In this thread have been arguing that Jesus was decidedly a revolutionary:  he despised the current system (government) (both Roman and Jewish) and hoped for/anticipated its complete overthrow.  But he was not in support of rebellion.  That seems a bit odd, since most revolutionaries are precisely trying to incite either a violent or peaceful coup for a new system to be put in place. Jesus was different precisely because of his apocalyptic views:  governments were necessarily human institutions, the humans in power were part of a cosmic-wide network of evil and corruption, and the powers ultimately in control (above their human minions) could not be dismantled by human effort.  Only an intervention of God would resolve the world’s plight, and he would do so not through human initiative but in an act of divine judgment, to be brought by a cosmic figure, the Son of Man. What mattered for Jesus was not one government or another; one governmental policy or that, this corrupt official or that, a particular systemic problem or another – [...]

When my book Love They Stranger came out a few months ago, I was honored to be interviewed for a Swedish podcast about my major theses and how I support them.  It was one episode in a multi-part series, and has now just recently been aired. I thought it was a particularly interesting back and forth, and the producers have given us permission to share it here on the blog. I hope you enjoy it!  (My host begins by welcoming his audience in Swedish -- but have no fear!  He has very fine English and breaks into it at about the 1.30 mark.)   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxkCnMyBqaQ

To condemn, oppose, and defy the current order is not necessarily the same as, or even a stage toward, urging its reformation.  Jesus certainly condemned, opposed, and defied the ruling authorities of his day.  But he did not propose (or support) an agenda to reform the system.  He believed God would destroy both the system and those who ran and supported it.  He would then set up a new order.  He didn’t need either urging or assistance. Roughly speaking there were two sets of ruling authorities in Jesus’s time and place, what we today would differentiate as “political” and “religious.”  The differentiation would have made little sense to Jesus or to anyone else in the Roman world.  Romans, Jews, and everyone else saw these two realms (that since the Enlightenment have been differentiated) as closely intertwined and interdependent.  There were not even words in Greek, Latin, or Aramaic that clearly designated what we today call “politics” and/or “religion.” That is because everyone (who supported the status quo) understood the ruling authorities and their [...]

Here are some random thoughts I’ve been … thinking, while contemplating Jesus’s views of political and economic systems.  They are not definitive thoughts, but explorations.  What do you think?  I would welcome your comments (on this post I probably won’t be answering questions, just observing responses). Normally when someone opposes a political or economic situation, they want it to be reformed.   We should move to a state-supported health care system; we should get rid of the electoral college; we should abolish the House of Lords; we should close the borders; we should … whatever, ad infinitum. It has long been interesting to me that (some) people who propose a radical transformation of current systems nonetheless (sometimes) fully participate in them to their own benefit.  For many years one of my close friends was an avowed, deeply committed Marxist who kept true to his principles by refusing to contribute to the Christmas fund for the office staff (since that would involve clandestinely acknowledging and supporting the system that accepted the reality of the proletariat).  [...]

I am pleased to let all you blog members to know that on Saturday July 18, 2:00 - 5:00 pm ET, I will be doing a FREE two-lecture course on where the Christian idea of hell (as a place of eternal conscious torment) came from.   This course is NOT connected with blog per se, except insofar as I am connected with both.  It is rather a production of my on-line course company, Paths in Biblical Studies.  But since this is a complete Freebie, I thought I would be remiss not to let all of you know about it who haven't learned about it from another channel. The course is called:  What theHell? The Real Teaching of Jesus on the Afterlife.   It will will consist of two lectures of 50 minutes each, followed by a live Q&A.  Anyone can come.  There's zero cost. If you're interested, you can find out more about it here:  https://learn.bartehrman.com/what-the-hell?widget=courses Here's a brief overview: What The Hell? The Real Teachings of Jesus on the Afterlife  Many people have trouble understanding how a good God could [...]

Why did early Christians portray Pontius Pilate, who ordered Jesus' crucifixion, as increasingly innocent in Jesus' death?  Was it be blame Jews for being "Christ killers"? In a couple of recent posts I've talked about a couple of the "Pilate Gospels" -- apocryphal accounts of Jesus' trial and crucifixion -- in which Pilate himself is shown to be innocent and "the Jews" (either their leaders or the entire people) were at fault for the execution of the son of God.  These accounts may have started to appear in the second century, but the texts we have now are from later periods when anti-Jewish hatred in some parts of the Christian church had become standard rhetoric, sometimes leading to violence. This rhetorical strategy did not originate after the New Testament period, but can be found already in the canonical Gospels. I should stress that the earliest Christians -- starting obviously with Jesus himself and his disciples -- were Jewish through and through, with nothing non-Jewish, let alone anti-Jewish about them.  Jesus did not plan [...]

Is there any evidence to support the idea that Jesus and his followers survived during his public ministry principally, normally, or often by foraging?  In my previous post I explained why it is plausible.  But is there any reason to consider it probable? (Sidenote: In my view, far too many scholars of New Testament and early Christianity in recent years have succumbed to the temptation of advancing claims/views that could be true, without worrying if there is evidence that shows they probalby are [or at least without citing and evidence];  and without considering counter-evidence.  For readers, books that do that can certainly be more scintillating than an account -- even at a popular level -- recognizes the need to mount an argument rather than simply make an assertion.  But in my view it’s bad history and not helpful) Since our best sources of information about Jesus’ life of any real merit are the earliest Gospels, it is to these we turn.  Here are three passages that seem to relate directly to my question, all from our [...]

I am please to publish this guest post by Christopher Stanley, a scholar of the New Testament and Early Christianity who enjoyed a long career at St. Bonaventure University (after receiving his PhD in NT at Duke!)   The post deals with a topic most of us haven't thought about before.  In the Jewish uprising against Rome that led to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in 70 CE, were there *some* Jews who were actually opposed to the revolt and sympathized with the Romans?  The answer may be surprising. This is a topic of Chris's recent research and a novel that he has published, as he'll explain in this intriguing post. --------- Anyone who has read Bart’s books is aware of the gulf that often separates scholarly interpretation from lay readings of the New Testament.  Some of the differences are apparent, such as questions about the authorship or historical reliability of the Gospels.  Others are less obvious. A topic that arguably belongs under the latter heading is the New Testament authors’ engagement with their political [...]

I’m in London for a bit just now, as is my summer wont, currently enjoying the heatwave (96 degrees without air conditioning!), as all you other London and thereabouts residents are!  But this too shall pass.  And so.... I would love to have a blog dinner in central London with anyone who can make it, hopefully in cooler conditions, on the evening of Wednesday July 15.  Would you be interested? I’ll probably start around 6:00 or so for a pint with whomever is interested in quenching thirst before satisfying hunger, and then head over to dinner at 7:00 or so.  Location TBD -- but somewhere relatively interesting and easy to get to. You interested?  My plan is to limit the table to 10.   For those who come there are no obligations other than: Being a blog member Showing up Talking Paying for whatever you ingest.  (Whatever you exgest is free.) If you’d like to join me and a group of other blog members for an evening of interesting discussion of areas of mutual [...]

One of the emails I get *all* the time is from authors who have written a book, or hope to write a book, who want to know how they can get a publisher to take a look at it.   The short answer: it ain’t easy.  Often the inquiry comes from someone who wants to publish a book for scholars to convince them to take a different view on a matter of scholarly importance.  How does a someone get a publisher to publish a book like that? People don't like to hear this, but if you don't already have scholarly credentials an academic publisher will almost certainly (or at least extremely rarely) even consider your manuscript.  And having the credentials, for a first-time author, almost always means having done advanced graduate level education in the field. I know a lot of authors who think that it’s not fair that they can’t get their books published “just because I don’t have a PhD.”   It get that -- it must be hugely frustrating.  But the problem is that [...]

Some of you have probably had this same experience.  Now that I'm 70, I'm thinking about my past a lot more than ... in the past.  The other day I was thinking about my life in high school soon after I had become a born-again Christian (an incredibly ignorant born-again Christian).  One incident quickly came to mind. Before I became a gung-ho Christian, my first serious girlfriend was Linda, whom I met when we were starting our sophomore year in high school.  She was funny, personable, attractive, intelligent, and Jewish.  I’m not sure I had ever known a Jewish person before her. Now I don’t recall that we ever talked about religion, and looking back  I suppose it’s not particularly surprising.  She and her family  certainly weren’t observant Jews and my uninformed sense is that they were completely secular.  I don’t know if they went to synagogue or kept any of the holidays, but I kind-a doubt it.  In any event, at that point in my life religion wasn’t really my main concern [...]

Isn’t atheism an extreme position to take?  If you (or, well, I) give up believe in the Christian God we were (I was) raised on, why give up on the idea of any god entirely? I’m on a trip giving lectures to a group of folks who, well, want to see Norway (!) but also want to discuss issues closely related to what we do on the Blog – questions about the New Testament, the historical Jesus, early Christianity, related topics in religion, and questions about religion in general.  It’s a great group with people of a wide range of backgrounds and lots of interesting stories. Already we have discussed lots of interesting things, and one of my fellow travelers has pushed me on why I became an atheist.  They agree that there are real problems with believing in an all-loving and all-powerful God who wants humans to thrive, be happy, be content with life, and who is certainly able to make that happen for everyone if he chooses (even if there does [...]