The Bart Ehrman Blog - Forum: The Rest of the New Testament https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/ Simple:Press Version 6.11.14 Steefen on Frances Tiaboe, Tennis Player - Christian - Romans 8:18 https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/frances-tiaboe-tennis-player-christian-romans-818/#p49736 The Rest of the New Testament https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/frances-tiaboe-tennis-player-christian-romans-818/#p49736 Frances Tiaboe, Tennis Player should be Tiafoe ]]> Sun, 13 Sep 2026 12:48:27 -0400 Helen Young on Frances Tiaboe, Tennis Player - Christian - Romans 8:18 https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/frances-tiaboe-tennis-player-christian-romans-818/#p49735 The Rest of the New Testament https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/frances-tiaboe-tennis-player-christian-romans-818/#p49735 A somewhat different and interesting translation:

** you do not have permission to see this link **
 

18 What we are suffering now is nothing compared with the glory that will be shown in us.

]]> Sun, 13 Sep 2026 12:43:34 -0400 Steefen on Frances Tiaboe, Tennis Player - Christian - Romans 8:18 https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/frances-tiaboe-tennis-player-christian-romans-818/#p49733 The Rest of the New Testament https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/frances-tiaboe-tennis-player-christian-romans-818/#p49733 ** you do not have permission to see this link **
For I consider that our present sufferings cannot even be compared to the glory that will be revealed to us.

** you do not have permission to see this link **
I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory about to be revealed to us.

]]> Sun, 13 Sep 2026 12:00:04 -0400 Stephen on Authorship of I Peter https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/authorship-of-i-peter/#p49392 The Rest of the New Testament https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/authorship-of-i-peter/#p49392 Another reason besides the style to doubt Peter's authorship is that the letter has a real Pauline flavor. Odd, since in Paul's authentic letters when he mentions Peter they are often at loggerheads.

Some scholars speculate that 1 Peter might be an attempt by a later generation of Christians to harmonize Peter and Paul which at that point would have meant agreeing with Paul.

]]> Mon, 07 Sep 2026 10:22:14 -0400 Robert on Authorship of I Peter https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/authorship-of-i-peter/#p49390 The Rest of the New Testament https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/authorship-of-i-peter/#p49390 Welcome, Paul, to the Readers Forum. There are a few (but only a few) serious New Testament scholars today who defend authorship of 1 Peter by Peter through Silvanus as an amanuensis (cf 1 Pet 5,12: "Through Silvanus, whom I regard as a faithful brother, I have written to you briefly") or that it may at least contain genuine Petrine traditional material.

Most scholars do not think it was written or dictated by Peter. Although I've never studied the question in any depth, I typically go with the consensus of most scholars as a sensible approach. But if I thought Peter wrote or more likely dictated in broad strokes the content of the letter, would that affect the my estimation of the likelihood that Mark and Matthew acted somehow as authors of their gospels? It's possible they could also have used some type of secretary, but Matthew's clear dependence upon the Greek of Mark's gospel, which is almost universally attributed to post 70 CE, makes it unlikely in the extreme.

]]> Mon, 07 Sep 2026 10:12:40 -0400 paul24gracie on Authorship of I Peter https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/authorship-of-i-peter/#p49370 The Rest of the New Testament https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/authorship-of-i-peter/#p49370 Peter has been traditionally thought to have been the author of I Peter. But how could he be the author if he was illiterate? I bring this up because one reason that is cited for Mark and Matthew likely not actually being the authors of their respective Gospels is that they were probably illiterate, and almost certainly not fluent in spoken and written Greek. Since Peter made his living as a fisherman I believe it's very likely that he was also illiterate and certainly not capable of producing a polished written document in Greek like I Peter. So why is Peter thought to actually be the author of I Peter? And if he actually did write that epistle, doesn't that suggest that Mark and Matthew may have also been capable of writing their Gospels?

]]> Mon, 07 Sep 2026 07:00:23 -0400 Steefen on In Acts, Was the Pentecost Event in Jerusalem at the Temple or at a Private Upper Room? https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/in-acts-was-the-pentecost-event-in-jerusalem-at-the-temple-or-at-a-private-upper-room/#p49299 The Rest of the New Testament https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/in-acts-was-the-pentecost-event-in-jerusalem-at-the-temple-or-at-a-private-upper-room/#p49299 Comment 2

Bart:

In Acts 2 the event takes place in Jerusalem outdoors. That’s why there so many Jews who hear the followers of Jesus preaching the Gospel in their own languages. (Thousands convert: that’s not possible in a private room….)

]]> Sat, 05 Sep 2026 13:08:00 -0400 Steefen on In Acts, Was the Pentecost Event in Jerusalem at the Temple or at a Private Upper Room? https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/in-acts-was-the-pentecost-event-in-jerusalem-at-the-temple-or-at-a-private-upper-room/#p49172 The Rest of the New Testament https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/in-acts-was-the-pentecost-event-in-jerusalem-at-the-temple-or-at-a-private-upper-room/#p49172

Stephen said
None of this actually happened.  It's literature not reportage. Theological fiction, not history.
  

Off topic. It sheds no light on the scholarly debate mentioned.

]]> Tue, 01 Sep 2026 18:41:30 -0400 Stephen on In Acts, Was the Pentecost Event in Jerusalem at the Temple or at a Private Upper Room? https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/in-acts-was-the-pentecost-event-in-jerusalem-at-the-temple-or-at-a-private-upper-room/#p49162 The Rest of the New Testament https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/in-acts-was-the-pentecost-event-in-jerusalem-at-the-temple-or-at-a-private-upper-room/#p49162 None of this actually happened.  It's literature not reportage. Theological fiction, not history.

]]> Tue, 01 Sep 2026 14:04:36 -0400 Steefen on In Acts, Was the Pentecost Event in Jerusalem at the Temple or at a Private Upper Room? https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/in-acts-was-the-pentecost-event-in-jerusalem-at-the-temple-or-at-a-private-upper-room/#p49157 The Rest of the New Testament https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/in-acts-was-the-pentecost-event-in-jerusalem-at-the-temple-or-at-a-private-upper-room/#p49157 Bart,

Second QUESTION:

The exact location of the Pentecost event in Acts 2 is actively debated by scholars, with strong arguments pointing to either the Temple Mount or a private house/Upper Room.

In Acts, Was the Pentecost Event in Jerusalem at the Temple or at a Private Upper Room?

What is the latest? How do you judge the scholarly debate?

** you do not have permission to see this link **

]]> Tue, 01 Sep 2026 10:37:20 -0400 Steefen on In Acts, Was the Pentecost Event in Jerusalem at the Temple or at a Private Upper Room? https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/in-acts-was-the-pentecost-event-in-jerusalem-at-the-temple-or-at-a-private-upper-room/#p49156 The Rest of the New Testament https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/in-acts-was-the-pentecost-event-in-jerusalem-at-the-temple-or-at-a-private-upper-room/#p49156 First, to the Forum
Second, if Necessary to Bart (I do wonder how Bart answered this, if he did):

In Acts, Was the Pentecost Event in Jerusalem at the Temple or at a Private Upper Room?

= = = = = =

The exact location of the Pentecost event in Acts 2 is actively debated by scholars, with strong arguments pointing to either the Temple Mount or a private house/Upper Room. [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
While traditional popular belief places the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the Upper Room (the Cenacle), many modern biblical scholars and historians argue that the events likely happened in or around the Temple Mount (such as the southern steps or porticoes). [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
Arguments for the Temple Mount
  • Crowd Capacity: Acts 2 describes thousands of Jewish pilgrims (3,000 baptized just after Peter's sermon, plus a massive gathered crowd). An upper room could only hold about 150 people, whereas the expansive Temple Mount platform easily accommodated tens of thousands of festival visitors. [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
  • The "House" Terminology: Acts 2:2 states that a sound filled the "house" where they were sitting. In biblical Hebrew and Greek idioms, the Temple is frequently referred to as "the house" or the "House of the Lord". [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
  • Festival Context: Pentecost (Shavuot) was a major mandatory pilgrimage feast requiring Jewish men to appear at the Temple. Furthermore, the 9:00 AM timing of Peter's speech (Acts 2:15) corresponds with the traditional morning hour of prayer and sacrifice at the Temple. [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
  • Access to Water: The 3,000 new believers were baptized immediately. The massive stepped entrances of the southern Temple area featured numerous ritual immersion pools (miqva'ot) capable of handling rapid baptisms on a massive scale. [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
Arguments for the Upper Room
  • Context from Acts 1: The disciples had been staying and continually returning to an upper room in Jerusalem where they devoted themselves to prayer immediately prior to Pentecost (Acts 1:13–14).
  • Early Tradition: The identification of the Upper Room as the site has ancient backing, though specific localized traditions pointing directly to the current traditional site largely emerged centuries later in the Byzantine era. [** you do not have permission to see this link **]
Opinions on ** you do not have permission to see this link **]
]]> Tue, 01 Sep 2026 10:20:52 -0400 1stadam1stantiochian on From third to first person in Acts https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/from-third-to-first-person-in-acts/page-2/#p47724 The Rest of the New Testament https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/from-third-to-first-person-in-acts/page-2/#p47724
>>>> I’m primarily a gMark guy.   If you through some of the older threads you’ll quickly determine that I can go on and on about that one. 
 
Thank you for the whole reply. My favorite is the Gospel by the 'Beloved Disciple.' He was a genius even greater than Paul, waiting for the Revelator to be the first to "publish" his book. What I meant asking you about the fruits, and to compare - is this - look how I packed verses:
  • Matthew 7:15 "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves."

Acts 20:29-31(From verse 20:17 to the end of the chapter, Paul is speaking to the Ephesian elders—the presbyters): "For I know this, that after my departure, savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. Also from among your own selves, men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves. Therefore watch, and remember that for three years, night and day, I did not cease to warn everyone with tears." (Paul shed tears for, and towards, the Corinthians as well.)

  • Matthew 7:16 "You will know them by their fruits...

You called out  “end times” "crowd", and I positioned myself opposite to them.

Everybody will have to pick a side. And you are right about me grinding:
** you do not have permission to see this link **
** you do not have permission to see this link **
 
This means the Revelator was effectively spitting on a dead Paul!
 
Revelation functions like all apocalypses.

I disagree with even the attempt to pigeonhole it into a specific genre.

]]> Mon, 06 Jul 2026 16:59:31 -0400 Stephen on From third to first person in Acts https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/from-third-to-first-person-in-acts/page-2/#p47716 The Rest of the New Testament https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/from-third-to-first-person-in-acts/page-2/#p47716 I disagree with you, in general, because not every assumption is wrong...

But the point here is that in this case we can never know whether or not our assumptions are right or wrong.  I have nothing against speculation, clearly labeled, but in the end we have to admit the blank spaces on our maps. 

...but feel free to explore fruits, products, the effects; and why don’t we compare The Acts and The Revelation in that context?

Unfortunately these are two of my least favorite NT texts but I'll give it a go. 

Acts functions as an "origin story" for Gentile Christian communities who want to connect back to the original apostolic Jewish Jesus community.   That is the use to which the text has been put by subsequent generations of believers.  Whereas the hero of the original Jewish community was Peter, the hero of the gentile community was Paul.  

Revelation functions like all apocalypses.  It puts the struggles of a community that perceives itself as besieged into a cosmic perspective.  The suffering of the community has a spiritual cosmic significance. This is how it has been used historically.  Unfortunately the "end times" crowd has used it as a screen on which to project their own complexes and obsessions (and fantasies).   

I'm primarily a gMark guy.   If you through some of the older threads you'll quickly determine that I can go on and on about that one. 

]]> Mon, 06 Jul 2026 10:23:41 -0400 1stadam1stantiochian on From third to first person in Acts https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/from-third-to-first-person-in-acts/#p47628 The Rest of the New Testament https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/from-third-to-first-person-in-acts/#p47628

Stephen said
We have to dig out what is really true, questioning motives too. How else investigation can be done?
We can have no access to the motivations of these ancient writers.   Consequently we are forced to take them at face value.  Meaning, we are forced to assume they were expressing that which they wished to express.  If they were being duplicitous we simply have no way of ever knowing.  Any interpretation that begins by assuming some motivation on the part of the author is a non-starter.   Sadly enough, even scholars who should know better often make this mistake.  They build elaborate theories based on what some ancient author "intended". Admittedly it's hard to write a tenure track level thesis which takes as its subject, "We'll never know".
What we can do is note how the text works and the effects it produces. 
  

I disagree with you, in general, because not every assumption is wrong, but feel free to explore fruits, products, the effects; and why don't we compare The Acts and The Revelation in that context?

]]> Fri, 03 Jul 2026 10:47:32 -0400 1stadam1stantiochian on Revelation 6 https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/revelation-6/#p47626 The Rest of the New Testament https://ehrmanblog.org/forum/the-rest-of-the-new-testament/revelation-6/#p47626

Steefen said
Christians are not supposed to think Jesus in Revelation is the return of Jesus?
  

Look at Revelation 6:6 talking about a quart of wheat for a denarius. It’s a fascinating historical footprint—we literally kept that Roman currency alive overseas to this very day in the form of the modern Dinar. But the actual book of Revelation? It is a forgery and a plagiarized apocalyptic text.
The School of Antioch knew this from the beginning and completely rejected it. It was excluded from the Aramaic Peshitta canon because the great Antiochian minds refused to accept Alexandrian mystical delusions.
Revelation mimics the style of pagan mystery cults and astral prophecies, which is exactly why modern critics use it to claim Christianity is a copycat religion. You critics are using a counterfeit, plagiarized book to attack the true Logos. If you want the truth of Jesus, you look at the grounded parables of the Bread of Life and the Servant (Talya) defended by Antioch—not the wild, hijacked nightmares of a book the truest scholars threw in the trash.
]]> Fri, 03 Jul 2026 10:28:33 -0400