Loading...Here I begin my 14-post “anniversary” series with the very first post that appeared on the blog (April 3, 2014). Recall: this thread will consist of 14 posts from each of the 14 years of the blogs life, one per year, 13 of them from … April of that year. (Not this year’s, since if you follow the blog, they are still fresh in your mind.
This first one is rather telling. Among other things, it tells how much more thin-skinned, snarky, and combative I was in the days of my youth (fourteen years ago!). Hey, go for the jugular! Even so, since it was post #1, it simply has to start the thread.
******************************
Probably more than any of my other books, Misquoting Jesus provoked a loud and extensive critique from scholars
Get access to Dr. Ehrman's library of 4,000+ articles plus five new articles per week about the New Testament and early Christianity. It costs as little as $2.99/mth and every cent goes to charity!
Unlock 4,000+ Articles Like This!
You were good then, too, Bart
I suggest that readers of this blog read “How an ‘Agnostic Atheist’ Got Students to Scrutinize Their Faith” by Andrew Long in “The Assembly.” It describes Bart very well. Bart has helped me understand that different texts of a given Bible book can have significant differences and that different books of the Bible can have significant differences. Those two observations make a HUGE difference. Thanks.
Thanks Ron!
I should also mention that I am a Christian who believes the Bible to be the word of God. Yet reading your books has not weakened my faith. Rather, it has helped me appreciate even more the remarkable process through which many imperfect human beings, using their wisdom and judgment, participated in the formation of this great book. Knowing more about that history has deepened my sense of the Bible’s spiritual significance.
Some readers may lose their faith after reading your work. But sometimes I wonder whether, in such cases, what is being lost is not so much faith in God as faith in the Bible itself.
In any case, I simply wanted to share this personal reflection. No reply is necessary.
Since you have unshakable faith, I will introduce to someone else with unshakable faith by his YouTube channel. He is a retired Christian preacher (now deceased), and his YouTube channel is BIBLEisMARKofBEAST. He has merch (coffee mugs, T-shirts,etc) with the message, THE BIBLE IS AN IDOL. I have identified an influential “hidden” group in Judea and in Alexandria, Egypt in the 1st century – a proto-Gnostic group. In Jerusalem, this group started six (6) weeks before the Day of Pentecost. These were “former” Essenes. The EMPTY TOMB convinced them. Flavius Josephus is our most reliable source of the Essenes, but he did not speculate about their origin. They started when the Seleucid ruler attempted to eliminate the Jewish religion in 180 BCE. These “former” Essenes are the “Q” Community who wrote the Gospel of Matthew and influenced the Gospel of Luke. “John of Patmos” was a member in Egypt. They wrote five (5) pseudepigraphal books in the New Testament. 1st & 2nd Thessalonians, 2nd Timothy, 2nd Peter, Jude, and the addendum to 1st Peter. The “Q” Community joined and influenced the growing Gnostic Christian community. Another group in Corinth wrote pseudepigraphal forgeries, also. Romans 2:26-29. The “keystone” message.
While there are a few points on which I may see things somewhat differently, I am nevertheless very grateful for your willingness to share your insights.
DR Ehrman has helped my transition also. But I wonder how hypocritical I was to my practices 15 years ago.
Dr. Ehrman, I know that de-converting people is never your intention. But, as you probably know, there are people out there whose de-conversion happens because of your work. Recently, I’ve become interested in the psychology involved in the so-called de-conversion and so I’ve been watching YouTube videos of people who have left the Christian religion. Tonight, I’ve found and watched the story of Elliott Christopherson, and he said he left his faith after watching a Misquoting Jesus podcast. His video is here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMVNUJRzCVY
I suppose some people who credit your work as the reason for leaving their faith have contacted you. I’m curious if they ask anything of you or what you say to them in response. I suspect some thank you and others may hold it against you. So, I’m curious how you deal with that. It’s got to be hard sometimes.
My view is that if anyone reads or hears what I say — which for the most part is simply what critical scholars say, whether they are Christain, Jewish, agnostic, or whatever — and decides it is true, what they do with that for their personal religious lives is a personal religious decision. They are not changing because of me but because they come to think/believe something different from before. It doesn’t bother me if they leave the faith, become more persuaded by their faith, or anything in between. I’m more interested in them pursuing the truth wherever it leads them and in their not using knowledge or new views as a weapon to harm others, but to improve their world.
Hi Dr. Ehreman,
I understand your view that readers make their own decisions. But if scholarship predictably weakens a load-bearing religious framework in people’s lives, do you think the scholar bears any responsibility for foreseeable downstream effects, or is truthful presentation alone morally sufficient?
As a follow-up question, does the pursuit of truth truly improve one’s world? Or are falsehoods a necessity of life?
No, I don’t think what someone does with information is the fault of the one who provides it.
Truth does improve the world and falsehoods are sometimes necessary. (I don’t think it’s an either/or)
Hello, R_Geri. Elsewhere on this thread, Dr. Ehrman wrote “Truth does improve the world, and some falsehoods are necessary.” We can assume that he wrestled with his individual decision to renounce Christianity. After all, he is a graduate of a post-secondary educational institute that honors the famous Christian evangelist, Dwight Moody. Dr. Ehrman wrestled with his decision to publish his first book. A young Richard Dawkins “de-converted” Christians gleefully (now, Dawkins refers to himself as a “cultural Christian”) and his friend, Dennett, wrote the book, Darwin’s Dangerous Idea to de-convert the advocates of Intelligent Design. Unlike Dawkins and Dennett, Dr. Ehrman was a professed Christian. The Truth was a burden that Dr. Ehrman carried mile after mile. Was it a “sin” to tell the Truth? Was it a “sin” to withhold the Truth?
Years ago, I considered that Dr. Ehrman’s decision to publish for the General Public positioned himself “nearer” to any alleged Deity in any alleged Heaven, because GOD is Truth. Sincere “error” is accrued as pursuing Truth. According to the New Covenant message of the Apostle Paul, “faith” is not the criteria of Deity. “Acceptable service” is the criteria. God imparts “right-standing” to unbelievers and believers equally.
Does the NT contain the first ancient writing featuring the poor in a ‘favorable’ light? In the character of Jesus, poverty is ennobled, elevated, and outright prescribed. What does this mean regarding the popularity and expansion of the faith during the first few centuries?
These ideas advanced by Jesus and adopted by his followers are deeply rooted in the Hebrew Bible and the Jewish traditions that emerged from it.
That’s why I ask. In the Jewish texts, I see humility before the Jewish deity, not self-sacrifice on behalf of the poor and bereft. As for what Jesus said, we can only infer. No one who heard him wrote anything we have access to, if they wrote anything at all.
Even Paul (for as much as we know our texts tell the truth about their provenance and historical accuracy) doesn’t talk about the poor the way the Gospels portray Jesus’ message to his followers.
I am looking for the branch that bore the fruit, not the root that sprouted from the ground. Any ancient texts that show how this ‘miraculous’ evolution in thought and practice occurred?
I’d say Isaiah and Amos, as two examples, are unusually concerned about the poor and needy and malign those who fail to attend to their needs and threaten their judgment, even if they consider themselves faithful followers of Yahweh (As a quick reference, just Amos chapters 3-5).
So…. regard for the poor is certainly there. The ennobling and elevation of poverty in the Gospels is of another sort. This seems a fascinating development, both in scope and pace. Thank you
When something that could be calmly debated is met with harsh denials and accusations, be suspicious of the true intent of the panicker.
Carrier comes to mind.
I an greatly pleased that Dr. Ehrman wrote his many books that point out what we read in the New Testament in many place is based on what is written in only some versions of the text that exist. For me, the fact that the Bible we read states that Jesus predicted God would in the very near future destroy the oppressing Romans army, endorse the Jewish religion to the most senior position, and install him as King of everyone on Earth, indicates that Jesus wanted this to happen so strongly that confused “wanting” with “reality.” Nevertheless, I also believe that Jesus was correct when he preached that “supreme unseen force” is at work, planting suggested actions in our souls, and that when we pay attention act on these suggestions we benefit. When these suggestions involve helping other people, taking actions (giving money to charities, going on “mission trips), I believe we are doing what that unseen force wants all people to do. I note that DR. Ehrman claims to be a “non-believer,” but he does believe in helping those in need. Maybe he is the same type of believer that I am and many of you are.
Bill Steigelmann
I have a question about 2 Peter 3:15–16 and its reference to Paul’s letters.
In the immediate context, the author explains the delay of the parousia by saying that “the Lord’s patience is salvation,” and then adds that Paul also wrote about these matters. What puzzles me is that in the Pauline letters preserved in the New Testament, Paul does not seem to address the delay of the parousia in this way. If anything, Paul often appears to assume that the end is relatively near (e.g., 1 Thessalonians 4–5; Romans 13:11–12).
This makes me wonder what the author of 2 Peter might have had in mind when referring to Paul. Could he have known Pauline letters that are now lost, or is he interpreting broader Pauline themes such as divine patience and mercy?
I realize the most honest answer may simply be that we cannot know, but I would be very interested to hear your interpretation.
I suppose 2 Thessalonians 2 could be in view; but I agree he may well have had other no-longer extant letters in mind. Or he cold be appealing to Paul as an authority with nothing in particular in mind other than his sense that Paul wold have been on his side instead of his opponents’…
We need more of this type of reply. You are just saying the truth. no more, no less. And sometimes it is important to expose these people who say half-truths or misquote you 😉
Thank God for Bart 😉
Evangelicals and fundamentalists are so invested in their dogmas that you could remove half of the bible and they would still hold to their cherished beliefs. C.S. Lewis said in “Reflections on the Psalms” X Second Meanings, “Because, as we know, almost anything can be read into any book if you are determined enough…Some of the allegories thus imposed on my own books have been so ingenious and interesting that I often wish I had thought of them myself.” That’s how I feel about inerrancy and Calvinism. God is scratching his head wondering, “Why didn’t I think of that?”
It’s one thing to say that there are textual variants in Biblical manuscripts. It happens to be true, being based on physical evidence. It’s also not news to anyone who’s studied the topic.
The problem for some folks are the corollary notions that follow from this very simple statement. Those are what freak some people out. I say this as someone who once was a fundamentalist of the Biblical-inerrancy school of thought.
I was told by pastors and others I’d respected that there are no variations in Biblical manuscripts. Each is exactly the same as every other. I heard that repeatedly: Biblical manuscripts are reliable to a degree that nothing else was/is.
When one presumes one’s theology is based on there being no textual variation, for no reason other than you’d been assured there’s no textual variation, that can hit people hard. The idea that textual variants don’t necessarily “break” their theology is a nuance that some folks just can’t grasp. (Nuance is hard, generally.) All they know is the inerrancy and zero-deviation they’d believed in for so long, is not factually the case.
And they react badly to it. For me, it’s sometimes as simple as that.
They literally said all the manuscripts were entirely the same? YIKES!
Scribal correction: I presume you meant April 3, 2012! 2012+14=2026 🙂 (Also checked the first entry for 2012 and confirmed!)
Damn scribes…
I had already shifted atheist/agnostic by the time I read Bart. I was too “chicken” before then! I’ll agree that textual variants in biblical manuscripts don’t disprove anything. For example, the glaring discrepancies in the Resurrection accounts don’t disprove the Resurrection (I didn’t notice the discrepancies until they were pointed out to me and now I can’t unsee them). Maybe God wanted the Resurrection evidence to look really weak. But I also have a hard time believing that good faith skeptics are hell bound as a result. So that’s my Pascal Wager: I suspect the Resurrection didn’t happen, and will continue to think so probably for the rest of my life, but I’ll be glad to find out otherwise at the Last Judgment — which I also suspect won’t happen.
Years ago, I concluded that Dr. Ehrman moved “nearer” to God when he renounced Christianity. God is Truth and Truth is God. God wants a sincere response. A sincere “error” is accrued as a positive response. Recently, I have an opinion of the actual message of the Apostle Paul. It is “anti-religious”. Religion is organization. It is written, “Jesus went from town to town teaching the Kingdom of Heaven.” Paul went from town to town teaching the New Covenant. The New Covenant is the same as the Kingdom of Heaven. FAITH IS NOT THE CRITERIA of the New Covenant or the Kingdom of Heaven. Earth is the clever disguise for Hell. Don’t worry about dying and going to hell. Instead, worry about dying and returning to hell. Worry about being LEFT BEHIND. 99% of us have been here before. 90% of us did not meet the criteria to exit. We were LEFT BEHIND. 66% of each generation fail to meet the criteria and are LEFT BEHIND. 33% meet the criteria. There are souls among us who “volunteered” on suicide missions to return to Hell. 50% of the New Testament is bogus. THE BIBLE IS AN IDOL.
I like misquoting Jesus but the book that started my deconversion, though I didnt know it at the time was Orthodox Corruption of Scripture. Thanks Dr. Bart!