(12 votes, average: 4.92 out of 5)
Loading...I’ve been doing a lot of interviews and podcasts over the past couple of months, and for my money this is absolutely one of the best, with Seth Andrews the Host of “The Thinking Atheist.” He’s a terrific interviewer: intelligent, knowledgable, and gifted at directing a conversation. We talked about all sorts of things from my views of the book of Genesis, to the white Jesus, to debating whether Jesus was raised from the dead, and on and on. Check it out!
Is there a web site with all your video blogs? After 25y, I finally got sound for my computer and my wife and I have been watching a ton of your presentations that we find by hunting and searching on YouTube. Is there a site that lists all of these? BTW, she has become quite a fan.
I have a Youtube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/c/bartdehrman/videos
Seth Andrews has an interesting book called Confessions of a Former Fox News Christian (2020, Outskirts Press).
Dear Bart, I appreciated your take on the Quran and Jesus on apostate prophet. The conversation was respectful and very useful. However, I would like to comment on 3 points.
1. Kitab usually translated as book also means, principles, rules, regulations and is not necessarily a written document. Prophets come with Kitab (rules) and Hikmah (wisdom, or practical application of rules) even when they are illiterate.
2. Muslims consider all Judeo-Christian traditions, canonical and non canonical, on an equal footing. They all contain forgeries and some truths. They also are critical towards their own tradition, the Quran coming certainly from Muhammad, then Hadith (reports) that are highly likely to come from him (5-10%), and hadith forgeries (90-95%).
3. The NT makes absurd claims about the crucifixion. Mark has Jesus killed on 15th Nissan at 9am, after being helped by Simon to carry his cross. John has Jesus killed at noon on 14th Nissan after carrying his own cross. Who was hallucinating? Maybe both? Talmud has another version of execution altogether. Muslims believe there is no historical certainty on the crucifixion.Probably there were simply a lot of hallucinatory experiences in some Christians like Paul et al.
I think the verse is denying the crucifixion but its also extremely misunderstood. Shubihalahum refers to the boasting jews who insulted Christ and his lineage (calling him son of Mary intending slander)
So there’s a kind of rhetorical doubling effect. They’re guilty for slandering her because they saw the clear signs that she was a virgin, likewise when they murder him they failed and it was made to appear that way, they didn’t succeed. Finally when the false messiah comes, they’ll follow him. It is a common theme in the Quran, the moment you deny what is clear, you are caused to be deceived by falsehood (actively caused by God’s will.) Deny birth, deluded by murder etc
Of course non Muslims don’t agree but that seems very clearly to me to be the gist of the rhetoric and it fits within the overall quranic theme of, the moment you deny the truth you are made to be confused and kept in misguidance.
I say this not to promote any anti Semitic rhetoric, just explain my understanding of the verses. There are biblical verses with written by people describing facts true or false but have an underlying point
Shubihalahum being “it was made to appear to them” them being the jews who the Quran alleges boasted about killing him(while denying he was sent from God as a messiah and attacking his lineage, not noble but an out of wedlock kid)
So any notion of the Quran inadvertently causing christianities existence or deliberately deceiving the followers of Christ is somewhat suspect and either a hasty or deliberate kind of deception from the part of Christian missionaries. Muslims don’t agree that even if people thought was murdered and revived, that this in any way backs up a central claim of Christianity-that he is a divine being or that his death redeems anyone.
Question off-topic: Do you recommend Francesca Stavrakopoulou’s new book “God: An Anatomy”. If you have not read the book, do you recommend her work?
I’m afraid I don’t know her or it!
DR EHRMAN!!! You gotta look into this person Francesca Stavarakapoulou. She’s a limey instructor i forget which university, but she’s a credit to it. Old Testament is her thing, especially in respect to archaeology and historicity and that sort of thing, i think its conservative to say that she is a minimalist. Surely you are familiar with Finkelstein and Dever. Id say they are somewhat centrist in their ideas on what is historical and what isnt about the deuteronomistic history. Im afraid the esteemed Dr Tabor who has a great interest in those sorts of things as they touch the NT gives a great deal of interest to the work of Simcha Jacobovici who i simply cant ascribe the level of credibility as any of the afore mentioned people.
Which of the people i mentioned in the field of archaeology to you enjoy the most? Their findings and interpretations i mean, and secondly where do you fit on the spectrum of nihilist-maximalist in respect to the historicity of the deuteronomistic history?
Thanks. She looks interesting. I don’t think I’d say Finkelstein and Dever are centrists!
Professor Ehrman,
I thoroughly enjoyed your conversation with Seth Andrews. I also listened to your debate with Jimmy Akin and enjoyed it also. I have two questions: 1. Are you planning on commenting on your debate with Jimmy?
He has already commented on his blog about his idea of two residences for Joseph and states that he is not trying to harmonize. 2. In your conversation with Seth Andrews the topic of Original Sin came up. I have searched your site for information on Original Sin but have not found that topic addressed. If you have addressed it and I am just missing it, could you point me in the right direction? If you haven’t talked about it, would you consider doing so some time in the future?
1. No I’m not planning on commenting on the debate. (I’ve mentioned the “two residences” theory to a couple of my New Testament scholar friends and they just raised their eyebrows, like I did) (I’t just not plausible given what we know about the ancient economy of Palestine, even if makes sense to anyone in America who has a summer home!) 2. No, I’ve never dealt with it on the blog, to my recollection, largely because as a doctrine it did not develop into its traditional form until Augustine, and I usually keep blog things to the first 300 years of Xty.
I am always intrigued when I see you during a debate with a backdrop of, I assume, your bookshelves because there always seems to be a fairly eclectic collection of volumes. Please may I ask how you arrange your books so that you can lay your hand on a given one when you need it? You must have many hundreds.
Ha! That part of the study holds Sarah’s books, and I have no IDEA how she manages to find things. (I’m obviously a huge bibiophile, but she’s flippin’ off the charts)
Two further points on your take on the Quran and Jesus.
1. If Jesus believed he was the last prophet sent to Israel (according to Muslims) or to the world (according to Christians) how on earth early Christians accepted Paul as a genuine prophet? Perhaps, Jesus had never left a tradition about him being the last, so implying that prophecy after him could be possible?
2. Were Jesus and his disciples Muslim? Yes, if one considers the original meaning of the word muslim as a person submitting to the will of the One God (monotheism) by following His rules and principles and engages in prayer,charity, fasting, and pilgrimage. These are the 5 pillars of Islam (submission). The form of rituals may vary historically but substantially submission or islam is worshipping only God and being helpful to mankind.
I’m not sure what you’re asking. Do you mean historically? According to the Xn faith? Big difference. I’m not able to speak theologically about the “truth”, just about what Xns have said. But normall Paul is not understood as a prophet in teh sense you’re using it. 2. No, there were no Muslims before Islam.
Thank you Bart.
1.Well,Paul claimed he had his own gospel from heaven,not by men.Similarly,the author of Revelation claimed to be a prophet par excellence.These two “prophets” writing decades after Jesus,were accepted as such by the Churches.This would indicate that early Christians believed prophecy was still possible.Prophecy is still considered “on” in Catholicism and Protestantism alike.
2. Of course sociollogically there was no Islam and Muslims before Muhammad. However,linguistically and theologically,”islam” is a state of being (i.e.submission to God) and “muslim” is someone who claims to be in this state.It is similar to the world “iman” and “mumin”, belief and believer,terms used equally as a marker of the monotheistic faith community (see Fred Doner),which would include earlier prophets and their followers.From a socio-historical and political vantagepoint it later was understood as a name for 7th century Arab monotheism.It is interesting Jews of Medina told Muhammad,”we were muslims long before you”,that is we know before the Arabs what submission to God is.By the way,Allah was not a deity invented in 7th century,that was what people (Jews, Christians, Pagans) called The High God (the Father of angels,demons,Jesus, etc) in Arabic. Muhammad simply denied God sired or adopted anyone.
Bart, you’ve devoted your entire career to the study of New Testament. As you approach retirement age and look forward to having a bit more time to yourself (e.g. not teaching), are there any areas of study you’d like to delve into just for your personal interest?
I”m interested in a wide range of things, and over the years have figured out ways to incorporate a number of them into my research by choosing what to reasearch. E.g., one reason I was interesetd in doing a book on the afterlife is that I wanted to look into the phenomenon of Near Death Experiences; and my book Jesus before the Gospels was driven in part by an interest in psychology and memory, and by anthopological studies of oral cultures, etc. My last book (just came out) allowed me to dive deeper into classics, to learn Homeric Greek and to study Virgil in Latin, and to dive more deeply into Platonic philosophy. So my sense is that I’ll do more and more of that kind of thing, as well as get deeper into great literature. I’d love to do more with Shakespeare (my wife’s expertise), e.g.
Such great areas of interest. I look forward to reading your latest book. So many books, so little time. Thanks!
For my part, I found the Licona debate rather pedestrian. Nothing new from him in the way of real evidence or analysis. Yawn…… You may be too effective a communicator for your own good, professor.
As for mythicism, I get why scholars dismiss the idea. If the Bible contains mere characters, it isn’t a text of sufficient quality to merit the attentions of so many competent professionals. The reasons I see for you ‘debating’ Mike Licona are similarly founded
.
As an avid pedestrian, I take offense at the pejorative use of the word pedestrian.
Prof. Ehrman, You talk about how Jesus taught that the end of the world was coming just around the corner, and he also taught that the Kingdom of God was going to arrive imminently. Aren’t those two contadictory teachings? How did Jesus himself understand his predictions of was going to happen the day after tomorrow?
I mean the same thing by those. The world “as he knew it” was soon to end; a new world was soon to begin. It was a new beginning, which meant the old would disappear. Make sense? I’m not saying the planet would be destroyed. disabledupes{f74f5559ec483a38ab301513d452e8fc}disabledupes
I watched this video and it was really good.
I have a question: Do you know of Dr. James Tabor? If so, what do you make of his work?
Yes, we have been friends for many years. He is a very smart and well informed scholar, although we disagree on a lot of things as well. (He also has been a guest- poster on the blog! Look up his name…)
This was indeed an interesting and enriching interview. It’s great when interviewers aren’t deferential and push back, and not ask their subjects variations of what ice cream did you order.
I have a question about the son of man in the clouds of heaven, is it true that this part of the book of Enoch is dated to be written in the first century and it is post christian?
It’s much debated. It’s the only part of 1 Enoch (the Similitudes) that was not discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls.
“Neither did Jesus!” Thank you!
Jesus answered them,”Is it not written in your Law: ‘I said you are gods’
John 10:34
https://biblehub.com/john/10-34.htm
God(s), plural. It’s Paul that upgrades Jesus. Paul’s hyperbolic.
Kings were gods in the Med basin:
Caesar/Rome. Herod/Jews (Paul is a Herodian kinsman.) Aretas/Nabataea – his birthname, Aeneas, means, “God inhabiting a mortal body.”
Jesus, the only begotten (conceived) son of God. And, virgins give birth all the time.
Maybe the Gospels are Greek as that was the lingua franca of the educated Transjordan, unlike Latin for Herodians?
In AD 40, Nabataea gets a leader whose new regnal name is simply ‘king.’ Who knows?
I’ve been away from reading your blog for awhile, Dr. Ehrman, I’m having my first agnostic, almost athiest experience. But simultaneously found out the songwriter of Maestranza (I’ve mentioned it) song sounds like a genius account of Passion Week – is not an athiest, as most his fans say. In our workshop he said he does glossolalia, and identifies spiritual. He gave me a red heart for one of my contributions.
If I win a a spot in the webinar, will you tell me if that album sounds like the NT?
https://genius.com/Fleet-foxes-maestranza-lyrics
Interesting.
Do you think Jesus died on the Thursday or the Friday? I had assumed it was Friday (as in Mark, Matthew, Luke) and that John got it wrong / changed the day to Thursday for theological reasons.
But I was reading an article by James Tabor arguing that the synoptics may have originally set the crucifixion on a Thursday, and the references in the narrative to the impending sabbath were referring to the special sabbath of passover (Friday that year) rather than the usual Saturday. In short I I think the article was saying that Jesus died on the Thursday as John’s gospel states, and there is no contradiction between the synoptics and John on this.
Have you covered this on the blog before?
He dies on Friday in all four Gospels. The difference is that in John that Friday is the day before the passover meal was eaten and in the others it is the morning after it was eaten.
Is there evidence (discovered scriptural interpolations perhaps) that Jesus and his followers were surprised that he was arrested and crucified, or is that an assumption based upon the unlikelihood of what the Gospels say about how Jesus repeatedly warned his followers that he would be killed, yet they all just ignored him?
No, we don’t have any written texts that say this.
In the debate Mike claimed that Jesus predicted his death and resurrection. He mentioned Jesus calling Peter Satan as a piece of supporting evidence. That is, given the criterion of embarrassment, the early Christians wouldn’t fabricate an instance in which a leading disciple was referred to as Satan by Jesus himself.
Two objections come to mind. It may be the case that Jesus did at some point refer to Peter as Satan but this scenario wasn’t necessarily connected to a resurrection prediction, and that said prediction was later woven into the actual Satan instance.
It could also be the case that it wasn’t necessarily taken to be an “embarrassing” moment, and that there was a general understanding that the gospel writer was having Jesus engage in some hyperbolic talk.
Another thought that just came to mind – how exactly does a gospel writer discriminate between fact and fiction of the competing stories of Jesus’s life that were circulating? It could be the case that, while not historically accurate, this Satan story had been circulating for awhile and was accepted by many as an actual saying of Christ. The gospel writer just recorded what he took to be an historical instance.
thoughts?
Yeah, I don’t see anything much persuasive about that. It occurs in the Gsopel of Mark and one of Mark’s major points is that the disciples never could understand who JEsus was, and once they do start to understand, they completely misunderstand. Jesus is rejecting Peter’s idea that he would be a powerful military figure instead of a suffering messiah; to think otherwise is not just to misunderstand, it’s to be influenced by the powers of evil. Mark probably did think this is something that had happened; I would suppose he heard the tradition and was passing it along.
Dr. Ehrman, when in Matthew 27:51 says that many saints were raised and appeared to many in Jerusalem after his resurrection, do you think this was later added to the gospel and was never in the original? This tradition is never mentioned in the 4 gospels other than Matt. It does not pass the Independent attestation criteria, what are your thoughts on it?
I think it was certainly in the original of Matthew. And I think it is certainly legendary, not historical.
Prof Ehrman,
I am micro watching your debate with Dr. Licona. In it, he referenced 1 Thess 4:13-17 in his opening statement. In the verse 14 – “For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those have died”, does Paul at this point presuppose that the Spirit of the faithful upon death, goes up to heaven to be with Jesus and makes a return with Jesus at the second coming? Presupposing a soul that lives apart from the body? My interest is in Paul’s understanding of the soul at this point – Jewish or Greek understanding? The verse 14 seems to point to a Greek understanding whereas the verse 16 “…and the dead in Christ will rise first.” appears Jewish.
Kindly assist with some clarification here. Thank you.
At this point of his career Paul appears to think that a person who dies simply doesn’t exist, until the resurrection when the breath/spirit would re-enter the body. Later, in 2 Corinthians 5 and Phil. 1, he appears to think that there is some kind of intermediate existence in the spirit with Christ. I talk about his change of mind in my book Heaven adn Hell.
Then what do you see as the basis for your statement that not only Jesus’ followers but Jesus himself were surprised by his arrested and crucifictiction? Mark has Jesus prophesizing that death and resurrection will be his fate. Again, I get it that it could be reasonably argued that it’s likely Mark’s story had been twisted to include sayings by Jesus where he predicts his death and resurrection and his followers don’t believe him, but do we have any actual evidence that is what happened?
In the Gospels Jesus *definitely* knows he is going to die. My view is that tis is a later Christian explanation for why he wasn’t taken by surprise by it all. The words of the historical Jesus as they can be reconstructed indicate that he thought God was soon to intervene on earth to bring in the kingdom and that he, Jesus, would be made the king (not that he would be executed).
Dr. Ehrman, you have probably discussed this before. Is there a contradiction between Paul writing in 1 Corinthians 15 that Jesus was raised (resurrected) in a spiritual body v.44 and the writer of Luke’s Gospel having Jesus trying to convince his disciples that he was not a spirit by for example eating the broiled fish?
I’m not sure it’s a contradiction but it’s certainly different. For Luke Jesus’ corpse is reanimated; for Paul Jesus’ body is completely transformed into a glorous and immortal body.
Perhaps you should have a look at this video for your next interview. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iv4LiaRE1fU
Hi Bart. About your most recent debate with Mike Licona on Jesus’ alleged resurrection, when will the audio download be available?
I’m afraid that was not a blog event, but part of my separate enterprise, The Bart Ehrman Professional Services. You can see how to purchase a recording on my website: http://www.bartehrman.com
I purchased it last month, before Easter.
If you’re saying you purchased it but did not receive access to it, send me a private email and we can figure it out.
Hello Bart. I really enjoyed this interview. I’m glad to see you having discussions on diverse platforms. Have you considered rejoining Sam Harris for a podcast? Also I might recommend Lex Fridman. In the YouTube area Cosmicskeptic and Rationality Rules are worth checking out.
I”ve done Sam’s podcast, actually, a couple of years ago. He’s obviously a *great* interviewer.