Loading...
Christmas is upon us already, and I have decided to do a tis-the-season all-day webinar on Sunday, December 5: “Did the Christmas Story Really Happen?” The webinar will not be connected with the blog per se, except to the extent that I’ll be doing it and that some of you might be interested in coming.
>> You can register by clicking here.
It will be a full and unusually intriguing day, four lectures each with Q&A: two in the morning, a break for lunch, then two more. The talks will each be around 50 minutes with 20-25 minutes Q&A (each). Whoa!
Topics:
The topics will focus on different aspects of the birth of Jesus in popular imagination, the biblical tradition, legendary materials, and … and what we can say historically.
There are lots of intriguing issues here:
- Why is Jesus’ birth – the “virgin birth,” in “Bethlehem,” to “Joseph and Mary” etc. – mentioned in only two of the twenty-seven books of the New Testament? In particular, why is it not mentioned in two of our Gospels, Mark and John, or in the writings of Paul?
- Where did the idea of a virgin birth come from? Was it a common motif in ancient Greek and Roman mythology, for example?
- How do we explain the differences between the two accounts we have, the opening chapters of Matthew and Luke? Are they simply telling different stories, Matthew some and Luke others? Are there any truly significant differences between them? Flat-out contradictions?
- Matthew repeatedly says that the events of Jesus’ birth fulfilled Scripture, and he quotes the Old Testament to prove it. Is he taking these quotations out of context, or is there some solid logic behind his claims?
- Luke’s account narrates events in a highly historical framework, mentioning figures otherwise documented in history (Caesar Augustus, Quirinius the governor of Syria for example) and historical events (a census under Augustus for “all the world”). Can we reconcile what Luke says about these things with what we know from non-biblical sources?
- Miracles, of course, defy historical explanation. But even so, are there features of the two accounts that are difficult to explain even on the assumption that miracles happen? How, for example, does the “star of Bethlehem” in Matthew stop moving over Jerusalem, resume moving, and then stop over a house?
- Why are some of the familiar aspects of the Christmas story not found in the New Testament at all? For example, the Gospel accounts don’t say anything about Mary riding on a donkey, or about Joseph being an old man (have you noticed that he’s always portrayed that way in paintings?), or about the wisemen and shepherds showing up the same night. Where does all that come from?
- What other intriguing legends about Jesus’ birth don’t come from the Bible but from later legendary accounts? Some of these later versions were highly influential on Christian thinking through the centuries, and they are fascinating to read. One of them claims to be written by Jesus’ brother! What kinds of information do they give us, and can any of it be seen as reliable?
- Is there any way to know anything historically about Jesus’ birth, his parents, and his early life? What really happened?
These are going to be some interesting discussions and with four lectures we will be able to dive deep. Plus you will be able to ask questions. Interested?
Cost and How to Register:
The last event like this I did was for the Smithsonian, an all-day affair (like this one) with four lectures (like this one) on a different topic. For that event last spring, the fee for (remote) attendance was $90. This event, “Did the Christmas Story Really Happen,” will be only $49.95.
BUT you can save another $10 by registering early, by November 28: so $39.95
AND you can save $5 if you are a blog member: so: $34.95.
I hope you can come. It should be a terrific day!
>> Please click here to register.
$5 discount code for Blog Members Only: BLOG5
$10 discount for early registration: good till Nov. 28
This is going to be just as dope as that time when Metallica played 3 shows in the same day in France!
In Ephesians 4:24 the Greek word ὁσιότητι is translated holiness in many modern bibles . In some older translations like Youngs And Rotherham it is translated kindness or lovingkindness …. In the New World Translation produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses it is translated Loyalty …. Is there any justification to translate as Loyalty? Please can you give your own translation of this verse.
Many thanks
The word means holiness or sacredness; the problem in this verse is that it is followed by the genitive “of the truth,” and some translators think that “holiness of the truth” is too hard to figure out, so they come up with something else that makes a bit better sense to them. I don’t see the problem myself, but I haven’t studied it. The genitive could easily be understood as meaning source or origin, for example, to mean “the holiness that comes from (accepting/knowing) the truth.”
Will the lectures be recorded in case someone can’t be available all day?
Yes indeed!
Christ was to be born of a virgin according to Isaiah’s prophecy, and of the tribe of Judah according to Jacob’s last prophecy.
But in order to create a truthful narrative, a historical foundation was needed, and there was a rich material of narratives to draw from in the Torah.
Many have pointed out the similarities between Jesus and the story of Joseph. But right in the middle of this story there is an intermesso where we are told about the life of Judah and Thamar. This was before Judah went with his family down to Egypt.
Judah had married Thamar to his two eldest sons in turn, but God had punished his sons with death when the marriage covenant was not fulfilled. Thamar was then betrothed to Judah’s youngest son, but she remained a virgin.
When the Church Fathers describe this story, they are careful to point out that what happened was not an act of fornication but an act of God’s providence, although we see hints of this in the Jews’ mention of Jesus. John 8:41
Judah became acquainted with Thamar’s pregnancy after three months, and wanted to punish her with death. But when Thamar presented Judah with the three pledges, he recognized that her three “witnesses” were evidence of God’s providence.
Thamar gave birth to twins. Matt 1:3
Phares was a sign of the Jewish life, Zarah a sign of the spiritual life.
Phares a sign of Christ as king, Zarah a sign of Christ as High Priest.
Phares as the Son of Man, Zarah as the Son of God.
Two natures in one body. True God and True Man. God’s sacrificial lamb and scapegoat.
From Bethlehem as king, from Nazareth as High Priest.
In fact, Nazareth may have been chosen as the breeding ground for the divine in Christ because of the name Zarah, where the Greek particle “Να” means “this”, pointing to Zarah; Na-Zarah. Something that also gives the Nazarene sect an exalted spiritual meaning.
Everything happened according to prophecy. Even the census was God’s providence. The time had come for the souls of those who believed in Christ to be counted.
Will you cover the Gospel According to Bill?
Think I’ll skip that one….
How do we know that the Gospels we have received weren’t written by Bill-esque authors? Certainly the ones which relate Jesus infancy stories are/
Well, they certainly didn’t do it to make millions by coming up with fictions.
Excellent! I’ve registered, and for anyone else in Australian Eastern Daylight Saving Time – see you 1.30am 6th Dec!
Ouch!
That is dedication. I thought getting up at 7:30 was early (Alberta, Canada time) … have a nap … looks like you will need it.
Looking forward to it. I am hoping to land somewhere between… “It’s all facts” and “it’s all bogus” … I am hoping that a little more information will help me redeem the Christmas story in my journey…even if it means that I need to embrace it as a story. Maybe there is room for Jesus like there is room for Santa. I keep telling people “I’m 2000 years past the story.” I have no certainty or even a desire for certainty. I like the season of Christmas… I hope I can still find some space for the story. Being a Scrooge isn’t appealing to me.
Ruby you are perhaps the only person who gets the whole Christmas story issue. Too many Scrooges on this thread try to pop the beliefs of others for the fun of it, for the mean-spirited joy of it, to prove they are smarter. Bart generally avoids this hubris–but always? Not sure. The point of the Christmas story isn’t whether the facts are true or not. The facts may be true, they may not be. We simply don’t know. As Father Richard Rohr says in his Center for Action and Contemplation today, even if the Christmas story is a myth it can be true: “Carl Jung developed this idea for our generation of Western rationalists, who had thought that myth meant “not true”—when in fact the older meaning of myth is precisely “always and deeply true”!
Have a blessed Thanksgiving all! 🙏
Sorry for the off topic question, but I was just watching an interview with Dr. Steve Mason who’s a Canadian Biblical scholar, and he’s arguing that the author of Luke used Josephus as a source. That would put the dating of Luke into the 2nd century, which is much later than the typical dating. Evidence is mainly similarities in stories, such as both mentioning the census of Quirinius, both mentioning the same set of apocalyptic prophets (such as the Egyptian), emphasizing the same characters, etc.
I was wondering if you’d heard or addressed this sort of claim before?
Yes, it’s been around for maybe 15-20 years. I’ve never been convinced, but I’m open to it. It would indeed mean that Luke-Acts was written in the 120s, not the 80s. I’ve never gone into it at length on the blog; maybe at soem point I should.
Hi Dr Ehrman!
Do you think that if Paul saw what Christianity was today, or knew back in the first century that Jesus was not going to be coming back for at least the next 2000 years… he would have changed his theology and understanding of Christ?
Thank you!!
He certainly would not have told his followrs that the return of Jesus wsa imminent. It’s hard to know how much else in Paul’s theology would have been affecged by that shift. Maybe he would have become more emphatic that there is an interim heaven and hell before the End comes..
If the understanding of Jesus as God hinged on his resurrection which was seen as the beginning of the mass resurrection (and which was only understood to be a resurrection and not merely an apparition due to the apocalyptic context of eschatological understanding), if Paul knew that there was not going to be any apocalyptic mass resurrection, do you think that he would have come to the same understanding of Jesus being God or of salvation coming through the death of Jesus? Thank you!!
It’s a good question. I think you’re asking whether Paul would have understood Jesus’ resurrection the way he did if he had not *already* been an apocalyptic Jew expecting a resurrection at the end of time? If so, then I think the answer is that he would NOT have understood it the same way.
Well it is certainly less costly than attending an Ohio State University football game in Columbus, OH. Can I drink beer, scream and generally act like an idiot? Are you going to wear a helmet? Looking forward to the event.
Yes, I hope you do. And oh my god, what a trouncing today. (I’m with my son and daughter in law for a weekend, and her family is all OSU).
Oh, you are trying to ruin my Christmas spirit ! (But I think that I can take it). I love attending Christmas services and hearing all those old traditional hymns. “O Holy Night” is one of my favorites. Cuts right to be bone.
I do too! For me it’s Silent Night.
The video says 10:30am, but that seems to be wrong based on other information. (It may be a complication of daylight savings changing.)
THe video says 10:30? Yikes, it’s 9:30.
I will not be able to attend , I did pay. How can I listen to a pre-recorded Christmas Story? Do I log in and it can be found?
Thank you ,
Rut
IT won’t be pre-recorded: it will be a live event. But the recording will be made available to those who have purchased a ticket.
The “Bartmas” event on 05 December, 2021 lifted listeners above the canopy of the Biblical canon. From that academic loftiness we glimpsed the textual and historical forest in which the Christmas story was seeded and thrived. The third lecture outlined the historian’s method, contrasting it with the scientific method, and briefly alluded to Dr Ehrman’s conclusion in previous webinars that the retrogressive Christology of Jesus was a reverse engineering from the resurrection, to the miracles, to the baptism, to the virgin birth, then to the eternal Word. By belief in the resurrection, exaltation has evolved into incarnation. However, the historian’s method can’t accept physical resurrection as either plausible or even humanly probable. From my limited reading, historians don’t seem able to offer an alternative as to what it was that sparked such fiery and focused conviction in the mix of downcast, skeptical, or hostile minds of the disciples, miscellaneous other followers, Paul, and the 500 mentioned in 1 Corinthians 15. Does Dr Ehrman have any comments on what, apart from subjective visions and attributions of sightings, might have caused the earliest belief in the physical resurrection? Thanks.
I’m glad you were there! Yes, historians have given lots of alternative reasons. I lay out my views on the matter at length in my book The Triumph of Christianity. Jesus did not have to rise from the dead to make Christianity happen. His disciples had to *believe* he did. (As to *why* they believed that, I explain that in a different book How Jesus Became God)
Thanks for the useful marathon Christmas webinar on 05 December,2021. Dr Bart D. Ehrman creates sufficient time in the 168 hours available in each week to teach at tertiary level, to research, to write books, to post regularly onto a blog, and to agree to be interviewed by this and that Youtube channel proprietor. Could Dr Bart D. Ehrman please run a brief webinar on time management? No need exists to spend time on any apocryphal or apocalyptic works on time management; just the short canon of effective time management will do!! Thank you very much.
Thanks. I’d like to, but I don’t have the time. 🙂
Dr. Ehrman will you be putting the CHRISTMAS STORY with Great Courses DVD FORMAT AND TRANSCRIPT?
I think it’s only streaming; I know there will be closed caption. If you’ll ask Chris Huntley, who has kept you apprised of the whole thing, he’s the one who would know. I just give the lectures and leave the productdiin to him!
Hello Mr. Erhman, I am a rather huge fan of your work, along with many others(you have even inspired me to start learning biblical Hebrew so I can have a better understanding of the OT)
I am a hobbyist biblical learner, typically dedicating around 40-60 hours a week to reading/listening to scholars. But I am stumped on the lack of information in regards to early church tradition relating to Jesus’ conception. I am positive I have heard of you speak about the tradition from Tertullian, Clement, and Hippolytus(as well as Dan McClellan and a few others speaking of it) and I thought it was in the Clement of Alexander ‘s Stromata, but I can’t find anything mentioning the tradition, only that some celebrated it December 25.
I found an article by T.C. Schmidt that discusses it and the words used in Greek to mean conception and not just birth as the classical writers had favored(unfortunately I cannot write Greek).
Can you tell me what book/author has the tradition mentioned?
Thank you in advance for all you do. I didn’t know what other blog to ask this on. Thank you in advance.
In terms of the “church fathers” I believe Justin Martyr (ca. 150 CE) is the first to mention Mary’s virginal conception (1 Apology 33); Irenaeus (ca. 185 CE) mentions it in Against heresies 3.22). It becomes prominent though in other kinds of works, especially Protevangelium of James (again second century). I’m not clear what you’re saying Schmidt was saying, but the Gospels do not speak of a Virgin *birth* but of a Virginal *conception.” Only with the Protevangelium does the idea emerge that she *remained* a virgin (physically intact; hymen unbroken) afterward; this then led to the doctrine of the perpectual virginity.
The “Bartmas” lecture dated 5 December was informative. The mini course to be released in January will likely be useful. During “Bartmas”, Dr Ehrman referred to Isaiah 7 while comparing the birth stories and prophecy fulfilment observed in Matthew and Luke. I’m no textual expert, but as far as my notes show, Dr Ehrman may not have mentioned the ecstatic Christmas appropriation of Isaiah 9:6 by the Christian church and by Handel’s famous oratorio “Messiah” into yuletide doctrine. Some of my limited reading suggests that the past perfect tense of the Semitic language of Hebrew in Isaiah 9:6 has been made to be present tense and mostly future tense by Christian translators of the Torah found in the King James and later versions. Therefore, the accolades of Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, seem attributed to the Davidic king Hezekiah (a name meaning something like “God gives strength”) as a celebration of the second deliverance from the encircling Assyrians, as remarkable as the first deliverance from the Egyptians; not to the birth of a future Messiah. Does Dr Ehrman have a “Bartmas” perspective on Isaiah 9:6? Thank you.
YEs, I agree, it is using hyperbole to discuss the mighty Judean king, probably Hezekiah.