Loading...I have mentioned in passing that there were some early Christians who thought that one of Jesus’ brothers, Jude (or Judas: both are translations of the same Greek word), was actually a twin. Not just of anyone, but of Jesus himself. Some readers have expressed surprise in the most succinct way possible, by asking: “Huh??”
I talk about the matter in a couple of my previous publications, especially when speaking about early Christian apocryphal texts that deal with the missionary exploits of the apostles after Jesus’ death.
We have several of these, including an Acts of Thomas. Like the other apocryphal Acts
Get access to Dr. Ehrman's library of 4,000+ articles plus five new articles per week about the New Testament and early Christianity. It costs as little as $2.99/mth and every cent goes to charity!
Unlock 4,000+ Articles Like This!
Would a twin not be an ideal way to stage a ‘resurrection’?
Sure would. Unfortunately, we don’t have any record of anyone taking it that way in early Xty.
In the time since people came to understand X and Y chromosomes, have theologians addressed the question of how a virgin female could conceive a male child? Other than miraculously, of course.
I’m sure they have. But it’s kinda hard to figure out on any scientific view….
Off-topic: My wife and I were wondering why you didn’t mention the murder of a grad advisor my one of his students on the UNC campus a while back?
It was a horrible event and set the campus on edge; some students still haven’t recovered fully. But I wasn’t sure I had anything to say about it here on the blog. So no real reason for not mentioning it, other than I had almost nothing to say. In our world it is a crazily common occurrence. (There was another gun incident on campus the next week.)
Dr. Ehrman, at what point in time did the Christian world come to believe that Jesus was born of a virgin? Mark’s gospel makes no reference to a virgin birth and that, together with Paul’s epistles mentioning nothing about it, implies that most of Christendom around the time of 70 CE didn’t know about or even believe in a virgin birth for Jesus. Since the birth narratives in Matthew and Luke could easily have been added years (or even decades) after those gospels were first written, it could be argued that the virgin birth paradigm was a relatively late theological development. Do scholars have a time frame for when the notion of a virgin birth was adopted by Christianity? It sort of makes sense to me that Roman Christians brought in the idea, perhaps as a response and objection to the promiscuity which was rampant throughout the Roman world. Of course, Romans using the Septuagint would have then changed the meaning of “young woman” to “virgin” after the notion of a virgin birth for Jesus became popular.
I think my view is the common one among scholars, that Matthew 1-2 were original to Matthew’s Gospel, that the book was written probalby in the mid 80s, that there’s no evidence of anyone claiming a virgin birth before that, that it’s hard to think Mark knew the tradition (though he may have) around the year 70, that Paul almost certainly didn’t know about it earlier, and that possibly then it came into being/circulation in the 70s or so.
Recent events have elevated the so called ‘New Apostolic Reformation’ to the mainstream (the new Speaker of the House is a true believer).
The NAR holds Ephesians 4:11 as their foundational text. Now,
I’m aware of what the NAR thinks of Apostles and Prophets, but I’m interested in what the author of Ephesians (psuedo Paul?) is talking about.
Are they referring to past, present, or future (or all the above) when they include Apostles and Prophets in their list of special elites designated by Jesus? (The NAR says future).
I’m familiar with Apostles in the early church, but who were the prophets and what were they up to? Do we hear about them in other texts? Are they fortune-teller montebanks, like today’s youtuber-grifters, or something else?
I”m afraid I don’t know enough about the NAR to comment on that. Prophets were people who allegedly were conduits for God’s revelations to his people. We hear a good bit about them in Paul (1 Cor. 12, 14) and the Didache etc.
Sorry, the ‘they’ there is about the author of Ephesians, not the NAR.
What does the author mean when the author says that Jesus elected people to be prophets? Is the author talking about Elijah or early church members who were prophets?
Ah, right. Yes, various people are chosen to receive spiritual gifts, prophecy is one of them, and so some are chosen to be prophets.
Dr. Ehrman, I know this is unrelated, but can you help me understand that the gospels were initially anonymous with no titles or attribution? My understanding is that the earliest complete manuscripts all include the titles (“According to Mark” and so on). How do we know that the earliest copies didn’t include these titles if our earliest complete copies all include them? I know we have fragmentary copies like the famous P52, but do we have any “Page 1s” that don’t include the titles/attribution? How do we know that the “According to” wasn’t added until the time of Iraneus?
Thank you, Dr. Ehrman! I hope you’re having a lovely day 🙂
Good question. We can’t *know* either way, it’s a matter of where the probabilities lie. The earliest titles show up in manuscripts done well after the time of Irenaeus, so he’s our ealriest evidence. There are solid reasons for thinking the ealriest mss didn’t have titles. For one thing, the books are not CALLED by these names (definitively) until Irenaeus (Papias does refer to a matthew and a Mark, but we have no way of knowing he’s referring to the ones we call Matthew and Mark and what e says about the two of them do not seem to correspond to the Gospels we give those names to). they are quoted, but never named. If they had names, why didn’t, say, Justin Martyr, who quotes them a lot and things of them as Gospels, name them. Even more important, the titles we now have could NOT have been their titles. When I published my last book I did not *call* it “According to Bart.” I gave it a title. If someone calls it “According to Bart” they’re tellin gyou who, in their view, wrote it. If a book was written anonymously and circulated for a century and then for the first time was called “According to Bart” it would be someone telling you who wrote it, in their view, probably in order to differentiate it from other anonynous books on the same topic so you could know which of these was written by whom. Same as the Gospels. So they almost certainly coudn’t have had these titles when they were produced.
Interesting read Dr Ehrman. Thank you for your work.
> The name Thomas, in fact, is an Aramaic equivalent of the Greek word Didymus, which means “twin.”
The son of Israel, Joseph, is the added one. It is Israel who is a twin, (Jacob whose name means heel) as he was born holding the heel of his Esau. The added (adopted) son of King Bharata was Bharadwaj who became the Royal Priest of the Eastern Kings much like Joseph became the Vizier at Egypt. Bharadwaja had a twin, Dirgathamas who was blind(name is lasting darkness) and it is by his kick that Bharadwaja emerged. Joseph as we all know, had Ephraim and Manasse(although not stated as twins but are receivers of the Blessing from Jacob) and is also the name of the father of Jesus as well as the recipient of the body Joseph of Aram(athea) ala Priam. Dirgathamas was the Thomas the twin and ends up in India. And we do also have Didymus the Blind(some say unrelated). Isaac as many know was blind in old age, but also Jacob(became blind in old age). The Thomas link to India is also seen in Mylapore, in Kerala and in Edessa by the Eastern churches.
Bart, I know you disagree with me, but I stand by my theory that Jesus could have had what I’ll call a “colloquial twin”–a sibling who looked just like him. I have one myself, ten years younger, but identical in photos taken at the same age. A brother who looked just like Jesus could certainly have been referred to as his twin; I don’t imagine 1st century Aramaic-speaking Palestinian Jews would have stood on (genetic) ceremony.
Reminds me of the serpent seed doctrine
Hi Bart, could Jesus have a lookalike bro because his bio father has a looooooooOOt of sons?
And only one is begotten, ie chosen as his successor? Like, Abraham has only “one begotten son”, but obviously he has many sons.
Herod the Great had 3? sons chosen as his successor — Herod Antipas, Herod Archelaus and Herod Phillip.
Joseph isn’t his forever dad, no one talks like Jesus with a tekton upbringing. So the interesting thing about the Didymos/Thomas/Twin is — it’s the father that’s supposed to be the seed and propagative force for this time. The woman is the soil. So who is the plowman?
Aretas III, Josephus’ “uniter of Jews and Arabians” right prior to Jesus’ time, reputedly had 600 sons. And he reportedly activated them in times of conflict. There’s a modern Arab sheik that claims 1,000 sons. This is unique to wealthy nomadism.
In fact, something new I noticed today is that the cultures where ancient authors wrote about the tradition of leaders picking from “engaged virgins/brides” — the Cyrenaica area one seems to be wealthy nomads — ie Arab/Bedouin/Midianite (Libyan/Moabite).
About when did Christians start saying that the Bible is the Inspired word of God?
I very much like it when you say that if the Bible is the inspired word of God, then why didn’t God Inspire it so to keep the originals safe and available. This would surely solve many issues.
Do you have a schedule of upcoming debates and their topics?
Already in the period of the New Testament some writers are quoting sayings of Jesus and writings of Paul as Scripture (1 Tim 5:18 and 2 Pet 3:16. The NT wasn’t canonized for long after that, but in teh second century and into the third (before the canon) many of htese writings were considered inspired scripture.
I don’t have a set schedule, but if you’re interested in my various public presentations, check out bartehrman.com/courses and my youtube channel.