So, about my quiz on the New Testament. Most of you who sent me answers failed miserably. I think you should buy *me* dinner…. I did this already with my other quiz, but I’ll do it again here – explaining what I try to accomplish by the various questions.
FOR THE REST OF THIS POST, log in as a Member. Click here for membership options. If you don’t belong yet, JOIN NOW, OR YOU MAY NEVER KNOW!!
- 27 books in the NT (when you think NT, you should think God; then think trinity; and what is 27? 3x3x3) (It’s a miracle). I ask this question not only because it’s basic information, but also because I want them to start thinking about why we have these books and not others – the subject of my first lecture on Monday.
- Written in Greek. I want them to know the importance of Alexander the Great’s conquest and the Hellenization of the Mediterranean for early Christianity – and that Jesus’ teachings in Aramaic come to us by way of Greek by way of English – and something is always lost in transmission.
- Written mainly in the 1st century CE, one or two possibly 2nd century. I want them to get oriented to when all this stuff happened, and to explain why scholars use BCE and CE instead of BC and AD (which does *not* mean “After Death”!)
- Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. A gimme. But opens up the question of there being yet other Gospels that did not make it in.
- John the Baptist baptized Jesus. But who carried his cross depends on which Gospel you read. The Synoptics say Simon of Cyrene. John says Jesus. NONE of them says that it was first Jesus and then (after he stumbled or whatever) Simon! I introduce them to this problem because it’s a glaring discrepancy, and they can see it for themselves if they read the Gospels. So too, less significantly, with who discovered the empty tomb. Always it was Mary Magdalene – but with anyone else? If so, whom? Depends which Gospel you read.
- Paul wrote the most books. I use this to explain that 13 of the NT books claim to be written by Paul. But scholars doubt whether Paul wrote 6 of them. Most of them have never heard this before, even though they’ve heard about Paul’s writings most of their conscious lives. Part of the class will involve showing why scholars doubt the authorship of so many books, and what grounds they have for claiming that a bunch of them were pseudonymous. I.e., forged. I don’t use the word “forgery” on the first day of class. (!) Also, I point out that Paul did not write the most words in the NT (even if you think he wrote all thirteen of the Pauline epistles.) That would be Luke – whose two-volume work, Luke-Acts, makes up about ¼ of the entire NT.
- Peter allegedly wrote 1 Peter; Paul allegedly wrote 2 Timothy; and no one wrote 1 Andrew since there is no such thing.
- Paul didn’t have a last name. The vast majority of people didn’t: the exceptions were the highest level of the aristocratic elite. I want the students to know this so they don’t think that Christ is Jesus’ last name (born to Joseph and Mary Christ). And so they realize that socially the world was different then. And that the people we’re dealing with in the NT are not on the top end of the social scale.
- Jesus died somewhere between 29-33 CE. We don’t really know which year. And that’s worth knowing. But somewhere in there. Alexander 323 BCE. As you can see, I’m trying to get them to think about history, not just about religion, when it comes to the NT.
- In the order of their deaths: Moses; Isaiah; Alexander; Augustus; Jesus; Paul; and Constantine. Again, I’m trying to get them to think historically.
- Jews: John the Baptist, Jesus, Simon Peter, Paul. This question these days is less important than it was a long time ago when I began teaching. (I began teaching precisely 30 years ago this semester. AI YAI YAI!!!!) It used to be that a lot of students didn’t think Jesus was a Jew, but was a Christian. It takes a long time to unpack the problems with that. But we do it in this class. Most of the students today know perfectly well that Jesus was a Jew – this idea has seeped, finally, into our collective consciousness. But what they don’t know, or haven’t thought much about, is that this means that if we want to understand who Jesus was, or make sense of what he said, or figure out the significance of what he did – we have to know what it meant to be a Jew in Jesus’ time and place. What was Judaism like in first-century Palestine? What did it mean to be a Jew in the early Roman empire? Most of them have no clue. And so we begin the semester, after some preliminary basic information on the books of the NT (how it is organized as a canon; what the various books are) and how it came to be collected into a canon of Scripture (when other books competing for a place were left out, and some of those taken in had a hard time getting there) – all of this in my first lecture – we move to the world of Jesus and his followers. I lecture, and they read, about the Greco-Roman world (politically, culturally, religiously – i.e., the character of “pagan” religions subscribed to by 93% of the population) and about Judaism (in the Diaspora and in Palestine). It’s hard to make this kind of historical information accessible and interesting for 19 year olds. But I have ways of trying.
Anyway, I hope you passed the quiz with flying colors. Anyone who missed five or more questions should feel morally obligated to send me a very fine bottle of single malt scotch.
I got nine! Take me to dinner?
Should’ve asked about Judas….
Zing!
Prof Ehrman seeing as how yr quiz is pretty much out of the bag now does it still surprise many students?
Yup, few of them read my blog!
what are the odds of your debating against the great William lane Craig again? it was an entertaining clash first time round. if you do as well as Sean Carroll recently did you’d go down in Christian Apologetic history?
I never set up my own debates, but simply consider invitations….
Just wondering if you have read Evangelical Faith and the Challenge of Historical Criticism by Christopher M. Hays (Editor) , Christopher B. Ansberry (Editor) – and if so, how would you rate it? The book “introduces evangelicals to a way of understanding and using historical-critical scholarship that doesn’t compromise Christian orthodoxy. (it) covers eight of the most hotly contested areas of debate in biblical studies, helping readers work out how to square historical criticism with their beliefs.”
I’m afraid I haven’t read it. Sorry!
In the days of your youth, how come many laypeople got the impression that Jesus was not a Jew? Nowadays, I know of no churches – fundamentalist or otherwise – that would get this detail wrong, though they may still misleadingly project their notions of 21st century Judaism onto 1st century (or maybe more commonly, vice-versa i.e. Christians today often fail to appreciate the importance of the Talmud and fail to understand the changing Jewish conceptions of the messiah in modern period).
I think it took a realization of the full implications of the Holocaust for the world to realize just how thorougly anti-Jewish it was (and this moved it, after some decades, to realize that it’s views of Jesus were anti-Jewish.)
Paul’s last name was Paul. His first name was Saul. He didn’t have any names in between those.
Wrong, but thanks for playing! 🙂
You are one terrific teacher!
Thanks. Not all of my students agree. But I love it anyway….
I hope you got some smart alec offering “of Tarsus” for number 8. 🙂
Yup, got that!
It was great fun, Bart. Thank you for allowing us to participate. Any time you want to throw another one at us, don’t hesitate. It’s a great learning experience, especially when it comes to those “kings” I never paid much mind to before, but most certainly will, now!
Kings and emperors, emperors and kings, O MY!
Thanks for the info, Bart. If I were one of your students, you’d have to buy me a dinner. But…I passed only because I’ve been a member here for a couple of months and have read almost everything on the blog!
🙂 I’m getting there. Slowly, but surely. You offer me hope, Hank! Thanks!
Bart.
Two very quick questions!!
Re. Simon of Cyrene.
Is the absence of an “assistant” in John’s account (of Jesus’ carrying the cross) indicative of John’s desire to show that Jesus was accepting of, and capable of shouldering, his ‘fate’, or is there another reason why John doesn’t include it?
While looking up the passage re. Simon in Mark’s account, I noticed that where the centurion, after Jesus’ death, says, ‘Surely this man was the Son of God’, there is a note in the Bible I was using, that states “or ‘a Son of God’ “; are there many manuscripts which have “a” rather than “the”?
Good questions. (1)In none of the Gospels is Simon an assistant. In the Synoptics he carries the cross for Jesus. In John Jesus carries it (explicitly) all the way himself. (2) The Greek lacks a definite article, so it could be translated either way, and scholars debate how to understand it. (Possibly, since the centurion would have been a pagan, he meant “one of the sons of the gods.” Or possibly the fact that God is “definite” “son” needs to be also. Or possibly something else!) I don’t know of any manuscripts that add the definite article.
So we can probably assume the author of John had *never heard of* a tradition that anyone other than Jesus had carried or helped to carry it?
It’s hard to know (impossible really) if John had never heard such a tradition or if he had heard if and rejected it for his own reasons (e.g., to show that Jesus did it all himself as the one taking the sins of the world upon himself).
Now, how about one for YOU? Let’s make it the gnostic teachings of the Gospel of Judas. Let me know when you are ready. It will only be five questions.
Don’t think I need a quiz on it. I did write a book about it. I think I know what’s in it pretty well! 🙂
Hey Bart, I know this is totally off the subject, but are you aware that one of your past debate opponents, Michael Brown, appeared on the Benny Hinn show? and recorded 5 episodes with him You do know who Benny Hinn is, right?
I mention this because Michael Brown and the evangelical/fundy Christian crowd tend to be suspicious of secular college professors and are constantly whining that the “world”, including the secular academic world, characterizes them (fundy Christians) as gullible and backwards.
Well, I’ll just say that Mike Brown is doing himself no favors.
Wow. Go figure….
So Paul’s last name wasn’t “of Tarsus”?…please don’t think I’m being serious.
Yes, some of my students said that too!
I have a question that I may as well submit here, since it doesn’t relate to the discussion about Aslan’s book.
I don’t think Jesus’s teachings (in areas where he wasn’t just plain wrong) were, in themselves, exceptional. But I’m not qualified to judge the literary quality/profundity of his parables, etc. Is there anything about the way he supposedly *communicated* his teachings that doesn’t seem to “fit” with his having been a barely-literate Galilean, a former *tekton*? If so, how can it be explained?
I was thinking of such possibilities as the author of Q, or some of the many possible contributors to the M and L traditions, having been better-educated men who wrote their own “illustrations” of what Jesus *meant*, and the Gospel writers having wrongly attributed those passages to Jesus himself.
Well, many of the parables are really quite simple and down to earth; and the apocalyptic teachings would require intelligence, but not an education.
Shocking, just shocking. Having lived there in Hope Valley, I managed to escape Chapel Hill about the time you arrived. I am concerned the experience has become somewhat corrosive to your cultural pallet. ‘Fine Scotch’ should be considered an oxymoron. What’s next Bart? Perusing the local pig pickin? Fine dining with hush puppies? I am just worried, even Jesus finally succumbed to the temptations of vinegar…….please tell me you are not consuming swine soaked in that swill. Damn it man, don’t loose your grip, scripture tells us ‘Go and enjoy choice food and sweet drinks, and send some to those who have nothing prepared.’ It mentions noting divine about the feast of collards and corn bread. Salvation my lie just up the road at that Mecca of enlightenment. Seek strength from the Blue Devil, “Though she be but little, she is fierce!” .
A followup to the comment above on lack of last names for Jews. See this Slate article on how that continued and was only ended relatively recently in the West: this might interest your students. http://www.slate.com/blogs/lexicon_valley/2014/01/08/ashkenazi_names_the_etymology_of_the_most_common_jewish_surnames.html
(if the link doesn’t work google “slate last name of jews”)
Hypothetically, were I to send you a bottle of single malt scotch, would you prefer Islay, Highland or Speyside?
Hypothetically, I would prefer Islay….
I nailed it, but as soon-to-be retired clergy (UU) I had better! Though I do have a linen closet about to pop it’s door courtesy of all the single malts my husband has brought back from the U.K. since 2007. I’d be perfectly content to bid them farewell and reclaim the space for sheets, towels, and table linens. I should have him attempt the quiz. Guaranteed no more than 5 correct answers…6 tops. 🙂
Speaking of crucifixion, how was the crossbar raised? Jesus carries the crossbar and will eventually be fastened to it, attached to the upright. But is he fastened first and then raised, or is the crossbar raised and *then* he’s fastened?
And since a body is left on the crucifix until it rots, there must have been a forest of uprights waiting for the next criminal.
Is there any information on this? or even any speculation?
Thanks, Bart
Unfortunately we don’t know. The text doesn’t mention a cross bar, but the “cross.” And we have no actual descriptions of how they crucified people. There didn’t need to be a forest of uprights unless they were crucifying many dozens every day.