Loading...One of the readers for the audio versions of my daily blog posts is Sam Devis, who also runs a podcast called “When Belief Dies,” dealing with lots of intriguing issues connected with “faith, religion, and life.” Check out the podcast site (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/when-belief-dies/id1516058806) ; he’s had some terrific guests on, and is an extremely thoughtful interviewer.
Sam asked me to do an interview, and I thought that the questions and issues were particularly penetrating. See what you think. Here it is.
Of course we aren’t going to see/hear a podcast about WHEN BELIEF GROWS, are we. That’s probing in the wrong direction.
I believe you will have no problem finding podcasts like that; there roughly 29 million of them! None of them has asked to interview me though. 🙂
Actually, Sam has christian guest on the podcast as well and let’s them freely explain their views. It is very much a balanced approach if you ask me. But you wouldn’t know that, unless you visited the podcast website and took a look for yourself before commenting.
It was a pleasure to record this with you Bart 🙂
This was so helpful, thank you for this. I’ve been wrestling lately with coming to realize that I wasn’t so much educated in Bible College and Seminary, but maybe indoctrinated? I was told about Bart’s material along with Crossan, Borg, etc. and was told about the Gnostic texts, but it was all quickly dismissed as wrong. There was one right way (our very narrow way) and many wrong ways (those other ways). The narrow way (our way) leads to life, the other wide ways lead to destruction. Now that I’m studying all of this stuff on my own I’m growing more and more annoyed, disappointed, and overwhelmed with how much I don’t know and wasn’t taught … that I’m essentially trying to learn on my own with the help of this blog, a shelf of books, podcasts, etc. Grateful for this space to explore and learn.
Love this btw! 🙂
Hear, hear! “Grateful for this space . . “
Couldn’t have said it better myself.
Would you say your attitude towards your profession changed at all when your religious beliefs changed?
Actually, not at all! What I teach now and how I teach it is almost exactly the same. Except I’m more mellow…..
Quote – “I believe you will have no problem finding podcasts like that; there roughly 29 million of them! None of them has asked to interview me though”
Certainly not in academic circles.
You can interview me anytime.
Oh yes, tons of them. Seek and ye shall find.
A question concerning translation; In the NIV Bible. Matt 24:34 “I tell you the truth, this generation ….”
The word “generation” is footnoted as also being translated as “race”. The race translation changes the meaning significantly and this seems to be the one apologists favor. Is one of these translations actually more correct or is it just a matter of personal belief?
The term can, in some contexts, mean “race.” And in some contexts mean “generation.” Like just about every word ever created it can mean different things depending on how it is being used in context. In this context, most Bible translators agree that “race” doesn’t make any sense. That would mean that Jesus is assuring his disciples that they need to be prepared for the coming end, cause it could come at any time — in fact, before there are no more members of the Jewish race alive. Uh… Obviously in this context of urgency, it has to mean “generation”
Mark 8:31
Mark 9:31
Mark 10:33-34
An apologist used these to authenticy, together with saying that these things are not in favour of Jesus, therefore its likely to have happened. I on the other hand disagree. What is your take on these verses and Jesus predicting his suffering?
Taking a closer look i get the feeling that Mark 8:31 is written to expel Peter and the followers of him. That brings me to the gospel of Peter. Its like the gospel of Peter is older than Mark for me. I know the dating of the Peter we have is rather new compared to Mark. But I recall you have said that the gospel of Peter was popular and has been found more fragments than of Mark. My suspicion of “conflict of opinion” is further increased in Mark 10:33-34 where Mark in a sense embrace John and James. Therefore Mark is older than the rebuke of James.
Have you ever thought some of the same? Maybe written about it or want to write about it?
I guess I get these indications in the same way people put age on a script on whether the temple has fallen or not.
I’d say that’s a rather bizarre argument. These are Mark’s passion predictions and they are *exactly* what later Christians thought about Jesus. There’s no way they pass the criterion of dissimarity.
In light of Matt 16:28; Truly I tell, there be some of you here that shall not taste of death until you see the son of man…” I would say it is consistent with that word meaning generation. There are contradictions between gospels but, not so much within one gospel, I think.
Thats interesting. I have to read it in context Walter. I wasn’t thinking so much of contradictions, but more like Mark gospel has taken a stand to support James and John theology and not peter. Or their gospels. Not sure how to word this so it is understandable.
I didn’t put the verses in the comment here though. It is the following verses of Mark 8:31 and 10:33-34 where Peter start to rebuke jesus and he says stay away satan in the first and talk about James and John at his right hand in the last section.
Either way, taken how devastated they were after his death makes a prediction, let alone 3 very not plausible.
It’s interesting to me that Devis talks about “trusting in the Bible.” Since the pandemic, I’ve been reading and listening to Great Courses about the Reformation. Seems like perhaps when the Reformers got rid of centuries of theological meanderings (good thing) some of their descendants became equally “stuck on” the Bible, not the way Jews deal with (their own) texts: https://www.britannica.com/topic/Talmud
“This encyclopaedic array is presented in a unique dialectic style that faithfully reflects the spirit of free give-and-take prevalent in the Talmudic academies, where study was focused upon a Talmudic text. All present participated in an effort to exhaust the meaning and ramifications of the text, debating and arguing together. The mention of a name, situation, or idea often led to the introduction of a story or legend that lightened the mood of a complex argument and carried discussion further.”
What exactly any scripture means is contested.. therefore the problem to me would be to place trust in human (what the Roman Church has taught) or (how people interpret Scripture) and not in the Divine directly.
Can I add one more thing… Sam has good stuff on his podcast… if anyone has a few bucks they can put towards this, it is money well spent. These are the voices that need to be supported. We need more voices out there inviting the dialogues that ask the hard questions and seek to find some answers or at least finding a good adventure on the journey of discovery. Sam has a Patreon account. It’s not a big individual investment, but if there are a lot of people putting a few bucks in, that helps him out.
https://whenbeliefdies.com/patreon/
Great interview. Thank you Bart for adding this interview on your blog.
Ruby from Alberta Canada
Thanks Ruby, this is really kind of you ✌️
I grew up in a fundamentalist church! We were told at almost every service one mistake and we were Hellbound! I believe the teachings on Hell, are the evilest doctrine ever invented! Why in the name of justice would people want their fellow humans to burn eternally! I really appreciate this blog and all of Dr. Erhman’s books!
Really enjoyed this interview. One point that really struck me, at around .53 minutes, you mentioned some of these good evangelicals scholars purposely change what the Bible should “really say”,especially in the O.T. and they should not do that. Is this practice of revision permissible? are there no boards of ethics who oversee a correct and plausible revision is conducted? I am a somewhat surprised that is knowingly done this way.
They would say, of course, that they are being true to the meaning of the passages in context. And no, there are no boards of ethics — the committees themselves are teh boards.
Really interesting introduction of ‘When belief dies’ by Sam, and I empathise so much with his experiences, and recognise so much, as someone who also grew up in a Christian home and went on to eventually leave the faith and become a non-hostile agnostic who still loves his hymns and the occasional church service.