(9 votes, average: 4.78 out of 5)
Loading...I now turn to another non-canonical text connected with Paul, one of the most famous throughout the Middle Ages, an account of his journey to observe the fate of souls in the afterlife, both the glories of the saints in heaven and the torments of the sinners in hell. This tale is not simply meant to convey factual information about what happened to Paul once. It is intended to teach a clear lesson. Isn’t all interesting history like that?
Here’s how I discuss it in my book Peter, Paul, and Mary Magdalene (Oxford University Press). This will take two posts.
The Apocalypse of Paul
Is anyone ever interested in the past for purely antiquarian interests – that is, they just want to know what happened but for no other reason? Well, not usually. Most people think about the past because they are interested in the present. One of the ways that people who are interested in the present use history is by making the past itself present—that is, by making it relevant to the present day.
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!
As you say, Paul refers to only cryptically, in the third person to his “vision.” Since Paul wants to show that he too has superior knowledge, I am inclined to think that he fabricated this story. He conveniently says “he heard words that cannot be spoken, which no one must tell.”
The whole approach to how he talks about his vision is odd and seems suspect.
But you are inclined to believe that Paul really had this vision?
Dr. Ehrman,
The quote from Paul in 2 Corinthians where he’s talking about someone who went to third heaven – how often did Paul (in his undisputed letters) refer to himself in third person?
Why do you as a scholar think he was talking about himself when his words seem to make such an effort to say he was speaking of someone else?
Rarely. I think this is the place. When you read the passage in its wider context of Paul explaining why he has authority equal ot those of hte superaposltes, aI think it’s clear that he is enaged in an act of humility (in his view), wanting to establish his supernatural credentials without seeming to brag but also without providing a way for anyone to try to verify what he experienced.
Paul isn’t exactly known for humility, no? Doesn’t he seem to take opportunity to brag himself up to the point of what seems to be exaggeration most of the time?
I”d say there’s a definite difference between having a high view of oneself and being a bald-faced liar. It’s possible to be both, but many people are one or the other. Or, hopefully, neither!
Thank you for the reply. It seems to me that Paul has multiple opportunities to create what he is saying (exaggerate or actually lie) to give himself the credentials that he wants to promote himself to others. We know that there are many parts of both the OT and NT where stories are made up by someone and then readers then and now assume the stories to be true. I do not mean to indicate that Paul is a bald-faced liar but why do you believe that everything Paul says is a truthful statement?
As it turns out there’s a significant amount of scholarly literature on teh difference between a falsehood and a lie. A lie is intentional. More specifically, it involves saying (or writing, or indicating) that something is true that you believe (or know) is false. As it turns out “lies” can be true — if you think something is false and say it anyway, it is still a lie even though it’s not false! A falsehood is simply a statement that is not true, regardless of intent. I can’t think of any passages in Paul where there is any evidence that he is intentionally saying something that he knows/thinks is false.
Hey Bart, I have a question about the acceptance of the Deutero-Pauline epistles. If they were written while Paul was still alive, it seems like he would have said those weren’t his, and to knock it off. If they were written after Paul had died, it seems like his closest companions would have said that Paul had already died, the epistles were fake, and to knock it off – especially if the epistles were written years after Paul had died. So my question is, why were the Deutero-Pauline epistles accepted?
Hello Dr.Bart Erhman
Yesterday i asked”Is there a concensus that jesus ressurection is highly unlikely?” And you said there is if you dont include the christian scholats. Are Christian scholars more biased then atheist scholars?
Hello Dr.Bart Erhman
Do you think that John got his tomb naritive from Mark?
Again, completely off-topic.
I’m reading Timothy Beal’s The Rise and Fall of the Bible, and among the many translations he mentions Manga bibles (bibles with comic book-like illustrations, as he explains for old fogies like me). This made me think of the paintings and stained windows in medieval churches, which explained bible stories to those who could not read. They had them in the middle ages, and they have them now.
(Just as they used to use scrolls until codices became more prevalent, and now we’re returning to scrolling with ebooks.)
Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose.
“Jesus Resurrection is highly unlikely?” This is something driven as an American truth since birth.
I lived mostly in urban China from 1995-2021 & I can confidently declare: THAT CHINA WAS NoT BLESSED [by God at all] as the USA was in developing its economy.
Question: Dr Ehrman: you “spoke in tongues”- HOW COULD you not think you were blessed by God.
My mentor told me to move my tongue & I gurgled for hours daily for 25 years thereafter truly believing I was praying according to his will.
As the Senior Pastor at Shanghai’s Community Church answered me: Maybe God did not want you cleaving onto him.
Bart,
At the 7:50 mark in your recent podcast “Secrets of the Third Heaven: Exploring Paul’s Vision” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhfwdMoKivs), you are talking about visions in the ancient world outside of Christianity and say, “We have eyewitness accounts of people who [claimed visions of people who] had died who came back in the flesh.” Can you please cite a few examples?
The Blessed Virgin Mary. Happens all the time. In antiquity: Romulus. Apollonius of Tyana. Etc.
1] Wouldn’t it be more accurate to say that people who have seen the Virgin Mary think her SPIRIT visited, not her body in the flesh?
2] Wasn’t Romulus translated to be with the gods BEFORE death, so that would not be a good example of someone who was thought “DIED who came back in the flesh”?
3] Aren’t the Romulus, Apollonius of Tyana, etc. examples more likely STORIES of appearances that don’t have any basis in any actual visionary experiences?
1. Don’t know. She’s clothed.
2. No, it was after he disappeared from earth that he translated; and he came back in the flesh and appeared to an eyewitness.
3. THe accounts don’t describe visions but physical appearances to eyewitnesses. They are visions only to the extent that they were “seen” (“vision” comes from the Latin “video” — to see) And yes, they are stories. Just as the Gospel narratives are stories.
Livy says that when Romulus disappeared from his royal chair some thought Romulus was “snatched away to heaven” and was later seen by Proculus Julius (https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0026%3Abook%3D1%3Achapter%3D16). How do you get from this that some thought Romulus DIED and then came back in the flesh? It looks to me like they thought Romulus was translated up to be with the gods or to a different place without EVER EXPERIENCING DEATH, like was the case for many other Hellenistic heroes.
Yes, it depends what “die” means — but that’s right, he was not dead, buried, and then raised.
Can you please cite in Livy’s work, or any account from anytime in history, where someone had a vision of a dead person and thought that person had appeared in the flesh (other than the gospel accounts of Jesus)? As far as I can tell, no such traditions exist. (And as far as I know, “die” means “dead” regardless of whether the person was “buried”; I didn’t understand your point there).
Are you saying that Livy’s account of the appearance of Romulus back on earthy after his translation to the heavenly realm was in something other than the flesh?
No, I’m saying Livy intends Romulus was translated to the gods and then appeared in the flesh, he never died. You previously suggested Romulus died somewhere in that process, which as far as I can tell is incorrect, or I just misunderstood you. Basically, I’m just asking if you can cite any account from anytime in history (other than the gospel stories about Jesus) where someone who was thought dead appeared in the flesh.
I guess it depends on what it means to die.
THere are, of course, other accounts of dead people coming back to life (in the flesh) — Jairus’s daughter, Lazarus, plus a couple in the OT.
Jairus’s daughter etc are resurrections back to a continued earthly existence (either stories or what today we would call resuscitations), as opposed to a “vision” which is seen for a short time and then is gone (like a bereavement vision of a deceased loved one). Do you have an example of anyone who has ever had a “vision” of a dead person and thought that person appeared in the flesh? (In your podcast that I referenced in my first question, you are talking about “visions” in the ancient world outside of Christianity and say, “We have eyewitness accounts of people who [claimed visions of people who] had died who came back in the flesh.”)
That’s what happens with visions of deceased loved ones all the time. the person who has the vision (which can include hearing and touching) is convinced they are physically there. Lots of research on that one.