(4 votes, average: 4.25 out of 5)
Loading...Just a reminder in case you missed it the first time! Come one, come all!
In celebration of our TENTH anniversary for the blog, I’m happy to announce a FREE webinar for anyone who is interested. No need to register, no need to pay, no need to donate, no need to do nada. Just come.
It will be this coming Saturday, April 23, 5:00 EST. And GOOD news. If you can’t come, it will be recorded and I will make it available to the entire known universe.
The topic. An unusually important one. “Does the Bible Condemn Homosexuality?” Well, does it? The lecture will deal with the issues of sex, gender, and same-sex relations in both Old and New Testaments.
I will give a 50 minute lecture and then take questions for 25-30 minutes.
Interested in coming? Below is the link. Just come to it. Want the recording? I’ll be posting it on the blog so no need even to inquire.
Thanks so much for being part of the blog. I hope you enjoy the event! Here’s the link:
********************
Topic: Blogaversary Webinar! Does the Bible Condemn Homosexuality?
Time: Apr 23, 2022 05:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada)
Join Zoom Meeting:
I’m commenting to hold a question for the webinar that is a must to be answered and understood for such discussion. The question is: What was considered a “normal” marriage relationship between the Male and Female? Not sexual, but rather romantic such as marriage today? Or was it more business/property like prior to 19th century? Or exactly what was the normal relationship between a man and woman?..
The definition of such relationship is key in what would be considered a loving relationship between two consenting adults (regardless of their sex). Sanctity of Marriage is huge Christian homophobic dogma. So would natural sex occur only for purpose of producing offspring, and unnatural sex be for pleasure? Questions if sex for pleasure in Paul view is unnatural.
What would Paul have considered consentual sex relations between a male and female that were not married nor the female being a concubine of the male?
Point of questions is what constitutes “normal” (God Sanctified) relationship between two individuals at the times the text in question was written?
Yup, I’ll be touching on such things. Well, metaphorically.
2nd sub question to hold which is related to procreation.
Is the mentrual cycle of women deemed unclean because they cannot get impregnated during such menstrual period? It cannot be that blood would be unclean, as blood would be expected from a virgin even if deflowered external of sex with a man. Menstual blood is not the only bleeding that can take place during sex act. Thus what other reason would woman be “unclean” for? Also goes to what relationship men had with women and women with men in a marriage. This goes to previous question if Sex for Pleasure is in Paul view sinful? After all, he lists all forms of sexual relations outside of Procreation as sinful.
Pauls concession of marrying rather than burn with passion he relates it is not a commandment. So is he saying better to produce unwanted children than seek sex for pleasure?
Pleasure seems to be the big issue with Paul not just Sexual pleasure most all forms of pleasure. Pleasure is what drives the 20th and 21st century thus why Sex is such a hot topic in Christianity today. Church reserves Pleasure to their members through their own definition of Marriage.
Currently listening to audiobook Heaven and Hell. Tremendous book!
I’ve dwelled on and researched the origins on the belief of afterlife (at least that of the Jews and Greeks). To me it seems that an afterlife is one of those beliefs that are somehow instilled into all mankind much like God (a creator). That there is something within the essence of man leading him to a belief in such. But a “common” uniform belief would be extreamly unlikely. There were Shamans 30,000 years ago in the Paleolithic era. Equally all cultures worldwide have entertained a belief (from beginning of existence) in another existence separate from the world we physically inhabit. I believe that there is “substance” in the existance of both a prelife and postlife existance because it is something that seems to be wired within humanity but in many different conceptions.
I don’t know your view of UFOs and intellegent life away from this planet, but to me, there seems to be a preponderence of evidence leading to such. Especially with the most recent videos released by the US govenment. My first question would be if they had same underlying belief in supernatural (other world) existence Seems the Govt is trying to prepare the world for possibilty of other world existence..
https://www.trtworld.com/magazine/nasa-turns-to-religious-scholars-to-prepare-humanity-for-alien-contact-53110
I’m in! Bought a Blogoversary lottery ticket, too.
I’m interested in gender discourse in the light of my best-guess hypothesis, a new one.
Was Jesus King Malichus II?
Thus, Phaesalis dumping Herod kicks off John’s baptism of Jesus and ministry. Woman power.
Malichus II:
•birth mother unknown
•birth date unknown
•AD 40, ascends to throne
•AD 66, Gospel of Mark thus becomes an offer of Transjordan refuge to Hellenic Jewish Christians, without giving away the military secret that Nabataea and Rome would encircle Judaea to quell the Zealots.
•7 churches in Syria ( I think, still learning.) adjacent Nabataean Abgarid dynasty, like Pella-Bostra.
(Also why Nazareth’s Hasmonean soldier descendants weren’t cool with him putting Naam the Syrian above Jews.)
•Malichus means King. So, King of Kings plural.
•Aretas IV’s birth name Aeneas, means “God in a Mortal Body.”
•”Render unto Caesar makes more sense if God was also on a coin.
•Nabataea’s: multiple cups in Luke, male-female power pairs, , vine motif, himation
•”On Petra I will build my church”
•Moves hq to Bostra, adjacent Pella to receive refugees
•Plant archaeology ties Qumran and Petra (ephedra seeds), just like Dr. Magness thinks the Transjordan was one material culture.
•Nazareth was within 20 miles of ethnically Nabataean towns to send over viable Holy Spirit to Mary.
•lots more!
Jesus died years before Malichus ascended to the throne.They are not the same person.
This is a late time to ask a question, but could you cover the views of homosexuality that the extrabiblical 1st century Christian texts (Didache, 1 Clement, Epistle of Barnabas, etc.) express?
None of the early texts that deal with same -sex relations differs much in their views; but none of them address the qeustion of homosexuality because none of the authors had an understanding of sexuality, as I explain in my lecture (soon available)
Looking forward to this! It’s a topic that’s really relevant to my interests as a queer reader of Scripture. One thing that I feel is really important is to separate the historical questions like “what did the Holiness Author probably mean by ‘a woman’s lyings?'” or “who would Paul have considered a ‘male-bedder’ or a ‘softie?'” from practical theological questions like “what should a pastor say to a gay parishioner who is troubled by these passages?” or “should a Christian couple turn their trans daughter out onto the streets?” and I trust you to be cognizant of that distinction and handle the topic sensitively.
Hi Dr. Ehrman,
Have you ever read Randy Alcorn’s post about you not really having true faith? I’m assuming he’s thinking you weren’t a Calvinist because they believe God draws people to believe in Him.
Here’s the article.
https://www.epm.org/blog/2019/Oct/18/how-former-christian-bart-ehrmans-testimony-should
It just seems like with suffering God doesn’t stop it because He let his son suffer for us. Maybe that’s why suffering exists?
Lastly, why didn’t the disciples know that Jesus was going to die? Was this not prophesied or they just though he was going to set up an earthly kingdom?
Thanks so much.
We had a back and forth on the blog about it! Look up his name by a word search and you’ll see. They didn’t know Jesus would die because he wasn’t expecting to die. (The Gospels say he knew, of course; the early Chrsitians didn’t want anyone to think he was blindsided by the crucifixion).
Thank you. I read the old posts. Calvinism is kinda holding me on to Christianity even though I have doubts because if a historical Jesus existed, are these teachings not real? Some of these Christian apologists seem convincing. But you do as well
Study hard and sincerely with an open mind. Only you can decide what you think is right!
I guess the root of my problem is that I grew up Pentecostal. When I realized that Jesus doesn’t answer every prayer or automatically get rid of suffering, that was when I was introduced to Calvinism and reformed theology. Which is against the prosperity gospel. Reformed people I guess believe that God wants us to suffer for him?
I hope it doesn’t look like I’m attacking because I’m not. I’m just lost. Reformed people are all about obeying Christ and letting Jesus be the lord of your life.
I do have doubts. I’m not expecting you to persuade me, but I do have a fear of hell so maybe that’s why I’m barely holding on to Christianity.
Yup, I get it. Have you seen my book on Heaven and Hell? I try to explain why the modern notions were not taught in the Bible (OT/Jesus/Paul/Revelation/etc.)
Bart.. Great webinair, and you basically confirmed what I had come to believe on my own.
One somewhat connected question…
Do you and/or other historians believe that Paul expected his letters to separate churches/groups, to be collected and canonized as “scripture” for all”?
Main point of question is to answer if Paul believed he was writting commandments for all of the New Faith, in each letter or just writing specific instructions to each church individually based on issues specific to that church?
Overall.. Was Paul expecting that he was like Moses in giving the “church” the Law of God in his letters? The reason for question is based on the view of infallible and inheirent bible scripture and Sola Scriptura, that such Scripture is equal in Authority to the Trinity. So was that Pauls intent?
My hypothesis is that Paul was originator of Gnostic belief that Gods instruction comes from a source other than the teachings and writings of other men. God instructs to each into their heart and mind (Romans 2:15).
No, Paul didn’t expect his books to become sCripture. He thought he was addressing local problems, thouh of course he thought he was answering them through the Spirit of God and that the answers were widley applicable. He had no idea of a future scripture though. He thought Jesus was soon to return.
This leads to another question… Why or for what purpose would the Gospels (both canonical and non) need to have been written?
My current view is that they were initially written (earliest gospels) to “sell” Jesus as the true messiah to the Jews as a means to convert them to the new sect. The message of Paul to the Gentiles was Eternal Life (Acts 17:31) as well as the other apostles message to the Jews (ie. he has risen thus the messiah).
I can understand a Jewish messeging need for the Gospels to show Jesus as the Messiah, but don’t see any revelancy for them among the Gentile converts other than possibly as a written witness to the resurection. Pauls message of Grace and Attonement through the blood of Jesus is minimalistically presented in the Gospels.
Do you think Paul would have endorsed such written Gospels? Would or Could he have viewed them as Heresy or just not considered them how Christianity adopted them in the 4th Century as “Holy Scripture”?
They appear to have been written for Christian communities by authors who wanted to provide the best way to understand the meaning of Jesus’ life and death. Paul almost certainlly had never seen any of the Gospels.
Re the origin of the Gospels CS Lewis puts it succinctly in The Screwtape Letters – that they were not written to make Christians but to edify Christians already made. And Christians made on the basis of a single fact (the Resurrection) and a single doctrine (Redemption).
The question of what Paul might have thought of the Gospels (the 4 that were eventually elevated to Scripture plus the abundance of other Gospels floating around) is interesting. Perhaps, like us, he might have asked of an author concerning some / many / most / all of the narrative of actions & dialogue from decades ago “How do you know that?”. Or “You cannot know that so what have you made up & why?”.
Is the video recording of this available somewhere?
Yup, coming out soon!
Dr. Ehman,
I missed the webinar on “The Bible and Homosexuality” last April 23. Have you already posted it on your blog? Would love to watch it also. Thanks.
It’s coming up soon.