jodi's claim is that the depictions of Jesus's tomb in the gospels resemble how wealthy Jews were buried, which may be what early Christians used as a reference. Bart's claim is that crucified bodies were left on the cross for days, which makes Jesus's burial in the gospels historically dubious. I don't see what their dispute is about.
I work with sociology, psychology and biology, and I've studied chemistry, particle physics and relativity for years-enough to know that there's no such thing as an exact science. It's just not in the cards when it comes to scientific measurement theory.
@@FernLovebond So it's nothing to do with the ancient roots of the language? Like the _"Sshh"_ sound in the Irish "Sinead", or the Welsh "siop", or the Sanskrit "Kṛṣṇa"? It's a personal choice? Well, that just makes it even MORE annoying! LOL! 🤣 It's a double "S", so the sound is "ess", not "sshhh". Thanks for the reply. {:o:O:}
@@ansfridaeyowulfsdottir8095 I mean, if you think about it, the average speaker isn't concerned about etymologies and root words of ancient language sources, we're just speaking what we've heard or what we've assumed. Regional, social, and cultural variances in dialects and pronunciation mean words shift in exact phonetics, cadence, stressors, or even in spelling. Colloquialisms, idioms, and local nomenclature, all offer a wide variety of expression; and without that variety, language would become boring, rote, prescribed. Where one person says "where is he?" the next might say "where he at?" and they could both be equally effective, in the correct context. Sure, to you one will seem "correct" and the other "wrong," but it's a matter of who is speaking to whom for what purpose. There are issues of power dynamics, culture and race tied up in that. The trick is to learn how to appreciate differences, rather than just dismiss others as "wrong" because they don't match our expectations.
I hope what she says is not true. The modern standard is that any possible ancient artifact location is at most excavated by a small trowel. If she really claims large tools should be used at any site that is not prehistoric, then she should be held to account for her vandalism.
I worked for Jodi for 10 seasons at Huqoq. Like she says it depends on the site and depends on what kind of stratigraphic layer you move through. Some layers need pick axes and shovels to remove material (while being closely watched by specialists) even backhoes at times...and yes, trowels, brushes and dental tools are used when necessary...
I think I disagree. The point of any science is not to replicate experiments. That's a means, not the goal. The goal is to predict the future (usually in small ways, that is, if I do X, I will get outcome Y). And history and archeology actually do that, too. They come up with theories about the past, and those theories predict "If you look for X, when you find it, it will match Y". (Incidentally, that's the same with all forms of astronomy, geology, and others considered more "hard" sciences.) That's a fundamental principle of *all* sciences. (And it is why theology is not a science. It makes no verifiable predictions because it was carefully constructed to be able to explain any facts imaginable. When there are no facts that do not fit the theory, you cannot predict anything.) It's all about predictions. That's how you tell good theories from bad. The various sciences have different ways to come up with predictions, and they'll change those if they learn about ways that work better, but that's not the important part, the predictions are the important part.
yes, good theories will make claims about things we dont know yet, and if we find these things to be true, we can get more confidence in the theory. if a theory never gets any examination or feedback in this way, it never can benefit from this process of confidence building. the best interpretations of data are both exposed to risks of being invalidated by new data and then bolstered over time if new data remains consistent with it despite that exposure
Truth about Jesus -- James Boswell II The tomb did NOT actually belong to Joseph of Arimatheia! ~~~It would have been surprising indeed if one of the few members of the Sanhedrin who was sympathetic to Jesus just happened to have a family tomb near the place of crucifixion, and ONLY the Gospel of Matthew makes that claim -- probably because of Isaiah 53:9. * ~~~No, John 19:41-42 is probably more historical: Joseph hastily borrowed a nearby empty tomb simply because the Sabbath was about to begin and burial must take place immediately. (See Deuteronomy 21:22-23). ~~~No wonder the Magdalene thought the owner of the tomb might have removed Jesus' body! ----*This realization occurred to me the first time I visited the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in 1976.
@@Professor_Pink Actually, I was not in 1976 and am not now "groping for speculations to cope with faith." If Joseph hastily borrowed someone else's tomb, it would make it even more likely that the tomb's real owner may have indignantly removed the body. It was not merely an empty/emptied tomb that gave Jesus' earliest disciples the conviction that he had risen, but the experiences that followed (1 Cor. 15:3-8). For Mary, Jesus remained dead and his body had been placed elsewhere until she had an experience convincing her otherwise.
@@TruthAboutJesus-pz4mb I wasn't accusing you of groping, but Boswell. We have exactly zero reason to believe Joseph borrowed another tomb, just like we have zero reason to believe Paul saw the risen Christ. We have no clue what Mary, if she existed, may have thought, believed, or experienced. We have anonymous copies of copies of oral traditions. That isn't sufficient to know what Jesus professed, Mary believed, or what the disciples may have witnessed.
@@Professor_Pink Dear sir, there are NUMEROUS sceptical, even atheist and agnostic scholars who are convinced by what they take to be firm historical evidence that there really was, for example, a Paul (Saul) of Tarsus who against his own will became convinced that he had seen an appearance of the same Jesus who he had previously thought was a heretic. Paul's seven or eight authentic letters* are not anonymous, but were really written by him, and therein he speaks of having spent time with Kephas (Peter) and with James (Yakob) the brother of Jesus, both of whom were also convinced that they had exprienced appearances of the risen Jesus -- and that happened although both Paul and Jesus' brother had formerly not believed in him. You seem to be unaware that it is not necessary for historical researchers to claim dogmatically that Jesus actually did rise from death to be convinced that there is verifiable evidence that a number of his followers, and even some of his opponents, became convinced (rightly or wrongly) soon after his death that he had risen. ______ *Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, Philemon (and maybe Colossians?).
Ah Jodi is yet ANOTHER scholar who is open to James NOT being a biological or half brother! Yeah! Honesty matters! It just doesn’t say or show James is his bio-bro. It does not.
Saying "science is not objective" is ridiculous. Science is the pursuit of objective truths. If science isn't objective then why not logic? And if logic is just subjective then how can you logically argue that science is or isn't objective? Then you go on to ridicule people for looking for the arch. Why? There's no objective standard of what to look for. Your criticisms are just subjective, after all. Postmodernist drivel.
@@SchutzBoysbandI think you're not listening closely and are making a mountain out of a mole hill. They weren't advocating complete epistemological relativism. They argued OBJECTIVE evidence can sometimes be interpreted in a variety of ways. 😊
I have seen only one good unbiased kind of analysis,summary video on qumran scrolls on youtube and it is not even in English. The rest is just going all around the place relatec,not related ,random topics etc.
Q: How do we know that archaeology is in fact *not* a “science”? A: Because she insists that it _is_ a science about nine times within the first five minutes. Her desperate epistemological status anxiety would be touching were it not so extreme. The key, of course, is how one understands the word “science.” She nervously navigates around the embarrassing reality by carefully stipulating that it’s not an “exact” science, but she desperately wants to claim the apparently privileged status of physical or natural science anyway. The fact is that archaeology is a *social* science, not a physical science, and its closest kin are disciplines like psychology and art history, not chemistry or geology. She should relax.
What a nonsensical comment. Archeaology is a science. And it isn't a pure social science since it uses the methods and techniques of the physical sciences, like radiometric dating, stratiography, etc. Don't be silly.
Yes many were crucified back then but not many crucifixion nails turn up in the tomb of Caiaphas, the man who put Christ to death. That's only, will only, could only . . . happened once. Those nails are at the same lab as the only other crucifixion nails ever found. That is one hell of a coincidence Bart. One huge hell of coincidence lol
@@MasterShake9000Technically, Caiaphis couldn’t order a crucifixion. That was a Roman capital offense reserved for offenses such as sedition, treason and rebellion. So even the 2 thieves being crucified could only occur if they were runaway slaves that went to being robbers. Pilate was the only one who could have had someone crucified. The Sanhedrin could have had someone stoned to death like James the Just, but they still needed the Roman Governor’s permission. See the comments on James by Josephus.
@marcomoreno6748 Jesus could not have been a king (a real king) if He never existed, but since Bart is saying Jesus did indeed exist, was He also really a king like proclaimed about Himself?
No. I can confidently say that Bart’s learned opinion would be that any such claims were later additions and not part of the real Jesus of Nazareth’s preaching.
@@tryme3969 And it sounds very much like you might be a Christian troll. I’m simply repeating what I’ve heard Bart say about Jesus’ purported claims to Kinghood, Godhood, being the Son of Man, etc. Bart doesn’t believe that the historical Jesus preached any of that, rather that he was a apocalypticist who believed the Son of Man (the Messiah) and the Kingdom of God were imminent. He (Bart) believes that Paul, the Gospels, and to some extent even the early Church Fathers introduced the idea of Jesus being THE Christ - ergo, the Jewish Messiah, as well as a direct descendant of the line of David, etc - into the orthodox faith, which made Christianity much more appealing than just saying that he was a prophet (as Islam does) who was executed by the Romans, but his message of the End should still be heeded. Dead prophets don’t really attract followers, but resurrected godheads do. These are not _my_ opinions, as you appear not to understand. If you disagree with them, go have a chat with Bart. I only answered your question because I know what he has said in his books, interviews, lectures, blogs, podcasts, and so on, so I know how HE would answer your question. More or less, of course. He’s the textual analyst, after all, not me.
![[SFM] Risky Recital](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RzNkY1_Nk3o/mqdefault.jpg)
"...new discoveries means new information and we have to revise our existing understanding..." Profound and brilliant statement.
Dr. Magness is exactly the type of professor I always loved having for my classes in college. Not just well informed and a great communicator, but also a practitioner in her field, not just an ivory tower academic whose career is based entirely on reading the works of others and responding to them.
Same.
Yeah! And he has a sense of humor, too!
Dr Magness is great at explaining her field to lay people! I will definitely listen to her lectures!
wow. one of the best episodes of the podcast. please invite dr. Magness more often.
Interesting presentation. I wanted to study archeology in college but one professor (who ran the mandatory "intro" course) was so bad he turned me off to the whole field. I went in another direction. Too bad I didn't get to learn from someone like Jodi.
I really enjoyed this. I think there should be more archeologist interviewed. Fantastic🙌
Jodi is da bomb. Great taster for the lecture series. Come on Bart, take up Jodi's offer to go digging !!😃
Haha, Bart would be taking a break and looking for a cold beer about every 30 minutes 😂
In the book, "Walking the Bible", the author tries to visit the most famous sites from the Bible.
Author, Bruce Feller, describes visiting a monastery near 'Mount Sinai'.
In the courtyard he said there is a hedge the monks claim to be the original burning bush.
A few years ago it caught on fire.
He noticed there is a now fire extinguisher behind it.
It sounds like if God has something to say they will quickly shut him up.
Waiting for this the whole day 😊
Sorry we had a problem with the original video file
i cant download the podcast version for some reason. it always fails
Would love to spend a few days with Dr. Jodi Magness just talking archaeology.
Jodi Magness!! Best dig director I've ever worked for!! (actually, the only dig director I've ever worked for! 😆) Proposed tshirt: I Survived 10 Seasons At Huqoq!
20:11 ... the British drama tv series The Detectorists had an episode about just that, the Grail is not what you think! It's a great episode, funny and poignant!
33:50 ... my wife and I have read her book on Masada, an excellent book! Very excited to hear about this new book on Jerusalem (my wife has a birthday in March...hmmmm 🤔)
Love seeing a woman who is so knowledgeable and successful in her field of work!! ❤️
very interesting speaker on the topic, i would have loved to have had her a as a lecturer back when I was at college.
Brilliant foreword - thank you!
I have heard that we have actually only found 1 crucifiction nail. It was stuck in an ankle bone. People who disagree but really like each other are the best company.
There is a video about it and how people were crucified on Pr James Tabor channel here on RUclips.
Two nails. There is a complete nail through an ankle bone and there's the remnant or residue of a nail through a wrist.
Highly doubt it's from Jesus and if it was able to be tied back to Jesus that would completely destory Christianity as we know it but I highly doubt is from Jesus.
@@MegaAnimeforlife Er, no. The two nails found so far have come from a random Jewish guy (the ankle bone) and what may be the remains of Antigonus, last king of the Maccabees (the wrist). Nothing to do with Jesus.
Jodi is great. I have watched both of her Great Courses on Wondrium. So interesting.
I think I’ve watched everything from TGC/Wondrium that either of these two has done, plus who knows how many hours on RUclips watching interviews and other taped lectures and talks of various kinds. Could listen to either of them all day 🙂
I know what Bart would love to find is an undisturbed ancient garbage pit with papyri and scrolls. That is where much of the ancient texts get found.
If you're thinking of genizas, they aren't really garbage pits but special disposal areas for writing that contain the tetragrammaton or other ways of referring to God. The problem is that, because that's what they are, the contents of a geniza would be very heavily biased towards Jewish society and specifically Rabbinic Judaism's understanding of it.
A better find would be a proper sealed library in the desert, something like the Library of Ashurbanipal but with papyri and parchment. Like a bigger version of Nag Hammadi.
As a historian, I’d say we’re more the puzzle builders, trying to stick together the pieces that the other branches have discovered. And I emphasize the distinction because we do our work on the foundation excavated by material historians like Dr. Magness.
I can imagine people 10,000 years in the future excavating our time and discovering how we used dog poop as currrency (or worshipped dog poop), which is why we stored it in plastic bags to preserve forever.
I suppose the plastic bags themselves may last quite a long time, but I doubt the contents will. Try this experiment: Put an egg-salad sandwich in a ziplock bag. Don’t freeze it or refrigerate it. Leave it in your pantry for a year, then remove the sandwich and examine it carefully. In my opinion, future archeologists are, rather, going to very interested in the indestructible high E, B, and G strings from classical guitars. These will survive long after all other traces of our civilization have disappeared, and the archeologists won’t know what to make of them.
I wonder if Dr. Ehrman's background is a Heritage Log Home. I used to own one as a weekend place and it looked exactly like that.
I'm a big fan of the British TV series on Channel 4 called "Time Team"
This was a very interesting preview on Jodi’s lecture. I just watched a James Tabor Video which covers some of the same topics. I’m curious how Jodi’s interpretations agree with James Tabor’s. I might have to sign up for the lecture to find out.
Tabor is quite fringe
@@TheRealDyscyples, I think Tabor would probably admit to that, but I wouldn’t discount his ideas.
Tabor has two sides. His academic side is very rigorous. His storymaker side isn't so much. It's kinda crazy when you start comparing his academic writings to his published articles on looser journals. Right now he's retired, so his storymaker side is more visible and he gets full airtime for his more fringe ideas.
Brilliant!
Great 👍
Want to hear about Sepphoris, please. An hour's walk from Nazareth; Jesus would have been exposed to many religious, spiritual, and philosophical ideas there.
Dr. Magness. It might be helpful, in your lecture/s to distinguish between the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hammadi scrolls. A lot of people seem to think they are the same things or conflate the two. 🙂
I know that the Chinese Archaeologists found the original 1st century neon plastic sign that said "Welcome to Nazareth" in both English and Mandarin Chinese. They also have the Stop signs reading STOP.
Just a light (✨) in all that darkness being heard across the world 🌎 as Martin Niemoller once wrote in his poem...💞🫂💞
The title is kind of funny like they were doing archeology 2,000 years ago
Maybe they were.
How about Gobekli Tepe?
Excellent edition of Misquoting Jesus!
Dr. Ehrman can you do an episode about the church fathers and how it relates to naming the gospels as well as the claims of the church fathers meeting the apostles
there were archaeologists in the time of Jesus?
There weren’t many Jewish settlements after Titus was done with them. Archaeology under the sate of Israel sounds like enabling Zio claims.
Archeaology in Israel is somehow Zionist? Stop. As somehow who has supported the Palestinian cause for longer than you've been alive, stop. You're being absurd. Did being a social scientist in segregationist America mean one was endorsing segregation? Did being a physicist in fascist Germany imply one was a fascist?
You could make an estimate about the time of Noah using the genealogy in the Gospels for whatever that's worth
How could you ever rely on that for reliable info
@@thesoldiersside it would be a rough estimate at best but it was the only thing I could think of just an idea
I want to know how you knew I wanted to see if could post anything on archeology from this time period?
Title’s missing an ‘r’
I paid for the two day course but am unable to access it! Can someone please help me with how to get to it? I feel frustrated cause it shouldnt be this hard. I am seeing free podcasts, shorts, and where to pay for it, but not having any luck with watching the full two days I have paìd for. Thank you to any empathetìç person to help me.
So sorry you're having trouble. Please email support at support@bartehrman.com and we'll get this resolved. - Social Media Team
(typo in the title FYI)
Having studied some archaeology I have high regard for Jodi Magness and am looking forward to the course and her book. On another note can you tell me what is your theme music? I recognize a baroque piece but I am not familiar with it. Thanks.
Archeology and History may be up for interpretation but we can’t say Science in general isn’t objective/is up for interpretation.
Science is certainly more objective than other non-scientific disciplines, but I don't think you can measure objectivity as a binary. Objectivity is a goal for scientists, but they are all still humans that practice it as a discipline. While this may be seen as opening a line of attack for apologists or otherwise science-denying folks, it is actually the opposite - science allows for the opportunity to be wrong without your worldview falling apart, without embarrassment. Being wrong isn't a sign or corruption or evil influence, it signifies growth.
i think what she said is accurate. yes there are objective components, but interpretations are not objective. if there were only objective components then all debates would just be over which facts are true or exist, not over the best way to interpret the evidence
26:00 well I'm not convinced there was a single specific Jesus in history, and I think I'm being misrepresented not once but twice here, potentially.
Firstly, I like Bart Ehrman enough to enjoy his podcast every week. I learn a lot from him. I have some criticisms of his style and I don't agree 100% with all of his opinions but so what? That doesn't mean I don't like him. I think he's done a real service bringing the scholarly mainstream consensus to a wider audience.
And secondly, I'm not sure that the rational claim is that Nazareth didn't exist. For me, the question would be whether it was inhabited in the supposed time of Jesus. I'm certain it was inhabited by the end of the first century, when the gospels were written. Perhaps it even housed a community of diasporic Jews after the war, maybe those responsible for the gospel of Mark since it's the earliest mention of Nazareth in history, and since it clearly has a message that Jesus would meet his followers in Galilee after the end of the story. But "the first century" and "in the time of Jesus" are very different things, despite the overlap.
So that's not the claim, though I am sure there are less well informed people who may mistakenly make this claim, it seems disingenuous to just say that "mythicists" say this.
Yes, it's a bit immature of him to go on this "Mythicists don't like me" He's narrow-minded on mythicism but he's spot-on on forgery and so on. Somehow he fails at bringing things to their natural conclusion. That doesn't mean people don't like him, only that he's a bit silly on that subject.
I can tell more about archaeology finding because they found a cave with Romans worship yeshua year after year plus sator squares as well.
what are you talking about
@@jevogroni4829 what is sator squares can you tell me what it without Google it and I watch a lot of Bible archaeology
@@jevogroni4829 tell me what sator squares without using Google plus I watch a lot of Bible archaeology
Dr. Magness, please be aware that zoom/video lectures can amplify hand and head motions. Constant motion can be distracting. Thank you for sharing and your immense enthusiasm and energy.
😆 Take it from me she can be very animated in her lectures and speaking! ❤
I've met many people who say how much they know about the Bible but they have never read the Bible other than a very select number of passages given to them by fundamentalist preachers to prove the prejudice of the preacher.
this podcast both helps me see that easier and makes me more interested in actually reading (some) of the bible and related texts
Indiana Jane. 😃
there is evidence of a major event 6k yrs ago, both noah and the gilgamesh legend seem to be based on the same event, from what i understand anyways
Literary dependence doesn't mean they are recording the same event, but borrowed the narrative. If you get two different but similar tellings of the story of Robin Hood, it doesnt mean it's not just a story. It is physically impossible for the Noah story to be literally true. Regional floods are sufficient to explain the source material.
@@SeekingVirtueAI hear there’s a flood layer in Uruk, I suspect those people experienced a flood so catastrophic and widespread that they we’re talking about it for the next however many thousand years and it evolves into these myths. Of course the animals but everything else in the story is pretty far fetched as well, like each of Noah’s sons was a completely different race for instance, of course they had no idea how many animals and environments there actually were. I suppose satan was transporting monkeys and such to South America and turning rats into kangaroos for Australia to throw us off.
Dr. James Tabor is under disagreement with a lot of Dr. Magness's presentation here. We will have to patiently wait for his response.
I don't know if i could handle being an archaeologist.. Because of all the nazis
👍 "Nazis, I hate these guys!" 😂
That's all very well, but it doesn't get us closer to salvation.
We need to make a sacrifice in order to be saved.
I don't mean slaughter, I mean donation !
My understanding is that Nazareth was a Roman garrison town at the time of Christ. While I see Christ as an historical figure I tend to agree with the Arian heresy, that he was a man upon whom the Spirit of God descended (???). I think he was heavily influenced by the Essene notion of a pierced messiah which led him to his death on the cross. His resurrection is purely an issue of faith.
Arian Heresy is the idea that Jesus was a created lower divine being with substance similar to God but not the same. The one you're thinking about is the later Nestorian Heresy.
Also, Nazareth wasn't even a town in Jesus' time. It was a podunk village. Its importance and size have been severely overrated thanks to Jesus. There's no way in heck you could set up any kind of military garrison in Nazareth of Jesus' time. The smallest possible effective military formation of the era would have outnumbered the village's population.
AFTER the time of Jesus, specifically after the First Jewish War, many Judaeans of the upper middle class moved to Galilee. That influx on migrants was what turned Nazareth into a town that could later be garrisoned. It was actually a fairly wealthy little town in the Roman era, especially after Christianity took over the Empire.
You're talking about time spans of a couple centuries and I'm trying to recall matters from my college days in history classes 40 years ago. Thank you for the update. I generally subscribe to the following: Christ was essentially an Essence. Stoked up on their teachings (apocalyptic) and fresh from a baptism, vision ala John the Baptist, and a period of time in the desert (a vision quest), he was ready to preach. I think he was also suffering from delusions. The Essence pierced messiah belief led him to the cross where he died, did not pass go and did not collect $200.
@@agentoffortune74 What you say is the current majority view for scholars of the historical Jesus based in Israel, with the exception that they no longer think he was an Essene proper. He was sharing the Essenes' belief system and sect-specific understanding of a suffering messiah, but not exactly one. I don't remember who coined this term, but "Essenoid" is sometimes used by scholars to describe this sort of person. 40 years ago academia hadn't finished translating and disseminating much of the sectarian writings of Qumran. Now we know that the Qumranites would probably have stoned Jesus if he tried telling them some of the things attributed to him in the Gospels. It turns out that real Essenes were really anal in the way they committed to Torah observance. My favorite example is that they have special rules on how to prepare insects for consumption, which also sort of explains why John was eating grasshoppers. They would probably have seen Jesus as a heretic corrupting their teachings. Some of the sayings of Jesus in the Gospels also hint that he was influenced by the Pharisaic Hillel school, which was known for their relaxed and flexible attitude towards interpreting the Torah, and was therefore strictly opposed by the Essenes. So, quasi-Hillelite Essenoid rabbi who went a bit too far with his delusions of grandeur is one way to look at the historical Jesus.
@@andrewsuryali8540😂That made my day. LOL. And we haven't even gotten to the resurrection yet.
So . . . Jodi's claim is that the depictions of Jesus's tomb in the gospels resemble how wealthy Jews were buried, which may be what early Christians used as a reference. Bart's claim is that crucified bodies were left on the cross for days, which makes Jesus's burial in the gospels historically dubious. I don't see what their dispute is about.
I work with sociology, psychology and biology, and I've studied chemistry, particle physics and relativity for years-enough to know that there's no such thing as an exact science. It's just not in the cards when it comes to scientific measurement theory.
39:36
_"Osh-u-ary"_ ?
Is that _really_ how to pronounce _"Ossuary"_ ? 🤔
It kind of grates. 🤨
{:o:O:}
Either OSH- or OS-yoo-air-ee is common. It's a preference. Like "ma-CHYOOR" or "ma-TOOR" for mature.
@@FernLovebond
So it's nothing to do with the ancient roots of the language? Like the _"Sshh"_ sound in the Irish "Sinead", or the Welsh "siop", or the Sanskrit "Kṛṣṇa"?
It's a personal choice?
Well, that just makes it even MORE annoying! LOL! 🤣 It's a double "S", so the sound is "ess", not "sshhh".
Thanks for the reply.
{:o:O:}
@@ansfridaeyowulfsdottir8095
I mean, if you think about it, the average speaker isn't concerned about etymologies and root words of ancient language sources, we're just speaking what we've heard or what we've assumed.
Regional, social, and cultural variances in dialects and pronunciation mean words shift in exact phonetics, cadence, stressors, or even in spelling. Colloquialisms, idioms, and local nomenclature, all offer a wide variety of expression; and without that variety, language would become boring, rote, prescribed. Where one person says "where is he?" the next might say "where he at?" and they could both be equally effective, in the correct context. Sure, to you one will seem "correct" and the other "wrong," but it's a matter of who is speaking to whom for what purpose. There are issues of power dynamics, culture and race tied up in that. The trick is to learn how to appreciate differences, rather than just dismiss others as "wrong" because they don't match our expectations.
I hope what she says is not true. The modern standard is that any possible ancient artifact location is at most excavated by a small trowel. If she really claims large tools should be used at any site that is not prehistoric, then she should be held to account for her vandalism.
I worked for Jodi for 10 seasons at Huqoq. Like she says it depends on the site and depends on what kind of stratigraphic layer you move through. Some layers need pick axes and shovels to remove material (while being closely watched by specialists) even backhoes at times...and yes, trowels, brushes and dental tools are used when necessary...
you would know as he'd have engraved "jesu was here" on the cup. use your heads!
I never knew there were archaeologists back in the time of Jesus. 😂
Mythicist are squirming in their chairs 😆
I think I disagree. The point of any science is not to replicate experiments. That's a means, not the goal. The goal is to predict the future (usually in small ways, that is, if I do X, I will get outcome Y). And history and archeology actually do that, too. They come up with theories about the past, and those theories predict "If you look for X, when you find it, it will match Y". (Incidentally, that's the same with all forms of astronomy, geology, and others considered more "hard" sciences.) That's a fundamental principle of *all* sciences. (And it is why theology is not a science. It makes no verifiable predictions because it was carefully constructed to be able to explain any facts imaginable. When there are no facts that do not fit the theory, you cannot predict anything.)
It's all about predictions. That's how you tell good theories from bad. The various sciences have different ways to come up with predictions, and they'll change those if they learn about ways that work better, but that's not the important part, the predictions are the important part.
yes, good theories will make claims about things we dont know yet, and if we find these things to be true, we can get more confidence in the theory. if a theory never gets any examination or feedback in this way, it never can benefit from this process of confidence building. the best interpretations of data are both exposed to risks of being invalidated by new data and then bolstered over time if new data remains consistent with it despite that exposure
Truth about Jesus -- James Boswell II
The tomb did NOT actually belong to Joseph of Arimatheia!
~~~It would have been surprising indeed if one of the few members of the Sanhedrin who was sympathetic to Jesus just happened to have a family tomb near the place of crucifixion, and ONLY the Gospel of Matthew makes that claim -- probably because of Isaiah 53:9. *
~~~No, John 19:41-42 is probably more historical: Joseph hastily borrowed a nearby empty tomb simply because the Sabbath was about to begin and burial must take place immediately. (See Deuteronomy 21:22-23).
~~~No wonder the Magdalene thought the owner of the tomb might have removed Jesus' body!
----*This realization occurred to me the first time I visited the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in 1976.
Boswell was a buffoon. Groping for speculations to cope with faith in the face of evidence isn't serious scholarship.
@@Professor_Pink Actually, I was not in 1976 and am not now "groping for speculations to cope with faith." If Joseph hastily borrowed someone else's tomb, it would make it even more likely that the tomb's real owner may have indignantly removed the body.
It was not merely an empty/emptied tomb that gave Jesus' earliest disciples the conviction that he had risen, but the experiences that followed (1 Cor. 15:3-8).
For Mary, Jesus remained dead and his body had been placed elsewhere until she had an experience convincing her otherwise.
@@TruthAboutJesus-pz4mb I wasn't accusing you of groping, but Boswell.
We have exactly zero reason to believe Joseph borrowed another tomb, just like we have zero reason to believe Paul saw the risen Christ. We have no clue what Mary, if she existed, may have thought, believed, or experienced. We have anonymous copies of copies of oral traditions. That isn't sufficient to know what Jesus professed, Mary believed, or what the disciples may have witnessed.
@@Professor_Pink
Dear sir, there are NUMEROUS sceptical, even atheist and agnostic scholars who are convinced by what they take to be firm historical evidence that there really was, for example, a Paul (Saul) of Tarsus who against his own will became convinced that he had seen an appearance of the same Jesus who he had previously thought was a heretic. Paul's seven or eight authentic letters* are not anonymous, but were really written by him, and therein he speaks of having spent time with Kephas (Peter) and with James (Yakob) the brother of Jesus, both of whom were also convinced that they had exprienced appearances of the risen Jesus -- and that happened although both Paul and Jesus' brother had formerly not believed in him.
You seem to be unaware that it is not necessary for historical researchers to claim dogmatically that Jesus actually did rise from death to be convinced that there is verifiable evidence that a number of his followers, and even some of his opponents, became convinced (rightly or wrongly) soon after his death that he had risen.
______
*Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, Philemon (and maybe Colossians?).
I’ve always found the concept of finding the holy grail laughable. It’s literally just going to be a cup.
Metaphor
The search for the holy grail is purely a medieval literary trope that usually explores contemporary virtues or symbolises mans journey towards God
The Isaih scroll 📜 from the dead sea scrolls was copied accurately for sure.
Is she a believer? Just curious.
Ah Jodi is yet ANOTHER scholar who is open to James NOT being a biological or half brother! Yeah! Honesty matters! It just doesn’t say or show James is his bio-bro. It does not.
Archaeologists: The Racoons of History!😂
Saying "science is not objective" is ridiculous. Science is the pursuit of objective truths. If science isn't objective then why not logic? And if logic is just subjective then how can you logically argue that science is or isn't objective?
Then you go on to ridicule people for looking for the arch. Why? There's no objective standard of what to look for. Your criticisms are just subjective, after all.
Postmodernist drivel.
Every argument for anything implies the existence of objective truth. Otherwise you're just throwing opinions back and forth.
@@SchutzBoysbandI think you're not listening closely and are making a mountain out of a mole hill. They weren't advocating complete epistemological relativism. They argued OBJECTIVE evidence can sometimes be interpreted in a variety of ways. 😊
I have seen only one good unbiased kind of analysis,summary video on qumran scrolls on youtube and it is not even in English. The rest is just going all around the place relatec,not related ,random topics etc.
Q: How do we know that archaeology is in fact *not* a “science”?
A: Because she insists that it _is_ a science about nine times within the first five minutes. Her desperate epistemological status anxiety would be touching were it not so extreme.
The key, of course, is how one understands the word “science.” She nervously navigates around the embarrassing reality by carefully stipulating that it’s not an “exact” science, but she desperately wants to claim the apparently privileged status of physical or natural science anyway.
The fact is that archaeology is a *social* science, not a physical science, and its closest kin are disciplines like psychology and art history, not chemistry or geology. She should relax.
What a nonsensical comment. Archeaology is a science. And it isn't a pure social science since it uses the methods and techniques of the physical sciences, like radiometric dating, stratiography, etc. Don't be silly.
1st?
Finally!! 😂
@@stewartthorpe2533
Yes many were crucified back then but not many crucifixion nails turn up in the tomb of Caiaphas, the man who put Christ to death. That's only, will only, could only . . . happened once. Those nails are at the same lab as the only other crucifixion nails ever found.
That is one hell of a coincidence Bart. One huge hell of coincidence lol
Nobody would have the remains of a criminal enemy they condemned, in their own tomb.
It would be like Putin being buried with Navalny.
You don’t think Caiaphas had more than one person crucified?
@@MasterShake9000Technically, Caiaphis couldn’t order a crucifixion. That was a Roman capital offense reserved for offenses such as sedition, treason and rebellion. So even the 2 thieves being crucified could only occur if they were runaway slaves that went to being robbers. Pilate was the only one who could have had someone crucified. The Sanhedrin could have had someone stoned to death like James the Just, but they still needed the Roman Governor’s permission. See the comments on James by Josephus.
Ropes
I bet they used ropes most of the time
Since Bart does believe that Jesus really existed, does he also believe that Jesus was really a king?
Not sure how those two follow.
@marcomoreno6748 Jesus could not have been a king (a real king) if He never existed, but since Bart is saying Jesus did indeed exist, was He also really a king like proclaimed about Himself?
No. I can confidently say that Bart’s learned opinion would be that any such claims were later additions and not part of the real Jesus of Nazareth’s preaching.
@dukeon It sounds like you're saying you know what Jesus would have preached about and what He would not have preached about.
@@tryme3969 And it sounds very much like you might be a Christian troll. I’m simply repeating what I’ve heard Bart say about Jesus’ purported claims to Kinghood, Godhood, being the Son of Man, etc.
Bart doesn’t believe that the historical Jesus preached any of that, rather that he was a apocalypticist who believed the Son of Man (the Messiah) and the Kingdom of God were imminent. He (Bart) believes that Paul, the Gospels, and to some extent even the early Church Fathers introduced the idea of Jesus being THE Christ - ergo, the Jewish Messiah, as well as a direct descendant of the line of David, etc - into the orthodox faith, which made Christianity much more appealing than just saying that he was a prophet (as Islam does) who was executed by the Romans, but his message of the End should still be heeded. Dead prophets don’t really attract followers, but resurrected godheads do.
These are not _my_ opinions, as you appear not to understand. If you disagree with them, go have a chat with Bart. I only answered your question because I know what he has said in his books, interviews, lectures, blogs, podcasts, and so on, so I know how HE would answer your question. More or less, of course. He’s the textual analyst, after all, not me.
3:16 A common mistake. Thats not a temple, its a mosque callled Al-aqsa mosque or the dome of the rock