Loading...From Diane:
Hi, Bart fans–Bart is too modest to blow his own horn about this, but Academic YouTuber Dan McClellan (@maklelan) has posted a short video debunking an apologist’s video trashing Bart. Dan is a master at this–watch below, and make sure to Like the video (instructions at bottom).
The original creator tried to slap back–it didn’t go well for him:
You can help this video go viral by clicking on “YouTube” at the bottom of the video, then give it a like by clicking the little thumbs-up icon under the video (see below). It’s got 1,000 likes as of this morning, and 10,000 views…let’s join in:
Thank you for sharing and this was a wonderful counter by Mr. McClellan to the apologist’s remarks. Unfortunately people are going to say what they want to say and distort what they want to distort, particularly when they have an audience that is ripe and ready to listen and believe that nonsense. But fortunately, Truth stands out clear from error… and my take away from the apologist’s video is:
1. He sped up Dr. Ehrman’s interview answers much the same way Bruce Lee’s nunchakus were sped up in ‘Enter the Dragon’ which was cool (so yes I am comparing Dr. Ehrman to Bruce Lee)
2. Background music inlaid set the tone (of the evil that is happening….)
3. The apologist made sure everyone noticed his beautiful hair and eyes
From Mr. McClellan’s video my take away was:
1. Sound, logical and correct/true information that ripped everything apart that the apologist was trying to do
2. Mr. McClellan may not have the hair to compete with but I give him the edge with his eyes
Without ominous music how will people know how scared to feel?
Excellent! Glad to have watched it and was very happy to hit “Like”! Question on a completely different topic, Bart: I heard there are a few places where Matthew and Luke are both copying Mark (each with their own independent changes), but then also have a sentence or phrase common to them, but not in Mark. John Dominic Crossan cites as an example the common addition of the sentence “Who is it that struck you?” in both Matthew 26:67-68 and Luke 22:63-65. Crossan mentions that one plausible explanation is that these could reflect variants between the version of Mark that Matthew and Luke had and the version represented by our surviving manuscripts of Mark. Any comments on that? But further, this issue makes me wonder if there is similarly any evidence of variants between the copies of Mark that Matthew and Luke had available to them. Or is that completely invisible to us? (to whatever extent it might be the case).
Yes, it rarely happens, but when it does there are usually reasons that can be adduced tht explained it. The “Who is it who struck you” could have come from the copies of Mark they had (it still can be found in a bunch of copies of Mark) or form a well known version of the story floating around orally, etc.
I’ve seen, liked and commented. Worth noting that the apologist responded to Dan, questioning his motivations and accusing him of taking things out of context (I know, how out of character for an apologist!). Dan has responded again in turn just a few hours ago. I don’t know if we’re allowed to post links in comments, but his rebuttal is fantastic and is (as of my writing) the most recent video on his channel.
Dr. Ehrman, of course, doesn’t need anyone to defend him, but it’s so nice to see one of these people arguing in bad faith called out.
What is the apologist’s name?
A question for Bart (or any other wise souls who may have good advice)
I want to finally fill the gap in my knowledge and read the Bible, old and New Testament cover to cover
I’ve had a few goes before but never made it
So which version would you suggest?
Is the ESV any good? Or is the NIV a superior option?
I have noticed some easily noticeable differences already
The KJV seems like a bit too much work (too many ye’s and verilys etc) plus it’s my understanding that it’s quite out of date with the ancient manuscripts discovered later paradoxically meaning the newer versions are closer to the original of what was actually written by the original authors
So NIV, ESV or something else?
Your help, be it Bart or others is appreciated (not to be rude but Bart can give a one word answer, I trust his judgment for others please explain why you think your choice is best 😊)
Thankyou
I’d suggest the NRSV, and recommend you read it in an annotated edition that explains each book briefly and adds notes to the bottom of each page to explain difficult passages, such as the HarperCollins Study Bible. My personal view is that since the books were written separately by different authors and are not arranged chronologically by when they were written, it’ perfectly fine to read the “whole Bible” by skipping around from one part to another. Most people who try to read “the whole thing” start giving up in the second half of Exodus and in Leviticus, where the laws are given. But that’s too bad. You could come back to those parts later if you want some more “action” as you find in parts of Numbers, Joshua, Judges, etc. and you could read books like the Psalms in and out, since they aren’t arranged in a necessary order.
People like this original creator vote.
Prof Ehrman, since your mission according to these apologists is to “destroy Christianity”, I must assume you have some sort of relationship with Satan. I’m curious how that works. Does the Horned One speak to you personally or through some medium like a Ouija Board or Tarot Cards?
Some of them thihnk that he lives within me and controls my brain. I guess that would be difficult to disprove, huh?
You got my “like”,,,,.
We just need the good scholars !
I wish the believers of faith wouldn’t speak for God. I’m allowing a few seconds for God to speak… hmm, nothing. Damn it.
If the majority of all religions were destroyed, it wouldn’t hurt my feelings. All three main religions have done horrible things, one of those horrible things is intentionally misquoting the Bible.
I think it’s important for humans to seek wisdom, understanding, and knowledge. It’s the only way humanity grows and survives. If it wasn’t for the separation of church and state, law and order, America would be like the Middle East.
You go Dr. Bart challenged him to a debate.
It disturbs me a whole lot that unless you are an I/I Christian you are the enemy of Christianity. Inerrancy and Infallibility, to me, are out of the scope of human capability. As an old lady in my mid-fifties my conviction about this grows every year. I know that BDE is an agnostic but it bothers me a lot that there is seemingly zero room for those of us in the Body of Christ who don’t hold a cultish outlook on the scriptures. My belief is that every human filters through the prism of their experience. And I don’t believe the kind of objectivity that the most powerful males in every culture claim they are espousing is even possible. In fact it is their viewpoint that is LEAST likely to have any amount of objectivity because the most powerful, most wealthy males in a culture have never been forced to exist outside of the dominant narrative like the rest of us have. I love both Dan McC and BDE, because while I love languages I do not have the memory required to pick them up quickly and as a visual thinker I am hopeless at speaking them.
Thanks! And whoa, do I ever wish I were an old MAN in my mid 50s…
I really don’t get why you strike so much fear into the hearts of folk, you seem to give sane scholarship that’s nothing really out of the blue (meaning to say well founded, not that you are unoriginal). I guess the element of discomfort comes from your presentation of new testament scholarship from a non Christian perspective, but as a Christian myself I’ve always loved your stuff. I guess for folks who are used to only one way of thinking, other ways of viewing things are a threat.
Yeah, it’s funny that some of my critics attack me for coming up with radical ideas and then a few sentences before or later malign me for not saying anything new….