Loading...If you checked out my syllabus for my undergraduate course this semester, you will have noticed that every week each student is to write a two-page “position paper” on an assigned topic, something of intrigue that, for this class, will involve texts and issues they have probably never addressed or even heard of, even though if they were raised as church-going Christians. I certainly hadn’t when I was their age….
Here are the instructions I give for the papers; you obviously couldn’t do the papers without reading the assignments, but you can get an idea here what they would be studying. (The abbreviation ANT is for their textbook, the reader I edited called After the New Testament: A Reader in Early Christianity 100-300 CE).
INSTRUCTIONS FOR POSITION PAPERS
Welcome to instructions for your weekly bit of recitation fun: the position papers! For basic instructions, otherwise known as absolute sine qua non (purpose, length, grading, etc.), see the syllabus. But do remember: these are to be two-pages, double-spaced, and turned in before the recitation itself.
Recitation One: Getting Started
Blessed are the neophytes! For this your first position paper you have just one assignment. List the three most important questions that you would like to have answered in this course. These should be things that you are most curious about with respect to the early Christianity.
There are no dumb or wrong questions to ask here. We’re simply interested in knowing what you’re interested in. And we’re interested in you too knowing what you’re interested in! The only way to have your curiosity satisfied is to know what your curiosity is. If you’re lucky it will get curiouser and curiouser.
NOTE: for this paper we don’t need you to write two pages! Just list your three questions. But think about it and come up with some things you really would like to know something about.
Recitation Two: Jesus and the Other “Divine Men”
Your first task for this position paper is to read the following selections (found on Sakai under Resources; there are 2 pdfs) taken from David Cartlidge and David Dungan, Documents for the Study of the Gospels, 2nd ed. (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994). These passages are all drawn from ancient sources that relate the words, deeds, and experiences attributed to persons who were thought to be divine by some people living in the Greco-Roman world. [these are passages that describe miraculous births to women impregnated by gods; and miracle workers who can heal the sick or control the weather or cast out demons; and people who were taken up to heaven at the end of their lives, etc.]
Now read the Gospel according to Luke, chaps. 1-2; 4-5; 7-8; 21-24.
For your paper, you are to list three specific ways in which Jesus as portrayed in Luke is similar to other people who were thought to be divine. (Give exact chapter and verse references when referring to passages in Luke.) Are there ways in which Jesus appears to be different from other divine men? How do you explain these similarities and differences?
Recitation Three: A Pagan, a Jew, and a Christian Walk into a Bar….
Pretend it is 200 CE and you are in a wine shop in Antioch, sitting next to a table where three people are in an intense conversation. You gather pretty quickly that one of them is like you, a follower of traditional religions (worships Zeus, Athena, Apollo, his own family gods, and so on….), another is a very devout Jew, and the other is one of those new-fangled Christians.
They are arguing about religion. Both the pagan and the Jew think the Christian is nuts, and they tell him why, in turn (so the pagan has some reasons, and the Jew has some reasons). The Christian then responds to them both to argue that in fact his religion is superior to either of theirs.
For your paper, reconstruct their conversation.
Recitation Four: Incentives for Conversions. Miracle Stories in Christian Legend
There is a reading assignment for this recitation (don’t worry – it’s terrifically good fun). But before getting to it, first do a bit of quiet thinking. Lots of pagans over the years abandoned their religious traditions and practices in order to become Christian – millions of them over time. In your opinion, based on what you know so far: what led them to do so? Something must have led them to forsake what they and all their families and communities had always thought and done to join the church. But what would that have been?
In your position paper, take a few sentences to sketch out what you think.
THEN, read the selections from the “Apocryphal Acts” in the Resources section of Sakai. The Apocryphal Acts are legendary accounts of the missionary activities of the apostles of Jesus after his death. The episodes you are reading for this recitation focus show how the apostles converted people. The stories themselves are clearly legendary. But what do they *claim* convinced people to start worshiping the God of Jesus, and him alone, rather than the traditional gods? It’s clearly miracles. [These are selections from the Acts of John and the Acts of Peter]
Is that plausible? Could Christian miracle-working abilities have converted the pagan masses? But these are legends! Right?
Still, think about it for a bit. Why would believing that Jesus’ followers could do spectacular miracles lead someone to convert?
In your paper, summarize a few of the accounts and then explain the logic this missionary strategy: Do miracles and people will convert. And then ask – could this really have been the reason? And if so – here’s the REALLY interesting question: would the followers of Jesus really have to have done miracles for people to be convinced? What about historians who don’t believe in miracles? How could they possibly think this would be the reason people would convert, if miracles don’t actually happen? Can you think of a way?
Recitation Five: The Martyrdom of Polycarp
Read the Martyrdom of Polycarp carefully (ANT 34-39). This is a fascinating account with numerous points of interest. Dig into it as deeply as you can and see what most intrigues you about it, We want your paper to show you’ve thought hard about the text.
For your paper you should pick two or three interesting features of the the Martyrdom and discuss them. Some of the options (there are others!): Who is portrayed as the “guilty party” who really wanted Polycarp killed? Why? What wrong had he done? Why was Polycarp willing or even eager to be martyred? Couldn’t he have gotten off the hook pretty easily? Why didn’t he do so? And why does his refusal to do so seem so infuriating to the proconsul? Is the proconsul really the bad guy here? Why is he himself trying to get Polycarp off the hook? What is being emphasized in the description of Polycarp’s actual death? What miracles were involved, and are they believable? And what do you make of the way his followers treated his remains?
There are other issues you could address. Pick ones that you find most intriguing and spend your paper discussing them.
Whatever you choose, END your paper by explaining what the author of this account was trying to achieve. Was he simply providing an “objective” account of what really happened for the sake of the record? Or was his account meant to teach his readers something important about themselves and their own lives? If so, what?
******************
I’ll set out the instructions for the other assigned papers in a later post.
In Revelation 4, the author talks about the seven spirits of God. Do you think these are related to the seven Amesha Spenta, seven divine emanations of Ahura Mazdah in Zoroastrianism?
No. I don’t think the author had any knowledge of Persian religion. “Seven” of course is a very important number not just in Revelation but in the apocalyptic and the entire Jewish tradition (including such non-apocalypticists as Philo, who’s was definitely not influenced by Zoroastrianism!)
I wonder if the following might have played a big role in the evolution from polytheism to henotheism and then monotheism. A major purpose of religion was offering sacrifice to obtain the help and protection of the gods. For many wouldn’t it gradually come to seem most expedient to appeal to the most powerful god? Why waste your time on less powerful gods? Hence henotheism. Yet the most powerful god wasn’t necessarily more powerful that some combinations of less powerful gods. Wouldn’t it make sense to just forget about the other gods and “discover” that there is only one god who is all-powerful?
Of course by doing this you lose the advantages of specialization. But there are always tradeoffs.
It seems like many early Christian apologists simply considered multiple gods to be ridiculous. Monotheism was so much more enlightened. But, irrespective of rational arguments for monotheism, it’s evolution might also have been strongly motivated by self-interest.
Yes, that is why even within traditional polytheistic religions there developed the worship of Theos Hypsistos, “the highest God,” to be worshiped above all else.
These are fascinating ideas with which to get students engaged with the course. The ‘miracle stories in Christian legend’ was the one that sparked my interest the most and I believe you touched on this issue in Triumph of Christianity. My feeling is that the Christians at some point would have had to have pulled off some miracle like stunt or had their bluff called. The movie Agora gets around this by having the Christians as aggressive thugs who you wouldn’t want to argue with and who walk across hot coals whereas the pagans can’t. Probably more a case of mind over matter than a miracle!
What are my questions? (you don’t have to answer them, but thank you for getting me thinking about it)
Does Christianity fall apart if Jesus is not divine?
Can Humanity benefit from Jesus and his story without the divinity identity?
Can I read the bible again and gain something valuable for my life even after I have tossed out the religion I grew up with and embraced for forty years of my life?
Bart… I respect you direction to keep studying and investing your work in the pages of the Bible. You must have found some incredible value for your life in those pages. I just wonder if I can find some value in those pages again some day, even if most of it is just a story.
Thank you Ruby from Calmar Alberta Canada
PS… I like your questions on miracles and martyrdom… will try to dig into some of that too. Thanks
1. Traditional Christianity, yes. 2,3,4: yes yes yes!
I can see why the value of Jesus’s teachings does not depend upon whether or not he is divine, but doesn’t it depend upon whether or not his apocalyptic belief is valid? What is the foundation of his morality without the apocalypse?
Not in my view. Jesus’ calendrical predictions may well have been wrong (they were) but many other aspects of his teachings could still be incredibly valuable. Einstein was wrong about quantum physics but that doesn’t mean his formulation of general relativity is not to be valued. I think many of Jesus’ teachings are hugely valuable; I don’t at all accept the apocalyptic foundation of his ethical views, but I think the ethical views are extremely valuable when transposed into my own non-apocalyptic context.
Jesus’ calendrical predictions may well have been wrong (they were)
No, they weren’t. You just don’t understand they happened INSIDE his initiated disciples, in visions. Every Synoptic “There be some standing here who won’t see death before the Son of man comes in his kingdom” is immediately followed by a TRANSFORMATION VISION within John, James and Peter.
Can’t wait for your revelations book!
What is the difference between the words “made”/”created” and “begotten” in the Arian controversy? Doesn’t begotten carry the idea of coming in to existence, like birth?
Yes, normally “begot” means “to bring a human into existence” (when the man makes the woman pregnant). That’s why the theologians came up with the idea of “eternally begotten.” God *always* is teh Father and so Christ is *always* the Son, and by virtue of their relationshiop one is always father the other always son so Christ never was not the son; he was *eternally* begotten (unlike humans who are one-time begotten)
Not in my view. Jesus’ calendrical predictions may well have been wrong (they were) but many other aspects of his teachings could still be incredibly valuable. Einstein was wrong about quantum physics but that doesn’t mean his formulation of general relativity is not to be valued. I think many of Jesus’ teachings are hugely valuable; I don’t at all accept the apocalyptic foundation of his ethical views, but I think the ethical views are extremely valuable when transposed into my own non-apocalyptic context.
I have heard it put that very little of what is recorded in the gospels as the wisdom of Jesus was actually new information (except for any divinity claims emerging in John). The accumulated wisdom from the past up to the lifetime of Jesus was enormous but most Christian teachers rely on very few people knowing anything about that, if they even know it themselves. Dig into some Socrates or read through the Delphic Maxims and see how much sounds familiar re biblical sources. In ignorance (& arrogance) we in the modern West often believe we are so advanced & smart, and that the Ancients were so primitive & stupid. Just the opposite I think??
Prof Ehrman – can you comment re this please?
I’d say that most of Jesus’ teachings are very similar to what you can find in other teachers at his time and before, yes, including his apocalyptic predictions. But of course they take on a particular cast as they are formulated differently. There are a very large number of differences, though, with, say, Greek philosophical discourse, given very different sets of assumptions and ways of working them out.
Hi Dr Ehrman!
So I see that a lot of anti abortion pastors argue against abortion, not by using any direct or definitive verse from the Bible, but by using the argument that god created that life and we have no right to “kill” it. How could one prove a pro-choice argument against this point without having to delve into the complications of where life begins?
Thank you!
THe passage you mentioned earlier, Exodus 21:22-25, is the best starting point. The Bible itself does not treat the unborn as “human” or the the death of the unborn caused by another as “killing.”
Thank you so much!! Is there any other proof (from within the Bible or without) that explains where ancient jews believed life began?
People cite all sorts of texts (“you knew me in my mother’s womb” for example), but none of these is actually talking about when life begins. They are metaphorical (in this case “you know all about me and always have”).
So I just heard in a video that the Criteria of Authenticity used by Biblical Scholars to argue that a passage in the Bible is/is not original are not used by other historians, e.g. for the works of Xenophon or Livy. Is that true?
Historians don’t give the criteria these labels usually, but they are absolutely the grounds used by historians and legal scholars and others to decide what happened in the past. Think about it: do you have lots of independent witnesses to it? Does their testimony represent what they *want* to say — that is, does it reflect their bias? Does their picture cohere internally? Is it consistent with other facts that we know? These are both standard and fundamental to any inquiry about the past.
Recitation 1:
Question 1:
My friend told me you have a YouTube channel. Would it be ok if I watched your videos instead of buying all those expensive books?
Question 2:
My Sunday School teacher told me you were a liberal scholar and to watch out. Why don’t you believe the Bible?
Question 3:
My parents named me and my brother Peter and Paul just like those Bible guys. Isn’t that funny?
1. The book’s always better than the film. :-). 2. I”m not sure a label is of much use. The thing to do is to look at the evidence and see what you yourself think. And for your teacher to do the same. It’s not who says it or what label you put on her or him; it’s whether their view is more convincing or not, and why. 3. It would be funnier if your sister were named Mary.
The Masters have a saying: If you lose your keys in the dark alley, don’t look under the streetlight expecting to find them just because it’s easier to see! What’s the point of a blog? Is it merely to offer a soapbox for a point of view? Or is it for exploring new ideas that might BE productive to issues at hand? I read all the posts, guest posts, and comments. There isn’t ONE that escapes massive impact from a correct reading of the gnostic/Essene mystic discoveries of Al Minya, Nag Hammadi, and Qumran. I’m truly sorry – truly I am! — that the academic fold is unaware of the profound implications of these finds! I’m not new to this rodeo. I’ve been a seeker as long as you, 1972, or actually 1963 — studying my red-letter RSV (still my Bible!). I’ve been meditating daily for 45 *YEARS* under a great Master, Charan Singh, who initiated 1,281,690.
Finding Dr. Eisenman’s work is life-changing. I’ve read all his work. I know of NOTHING he is wrong about – remarkable for someone unfamiliar with Masters. I drove 400 miles just to meet him. I’m always amazed he is ignored.
I suppose different blogs have different points. The point of THIS blog is to discuss a wide range of issues related to the NT and early Christianity from a *historical* point of view. If you’d rather not, that’s fine. But then it’s not the blog for you!
Bart,
I moved my reply to the current thread so all could read it. I come to your blog in all sincerity, Bart. I have the singular advantage of a perspective as a disciple of a real Master, not one in a book. {But I also was a Christian myself for two intense years!) I come here because I can HELP people understand the profoundly deep meaning of the scriptures. I did write two books (one an award-winner). They’re on Amazon, but I also give the files away FREE to anyone. That is the Sant Mat way — service to others. But 400 words is nothing against the complexities of explaining what happened in the New Testament and why correctly reading the new discoveries is so crucial to understanding the whole of the Bible — and all the other traditions. There IS a golden thread throughout all the weaves of scriptures, wherever they are from! Everyone deserves to hear the whole story.
I will email any of your blog members — or students! — both pdf files for free, the distillation of years of learning at the feet of a Master, and the resulting insight it will give all.
I am on a journey. This journey is very different from the the others who walk it. I learn from all kinds of people, but not by sitting at their feet as much as walking along side of them. Then I can see them for who they are.. fellow travellers on this journey and just as open to tripping on the rocks and potholes in the road as I am.
I have gained great inspiration from wise teachers and authors along the way, but no one of them have it all “right” or all “wrong” and my journey is not their standard of measurement. There are nuggets in the journey and there are potholes. I guess wisdom is learning how to gather the nuggets while avoiding the potholes that just trip me up.
Ruby from Alberta Canada
As a professional psychotherapist, which is a profession relying heavily on neuroscience and philosophy, I’d add the perspective that the golden thread you happen to find in the scripture, @judasthejust might be less within the words, but already in your heart and mind. Or, plainly put, within your unconscious mind.
We already carry the preparedness for the ‘wisdom’ in ourselves and happen to project it into the text. Whether it’s already being inherently there or not.
Our brains are hardwired to detect structure and give it a ‘gestalt’.
It doesn’t have to be in there in the first place, it’s just our own capabilities to read it into the text. It’s not written wisdom, it’s perceived wisdom by reading it into it.
Honestly, I think most of the ancient texts are much more profane than we would like to think..
We all should value our capacity to extract wisdom even where it might never have been in the first place.
I subscribe to the blog, but am not a student – is your text available locally in the
Durham, Chapel Hill area?
After the New Testament: A Reader in Early Christianity 100-300 CE
9780195398922
Like all books, it’s available on Amazon. I don’t know why it’s so darn expensive, but you can probably find used copies easily enough on, say abebooks.com or … ebay?
Other than the 1998 version, the book is the same price or more expensive than on Amazon on used books sites.
It’s interesting to reflect on what my questions would have been when I was in college (and a devout Christian) and what my questions would be now.
My now questions:
1. Did Jesus think he was the son of God and equal to the Father (his words in the Bible indicate “no”)?
2. Why did no book covering Jesus from the age of 12 until 30 make it into the New Testament?
3. Without Paul, would Christianity ever have been anything except a minor Jewish sect?
1. No. 2. None existed when Xns around the world were deciding which books were authoritative, and when they did appear they seemed a bit fantastic to many 3. It’s hard to say, but I think that’s a real possibility
A Pagan, a Jew, and a Christian Walk into a Bar.
The Jew says I love the Father.
The Christian replies, me too. And I love the Son. And the Holy Spirit.
The Pagan: How about your mothers?
The explanation is, of course, they do, but the Pagan read Freud.
I note that you refer to the papers as recitations. Are they delivered orally? I suspect that assignment three is the hardest, as it requires thinking from very different perspectives, which I presume they are not accustomed to doing.
Ah. The term “recitation” refers to the weekly discussion sections. When I was in grad school we called them “precepts.” I was never quite sure what that term meant either, but I suppose historically a recitation was what you’re suggesting, a time when students orally presented their work to their professor. And yes, it’s difficult to put onesself in the shoes of another, and one of the goals of teh class is to get students to see how to do it. It’s an unusually helpful exercise, and not just for religion, especially in our day and age….
I’m aware the so-called “swoon” theory has been thrown around in the past and most scholars have dismissed it. But please hear me out…
Jesus ostensibly died after a few hours after crucifixion, which would have been very odd, considering crucifixion was intentionally designed to be a slow, agonizing death, lasting for days. Incidentally, blood allegedly poured out his side, which doesn’t happen when a person is dead (blood would pool to the legs).
Regardless, the guards are pressured to hastily kill off the crucified criminals and take them down (perhaps the alleged thunderstorm was making them move faster!)
Jesus is unconscious and appears to be dead already, so the guard stabs him to confirm it. No reaction, so the guard assumes Jesus is dead. Note: He *didn’t* stab him *instead* of breaking his legs, like he was “finishing him off” so to speak.
From a medical perspective, it’d be highly unlikely that Jesus bled to death from the flogging or experienced heart failure in just a few hours. He certainly wouldn’t have died from asphyxiation under regular circumstances. Whatever the reason may be (damaged intercostal muscles/pleural effusion, dehydration), Jesus is unconscious and doesn’t seem to be breathing.
If Mel Gibson’s portrayal is realistic, dying by flogging seems like a very real possibility indeed….
.. And we know how Hollywood never sensationalizes or exaggerates history. 😁
Seriously, it may have been that bad. Then again, Paul spoke about receiving 39 lashes multiple times in his life. And I read where Romans would often flog prisoners 90 or 100 times.
It seems that Jewish law protected prisoners from being whipped to the extremes that Romans would often reach.
More importantly, from everything I’ve read, crucifixion was designed to last a couple days. They would bake in the hot sun, as birds would eat at their wounds and through dehydration and weakness and stretched out torn muscles and tremendous pain , they slowly lost the ability to pull themselves and breathe.
Josephus said out of ridicule and anger, Romans sometimes nailed their subjects. But the standard practice was to bound their arms and legs with rope.
“Since the evidence from antiquity doesn’t provide a clear answer as to whether Jesus was nailed or tied to his cross, it’s tradition that dictates this common depiction.”
I do find it interesting that only John mentions the idea of nails when Jesus speaks to Thomas.
Either way, he would have died very quickly which would have been unusual.
(FYI: There are many actual occurrences where people have been mistakingly pronounced dead by doctors but were alive) .
Joseph and Nicodemus, standing by, hastily take him down, bring him to the tomb but shockingly realize he’s still alive. At this point, Jesus is dehydrated with flogging and a small stab wound, but nothing life threatening. They secretly bring him into Joseph’s house and tend to his injures.
The day after, Jesus realizes he cannot fake his death because women would be coming to annoint his body. But if he tells them the truth, he knows he would have to leave the country (if he wants to live), and that would discount his entire Messiahship. Joseph is also now in a predicament, because he helped Jesus and will certainly be put to death or imprisoned if the Sanhedrin find out. He agrees with Jesus to fabricate a resurrection story to naive disciples.
The only real counter argument I’ve seen is the question of how Jesus could walk normally after his feet have been nailed. I’m out of room, but there is substantial historical evidence to support the idea that Jesus may have never been nailed to the cross.
Yes, my father was one of them.
Your father was pronounced dead when he wasn’t?
Thought dead, but not pronounced by a doctor.
I thought you meant he was a “swoon theorist.” Lol.
On a serious note, do you personally think my updated swoon theory is still crazy and totally implausible as the original? Aren’t there myths and legends that Jesus travelled to India. Could there be a grain of truth in some of those stories?
In some ways, I feel like this is more compelling than the idea that the disciples had visions of Jesus–so real that they would be willing to die for it. As you know, when Caiaphas saw these disciples in Acts, it was visibly evident these guys didn’t come across as super intelligent and educated. Maybe they were naïve enough to believe in such a story?
I know you are not big into speculation and more into actual evidence, but just was curious about your thoughts.
No, I don’t think there’s any grain of truth in these stories. They are actually based on Gospels that were forged in teh 19th century. I talk about them in the final chapter of my book Forged.
Darn! As a beer-drinking student intent on maximum beer and minimum study or thinking, your position papers would have really ruined my lifestyle. I would have had to sit up and concentrate! I am fascinated by the way you engage and involve and provoke. Sincere respect!