Loading...I don’t recall *ever* having a podcast interview in which I was asked to go down seriously into the weeds of my scholarship as found in one of my scholarly books. But that happened in this interview, done on June 14, for the Christian Humanist Podcast. It’s a serious podcast, where the perspective is Christian and the topics are intellectually meaty. The interviewer is a PhD in English literature and professor at Emmanuel College. He’s a bright guy, who knows a lot, who read my book Journeys to Heaven and Hell carefully, realized clearly what both the scholarly issues and the wider payoff were, and grilled me on it for an hour.
Here’s the podcast for your viewing pleasure.
This is of topic but…
Hello Professor Bart,
I was wondering if you have ever written anything and what you think about the so-called Gabriel Stone and its inscription.
I saw a documentary with Simcha Jacobovici and your colleague James Tabor about it, and the latter mentions that it speaks of a supposed suffering Messiah, which I read you do not believe. You even mention that the famous Isaiah passages are not about the Messiah. Could you please shed some light on this matter!
Thank you.
Just on thte blog. Along with most scholars I do not think that it refers to a suffering messiah. YOu can read up on various views just by doing a Google search. So far as I know it’s not a debated issue among most scholars of the NT or Hebrew Bible.
Very interesting and highly entertaining. Thank you very much for sharing this.
How much did the trajectory away from universalism and towards eternal conscious torment contribute to the success of Christianity do you think? I realize it probably wasn’t so cut and dried but did “raising the stakes” of non-belief contribute in the same way that doctrinal exclusivity seems to have done?
It was about Xty’s success principally because gentile converts raised in Greek ways of thinking about what itmean to be human bbrought it in with them. It did serve a missionary purpose, of course, but I’m not sure that’s what generated the idea.
Thanks so much.
Fascinating!
after listening I went over to audible and got the audiobook vers which I’m greatly enjoying
(expertly read in a very pleasing British accent very easy to listen to)
Highly Rec!
I loved this. It boils down to the interviewer being more interested in scholarship than justifying belief.
For me, it adds context and repetition of content I probably missed in the book. My primary reading is audiobooks. Overall I read/learn more, but details are lost sometimes.
Dr Ehrman: Have you considered creating companion maps of your books? Particularly for Heaven/Hell and your earlier “God’s Problem” book on suffering (no doubt also your future one on charity). It would be so helpful to have a visual summary of how versions of texts are connected (e.g. discussion re: Ethiopian vs Greek versions in the video), what a text’s core belief might be (e.g. Mercy vs God’s ultimate power), and perhaps a couple of additional qualifiers that might apply (e.g. apocalypse of Paul as inspiration for Dante). Like any city map, the one I’m suggesting could never replace the depths explored in a chapter. But I wouldn’t travel to a foreign city without a map either. A map is essential to taking stock of where we’ve been and where we’re going; it’s also a handy souvenir to jog our memories of a trip.
Thanks for your work!
Interesting idea. Thanks!
Just wanted to say that Journeys to Heaven and Hell greatly helped my understanding of why Paul’s gospel was so compelling to pagans.
The interviewer said he would get to Plato later but he never did. I have heard you say Plato strongly influenced early Christianity, which interests me greatly. Can you steer me to one of your posts that covers this topic? A very big topic, I realize. Like to hear your thoughts on the variance in Plato, also. Seems he is often, at the same time, praised for his rationality and denigrated for his coo-coo ideas—by the same persons.
I”m not sure I’ve written any posts on the broader impact of Plato on Christian thought — mainly just on his influence on Christain views of the soul as independent of the body (able to exist separately; and immortal), as this affected Xn views of afterlife.
Dr. Ehrman,
A professor sent me the reply quoted below. He seems hung up specifically on the issue of bones in Paul’s view of the resurrection. Do you agree with me that the bones, just as the rest of the dead body, gets transformed?
Prof.: “Given what we know of Jewish burial practices, Paul would expect the bones to “outlive” the flesh and blood, but it’s open to interpretation to what extent the spiritual body is a new creation or a transformation and so on.”
I think he’s pointing out that Jews knew full well that the bones survived longer than the rest of the body, hence the practice of “second burial,” and he’s saying that he’s not sure if Paul thought the body of Jesus was fully transformed or not. I think 1 Cor. 15 is pretty clear on the second point.
Dr. Ehrman,
In B.C.E. times as well as in the New Testament, the bones are always included in the resurrection event; it just seems like B.C.E. the process was more like a resuscitation, whereas in the New Testament it is a transformation, is this all correct?
I’m not sure what you mean about bones being included in BCE. What texts are you referring to? Ezekiel’s valley of the bones? That’s not an apocalyptic vision of the resurrection. (I don’t think Paul was thinking about which body parts — bones, kidneys, toe nails, etc. — would be included in the transformed body. It would *all* be transformed)
Dr. Ehrman,
Would these passages be among those that Paul had as a frame of reference for the resurrection? Is it true that passages such as these gave the impression that resurrection was more like resuscitation, and that Paul was unique in being the first writing where it is explained as a transformation?
Daniel 12:2: “And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.”
Isa. 26:19: “Your dead shall live; their bodies shall rise. You who dwell in the dust, awake and sing for joy! For your dew is a dew of light, and the earth will give birth to the dead.”
Ps. 49:15: “…will ransom my soul from the power of Sheol, for he will receive me.”
Ps. 71:20: “You who have made me see many troubles and calamities will revive me again; from the depths of the earth you will bring me up again.”
Ps. 16:10: “For you will not abandon my soul to Sheol, or let your holy one see corruption.”
Probably. But he, of course, was given the apocalyptic view as part of his understanding of his Jewish religion, and so I don’t think that he was trying to find prooftexts for it. But certainly Dan. 12 and Isa 26 (and possibly Ezek 37?) wold have been important.