A while back blog member Kevin Grant and I did a recorded interview on the teachings of Jesus about the coming apocalypse. Did he really mean it? Are we supposed to take it literally? How can readers understand the dire predictions? Here is the video!
Bart Ehrman and Kevin Grant – The Apocalypse: Literal or Metaphor?
February 4, 2025
Share Bart’s Post on These Platforms
12 Comments
Leave A Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
This interview was originally uploaded a couple of weeks ago. I put it on while driving to work, heard like 10 minutes of it, and thought it was interesting and it should be really exciting to watch it in its entirety back at home. But when I tried to do that, I couldn’t find it! I blamed myself for not watching it when I had the chance! It made me ponder on opportunities that I miss in life in general! Thankfully, I get to watch it now!
Hello Bart,
I listened to your latest Misquoting Jesus podcast this morning and I was fascinated by your discussion of the origins of Jewish law in Hittite suzerainty treaties. I don’t recall you mentioning in the podcast anywhere I could read more about those origins. Can you recommend any sources to look at?
Thanks!
Ben Stephens
One of the standard textbooks on the OT is Michael Coogan, The Old Testament: A Historical and Literary Introduction (New York: Oxford). He has a nice discussion on pp. 107-17 of his first edition (not sure what pages it wold be in the later editions).
Christianity uniquely characterized pride as a vice. Greek/Roman philosophers viewed pride as the byproduct of excellence. Christianity teaches that pride is a fundamental obstacle to relationship with God/others.
The act of genuine/intentional attempts to deny one’s ego is a fascinating exception to the rule that all selfless actions are motivated by egocentrism. The very act of ego-denial implies willingness to relinquish self-interest/pride/need for validation.
When we’re preoccupied with validation, we become trapped in self-consciousness, preventing us from fully immersing ourselves in the moment. Consider a painter obsessed with validation. Their creative process is tainted by the constant worry about approval. In contrast, the painter who creates solely for beauty is free to enjoy the creative process.
On the biblical worldview, humanity’s downfall began with the ego-driven desire to become God-like. This rebellion resulted in separation. Restoration lies in surrendering our egocentric ambitions/embracing a humble relationship with God. By letting go of our self-exalting pursuits, we can experience the joy that comes from being immersed in God’s presence.
“Storing up treasures in heaven” shouldn’t be seen as an egocentric pursuit, rather as the natural-byproduct of experiencing joy in its purest form. When we deny our ego/immerse ourselves in our Creator, we’ll inevitably find joy.
Hi Bart I have two questions. I was told in the forum that regardless of the topic this is the place to ask a question this is for a graphic novel script i’m writing about the morality of the bible so if you could answer these it would be very helpful. Enjoying the blog but I joined just to get these answered by an expert.
Question 1: Was there any way in first or second temple judaism for a woman to become independently wealthy through inheritance say if she has no living relatives and her husband and his father die at the same time and they have no other living relatives? Even in this extreme scenario would she inherit her husbands property/land/herds?
Some (very few) women certainly became extremely wealthy through inheritance, but it wsa very difficult to do so apart from male oversight.
Perfect! I assumed this would be a rare thing but I was unsure whether it was possible at all. Thank you so much Bart. I”m really enjoying the blog.
Here is my second question.
In first and second temple judaism were women allowed to work and earn money AT ALL on their own? From reading the bible I’d wager the answer is no but I want to be precise in this script I’m writing. I understand their role as property of men but was this permitted at all? Thank you in advance and keep up the wonderful public outreach! Your work has been very helpful in this project.
Are you askig if women could have independent careers, even if they were married? Society wasn’t set up that way. Women prostitutes could; and women could be servants, and of course slaves. But there really were’t career opportunityies.
Basically yes i was asking that and already fairly certain of the answer and you gave me a bit more confidence in part of this story. Thanks man!
On historiography: It’s wise indeed not to try and assign numerical probabilities to historical judgements. But isn’t the use of criteria for authenticity of testimony subject to severe danger of mis-use? The criteria of continuity with tradition and difference give opposite advice, and historians can (and do) make tendentious use of them to reach opposite conclusions. I suggest a different way of conceptualizing good historiography: all these judgements are subsumable under the principles governing abduction – reasoning to the best explanation. “Criteria” can sometimes help guide estimates of explanatory goodness. But the pitfalls are clearer. One is: how does one know one has thought of all the possible explanations for the data? Or judge a data set to be adequate and properly curated? Relevance of data is itself a matter of judgement governed by prior theory and conclusions. Criteria for “goodness” are themselves a bit seat-of-the-pants. This is not to invite deep skepticism, but clarity on methodology is essential to any discipline.
Yup, all criteria are subject to serious misuse. And it’s always a juggling act. But it has to be done in concrete cases, not in the abstract, for probabilities to emerge. If one dispenses with historical criteria altogether, there is literally no way to know what if anything happened in the past. Maybe that’s true. But it seems dubious. Ronald Reagan really did get elected as president.