Loading...As I’ve been writing my new book, tentatively called “The Invention of Altruism: How the Teachings of Jesus Transformed the Conscience of the West,” I’ve been thinking about how I might summarize the basic argument. Here’s what I’ve got to this point. I’d be happy to hear your reactions.
******************************
Most people I know are moved by news of tragedy. A terrible earthquake, a drought, a famine, a flood, displaced people, innocent victims of military aggression, — we feel pity for those who pointlessly suffer and sense a desire, even an obligation, to help, for example by donating to disaster relief. Almost never do we know the people in need; they are complete strangers, often in far-off lands, whom we will never meet and possibly wouldn’t like if we did. Yet we – at least multitudes of us – want to help.
This sense of moral obligation to strangers in need is unnatural.
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!
I wasn’t excited about this topic to begin with, but I like where you’re going at this stage of development for the next book. I like to think that Jesus changed the consciousness of humanity for the better and that one day we’ll achieve a utopian existence. Jesus exemplified 2 themes that run parallel with each other and continue to this day: the hope of a beautiful, perfect existence that’s achieved through alleviating pain and suffering (altruism, charity, etc…) or complete failure and total destruction (selfishness and greed).
According to Jesus, all the pain and suffering will be worth it in the end if we learn to follow his example of charity. I *choose* to believe that as well, even with the impending doom that looms over us at all times. The dichotomy of hope and approaching ruin keeps us in check I suppose.
There are couple things I would like to point out. It is my understanding that Greek tradition emphasized hospitality to the stranger as an obligation. This is not the Christian ideal you are talking about but certainly a rudimentary beginning to it. Also it is my understanding that the ‘government’ of the Roman Empire helped out Pompeii after the disaster of Vesuvius in 79 AD. This is also rudimentary but things to consider.
When you read the texts themselves, hospitatlity to a “stranger” means “a stranger who is of your same socio-economic class,” not just any stranger. Notice what happens to Odysseus when he shows up in Ithaca as a beggar, e.g. And I don’t think there *was* a Pompeii after the eruption. It’s true that Pliny the Elder went on a rescut mission to try and get his friends outta there (and died in the effort), but this was to help friends.
Jesus opened the way to joy. Happiness is attainable by doing for ourselves. Joy is beyond and entails putting ourselves out for others or experiencing by recognizing what others do for others. Joy is higher, deeper and at times too much. Happiness fades. Joy never!
Wow! As an eager fan, this book does appear to be a heavy lift with a multitude of issues to argue (even for the general public) and of sources to explore (for an academic audience). Has your publisher limited your word count? What led you to choose this topic? I have my suspicions given your charity work. But your uncharitable critics may have expected you to be interested only in Jesus’ role in the invention of religious exclusivism. This book may yield an increase in your evangelical church speaking invitations. When I was a young evangelical minister I could only dream of having an atheist/agnostic scholar confirm some of my religious biases. Here’s hoping for a best seller.
They have a word count suggestio that i’m blissfully ignoring. 🙂 And I’m not expecting a lot of invitations from Southern Baptist churches around here….
There is joy in being one of your blog members who help provide for the less fortunate. Then, you make sure we are amply compensated!!!
Thanks. And yes, the checks are in the mail!
It feels like such a privilege to read your books! But I have a question for you, Mr. Ehrman. Is there any chance you’re putting this out now, in the later stage of your career, out of some sort of an inner need to kind of make amends for “trashing” Christianity? I mean, I know you haven’t thrashed Christianity (that’s the reason I put “”), but throughout your career you’ve been (wrongly) accused of that. And I was wondering if you wanted to write something about Christianity with an emphasis on a totally positive aspect of it, such as the kind of altruism you describe in the text above and ascribe it exclusively to Christianity. Because up until now, all of your books pretty much demolish some aspect of traditional (or fundamentalist) understanding of Christianity’s history. And it feels -to put it in broad strokes- like this book will convey a message like “I know I attacked and demolished a lot of your dearly held convictions about the history of your religion, but let me give back to you some love”. I don’t know, maybe I’m being silly, these were just my original first thoughts without filtering them out.
Well, I do think it’s more balanced to look at the good sides of soemething as well as the bad. All religions that I know of have a ver ygood side indeed. I think they should all be examined critically, but it should not be based simply n an agenda to malign them or to focus on the negative aspects. A fair evaluation means being able to recognize what is good as well. Some branches of all religions have less to be said for them than others, of course (esp. the three most of us know best, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam — fundamentalism across the board seems as a rule to do far more harm than good; but none of these religions is primarily fundamentalist)
That’s a totally legit answer-perspective. Totally agree with you and appreciate your response.
As always, you have a GIFT, maybe earned through hard work, but a GIFT, nevertheless, for writing so well and so clearly. How many other atheists out there, besides you, are able to see so much good in this mess, confusion, and mystery of Christianity?
Thanks! And how many atheists out there are New Testament scholars?! 🙂
Hi bart
In deuternonomy 21 there is a mention of a hanging on a tree, do you think it means crusifixion because there were only 4 thipes of punisment alowed for killing i have head
It’s referring to hanging a corpse on a tree as a post-execution shaming (like putting someone’s head on a stake)
An off-topic question. When, where, and by whom did the idea of demons as fallen angels enter into Christian theology? According to 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 1:6 the fallen angels are chained up in hell until the Christian judgment day and, therefore, are not free to go around possessing people etc. Dictionaries simply define demons as evil spirits and, as far as I can tell, nowhere in the biblical writings does it say what demons are, where they came from, nor why they are evil. I was unable to find an answer to this question from AI and various web searches. So, your help is needed in answering this question.
It comes from early Jewish traditions, after the Hebrew ible. You can find a detailed myth about the fall of angels in the first sectoin of the book of 1 Enoch, which is a mythological expolsitoin of the biarre story of Genesis 6 where the Sons of God become ienamoured of human women and come down and copulate with them….
A point to explore might be why we are more responsive to distant tragedies of scale than we might to an individual’s tragedy in our own back yard. Is it just me, or is it easier to sympathize with someone suffering through circumstances not of their own making? Or who aren’t likely to ask/need help again? The contrast between near and distant “altruism” could shed some light on its roots and limits.
Maybve it’s easier to be concerned about someone you don’t know than someone you don’t like….
Very much looking forward to reading your latest book since caring for others and ethics in general are under such assault in the current political context.Everyone, but especially fundamentalist Christians need to be reminded that Jesus taught an ethic of love, not exclusion.
Hi bart
Is psalm 22 first par written after the babylonian exile and the latter part in 4 century bce also the suffering servant is a metaphor for the entire nation of Israel – this meaning is found in the 3 century ce, if i am not wrong does this mean it coul originaly meant the some one else?
I’m not aware of arguments/reasons for thinking that Psalm 22 was written at two different times by different people.
Is the First person in the start of iseah 49 the nation of israel and if so is it normal for the bible to use a metafoor in the sence of bringing the nation of israel in the first person?
Yes, v. 3 shows that it’s Israel speaking in the first person as “the servant” of the Lord.
I recently read a book summarizing research in psychology: Elephant in the Brain: Hidden Motives in Everyday Life by Robin Hanson & Kevin Simler (2017, Oxford)
One chapter is about charity. Among the findings are these:
▪︎ Only around 13% of donations in the U.S. go to the global poor where they are more likely to save lives.
▪︎ Few of us do any research to determine whether charities are effective.
This suggests that we are charitable for reasons other than maximizing the benefits to those in greatest need. One theory is we donate to feel good about ourselves, to get a warm glow. This helps to explain why we prefer to make many small donations to various causes: we get more good feelings than we do by signing up for automatic giving to a highly efficient charity preventing malaria in Africa.
Other factors are that we give more when being watched, when there is peer pressure, when recipients are local and individually identifiable. We rarely donate anonymously because we like to be recognized.
Thanks!
Communal Altruism
The followers of Jesus were of one heart and mind. None claimed possessions as their own, and they held everything in common. When there was need among them, land or dwellings were sold, and proceeds given to each according to need. Acts 4:32-35
I’m skeptical, and I look forward to the documents or other references that will back up your assertion. I have an anti-Christian view as it pertains to the early Church because of the reality of the Inquisition. I don’t view (especially) early Christianity as a humanistic endeavor.
Hi, Bart,
1) Does the word soul appear in the OT? If yes, in what way?
2) I’ve heard a commentary on Genesis 4 saying that since in hebrew “woman” and “wife” have the same word, we cannot know if Adam and Eve were married. What do you think?
1. It refers to that part of human that makes them alive (nephesh).
2. I don’t know what it would mean for them to be married. Certainly not in a church.
I wonder a bit about this framing. Most people seeing the word “altruism” probably think of it in contrast with egoism or self-interest, which as you point out is hardly what pre-Christian Hellenic philosophy defended. Rather, it’s that the *sphere* within which one had a duty to act selflessly was far more constrained than “toward all humanity.”
But then, I think it’s at best pretty unclear whether Jesus and his earliest followers always had such a broad conception either, or whether the injunction to love and aid your “neighbors” and “brothers” had a more limited referent—such as fellow believers, or at best promising potential converts. Certainly it seems as though that was the practical understanding throughout most of the theory of Christendom.
That would have constituted an important shift in the parameters of the potential in-group due moral regard, enabling broader cooperation across ethnic boundaries, but it would still ultimately have been a redefinition of the in-group, rather than the kind of radical discontinuity implied here.
I’m skeptical of this claim, although I’m very interested in reading your book. As a philosopher, I’m more inclined to differ from your view that caring for the perfect stranger is not biologically predisposed. I highly recommend you read the book _Unto Others_ by Elliott Sober and David Sloan Wilson. I also recommend reading the book by Peter Singer, _The Expanding Circle_. I think that both books will help nuance your approach to this subject.
Having said that, I don’t mean by all this that Christianity did not help create a more altruistic world. But I think that there are many other factors that play very important roles in altruistic behavior.
yes, I’ve read Sorer and Wilson very carefully. I don’t think they contradict the view at all. Do you have a passage of their book in mind? It’s a TERRIFIC book, btw. Peter Singer, of course, is not an evolutionary biologist. His effective altruism is an implementatoin of the older Christian view in a secular context that presupposes the importance of altruism, but does not of course explain where the impulse came from.
I’m really looking forward to it!!
Some reactions:
I recently heard on ‘the rest is history’ that a key driver of Hitler’s antisemitism was that he blamed the Jews for Christian altruism.
Also of some interest is the book ‘the WEIRDest people in the world’s in which, among other things, the author claims that a series of church edicts on marriage in the 4th century undermined kin-based society.
Finally, I wonder whether a large empire fosters altruism in that small tribes or nations often have many enemies next door, but in a large empire, the nation next door are more or less in your side now?
Just some random thoughts your summary provoked.
Ray
If you have a reference for the claim aout Hitler’s antisemitism, I’d love to see wit. And I’d say that historicall larger empires don’t at all foster greater altruism. Think: our current age!
Similar to my comment on the later post (which I read first): I suspect this kind of altruism actually is in our DNA. The teachings of Jesus put certain evolved but un-articulated altruistic tendencies (also known as “survival of the friendliest”) into actual words and then deeds — deeds which the recipients liked and benefited from and then paid forward to others. My best as you do your deep dive into all this!
I wonder if altruism might be an extension of the non-zero-sum relationships seen in the family, which than carried over into the tribe. Perhaps Jesus’ apocalyptic teachings were a form of this – and were reflected in Acts end-times communities.
Agreeing with normative. With due respect Dr. Ehrman, I know your practice show splendid examples of altruism and charity. But your thesis needs critiquing: // My claim is that as Christianity spread throughout the ancient world after Jesus’ death, it revolutionized the understanding of ethical obligation, [etc.] //
First, as you note, Jesus was an observant and practicing Jew, so his practice, in general, can be presumed to be based on OT teachings about charity towards ‘neighbors’ and this clearly was in the OT extended to non-Jews such as the widow at 1 Ki 17:8, Naaman at 2 Ki 5:1, and Ruth (4:15). So my first point is that one should take a neutral stance (regarding Christian claims of ‘one of a kind’); assume, like Sanders, continuity in general with Judaism (Tanach) on most matters, including ‘charity’ to strangers. Jesus’ main innovation, I submit, possibly lies in the teaching of “love your enemies.”
{I respectfully request allowance of 400 words further to make a couple historical points. Thanks, Hal White.}
Bart, I would like to offer two additions to the origins of Altruism, if I may good Sir.
1) Siddhartha Gautama, aka Buddha, and the ancient manuscripts of Buddhism (founded 6 centuries earlier than Yeshua bar Yosef’s teachings) could be well argued that Siddhartha Gautama initiated Altruism well before Yeshua ever did. And…
2) The great late scholar and entomologist E.O. Wilson presented a compelling argument and evidence that humanity’s moral codes and origins even began well before Buddha in a more socio-evolutionary process over several millenia. The book and journal articles? “The Social Conquest of Earth.” Wilson believed that genes that predispose people toward cooperative behavior would have come to dominate the human population over thousands of generations, giving rise to moral sentiments. And by default or natural selection, Altruism.
Just something for everyone to chew on. (wink)
1. Yup, I’lll be dealing only with explainining the western tradition
2. And yup, evolution is absolutely the key. But the “cooperatoin” evolutionarily was in-group. Members of a social group were not at all inclined to help members of other groups within the species, just as is true of other primates still.
Yes, I must applaud you for tackling this worthy subject. And I pretty much have to agree with you on your 2nd point: we still to this day possess those genes/traits of jealous territorial resource hoarding or stealing them and often look after only our own like-minded community at the expense of the whole species. True Dr. Ehrman. We are indeed still primates in many ways.
Thank you kindly for taking the time to reply. 🙏
Non-Christian countries are less altruistic than Christian countries? Japan?
Nope. I’m talking about the western tradition. Humans don’t have the DNA to help strangers, but they can develop the inclination for cultuiral reasons, and thereasons in Japan were not the same as in th ewest.
I recall someone saying that behavior can come before evolution. For instance, feathers didn’t evolve to enable flight. But they did enhance, as a byproduct, the kind of behavior that eventually led to full flight as flying evolved via natural selection.
I have read in the Christianity Today magazine many times that the majority of Christians do not come near to tithing ten percent at their church. Many churches support local and world wide missions to help the poor as well as evangelize of course. I have talked to many over the years who say that the practice of tithing ended with the New Testament. I am proud to say that my church eliminated medical debt for hundreds of people in my area and supports many missions local and worldwide. The medical debt was paid off for people we didn’t even know. A letter was mailed to them stating that their debt was paid off by my church.
Whoa.
I more than tithed. But anyways at a SF Chinatown church my sister’s in-laws grew up in. I specifically gave money 11 years ago to benefit the missionaries. What was done was how ever much I gave them was deducted from its missionary account & added to the general account.
Boy I felt taken!
Hi Bart,
I don’t know if you are aware of this, but from your article I doubt it. I think it was in 2011 that Peggy Mason, a neuroscientist at the University of Chicago tested rats for altruistic behaviour. I’m pretty sure that they had not read the Hebrew Bible.
She placed rats in pens with two cages, one containing another rat and the other some chocolate chips. The free rats could easily have eaten the chocolate themselves but instead most of the rodents opened both cages and shared the sweets.
Jeffrey Mogil, a psychologist at McGill University, thought that the rats might be simply trying to silence the trapped rats distress calls, but Peggy does not think this is the case and I think she has carried out further experiments to prove otherwise. If this is the case, then altruistic behaviour may not be as “unnatural” as you think!
A short YouTube video called Helping a Cagemate in Need, is worth a look.
Looking forward very much to reading your new book.
Regard
Dave Evans
Regarding ancient Greece and Rome not being altruistic, this paper ( https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/bitstream/handle/10822/557692/McCann_georgetown_0076M_11956.pdf ) points out, among other examples of altruism:
“During the late first century CE, the Roman emperor Nerva (96-98 CE) initiated a
program, known as alimenta, to provide annual monetary aid to benefit the children of
various communities throughout Italy and the Roman Empire.”
Regarding Jesus inheriting altruism from the Hebrew Bible, doesn’t the Hebrew Bible teach very anti-Gentile teachings, such as Jews should never own fellow Jews as slaves, but should only own Gentile people and their children as slaves who they can pass ownership of to their children as an inheritance “forever”(Exodus 25:44-46)? It also teaches Jews not to practice usury on fellow Jews, but only practice usury on Gentiles (Deuteronomy 23:20).
You wrote “strict ethical injunctions of Jesus himself.” Since the Gospels were all written by anonymous authors (thank you for pointing this important fact out), shouldn’t it be “strict ethical injunctions ATTRIBUTED to Jesus”?
If I remember correctly, you had said Jesus believed the end of the world was coming very soon and if people wanted to be on God’s good side when that happened, they should be charitable. This removes altruism from Jesus.
You may want to read up on the food dole in Rome if you’re really interested in it. You might start with Garnsey’s book on Famine and Food Supply in ancient Rome. He gives an exhaustive survey of what we know.
And yes, much of Israelite history was very nationalistic. And yes, the Gospels cannot be used uncritically to establish what Jesus actually taught.
Thanks for your response, Dr. Ehrman. I will definitely read Famine and Food Supply in Ancient Rome.
Since the Hebrew Bible was/is loaded with cruelty and greed, how did Jesus inherit altruism from it? From my layman’s perspective, Jesus endorsed the cruelty and greed of the Hebrew Bible and believed it was the Word of God. For example, in Matthew 5:17-19 the anonymous author of Matthew has Jesus saying he did not come to destroy the law or the prophets, he came to fulfill them, and “Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” In addition to this, Matthew 15:1-6 has Jesus angry with the Pharisees due to their not following Torah commands to kill children who curse their parents.
The Hebrew Bible has many examples of obeying commands allegedly from God but really from the clergy in order for personal and national benefits to be received. That’s not altruistic.
Thanks again for answering questions and for letting me know about Garnsey’s book!
It’s kinda like asking how Americans can be moral if they have laws that oppress people and engage in wars that kill the innocent. We all pick and choose.
Until last decade, I believed that Jesus = Bible, because the Word is the Bible
How the author of Gospel of John:
1In the beginning [before all time] was the Word ([a]Christ), and the Word was with God, and [b]the Word was God Himself. 2He was [continually existing] in the beginning [co-eternally] with God.
Other stuff we learned in Sunday School as the great Yale professor taught: I would never allow my children [as minors] read the Bible.
I know you are only writing about the Western Conscience, but I have concerns about the title. Researchers have identified several types of altruism. The title refers to only pure or moral altruism.
Also, if you call it “The Invention of Altruism: How the Teachings of Jesus Transformed the Conscience of the West,” it sounds like altruism didn’t exist before Jesus. I know you do not mean that.
For anyone interested:
Others are:
Reciprocal Altruism
Genetic Altruism
Group-Selected Altruism
Nepotistic Altruism
Digital Altruism
Kinship Altruism
Altruism in non-Western traditions:
In Sikhism, altruism is essential. The central faith is that the most extraordinary deed anyone can do is live godly qualities like love, affection, sacrifice, patience, harmony, and truthfulness. Sevā, or selfless service to the community for its own sake, is an essential concept in Sikhism.
In Hinduism, mass donating clothes to poor people (Vastraseva), blood donation camps or mass food donation (Annaseva) for poor people is typical in various Hindu religious ceremonies.
Altruism is fundamental in many other religions, including Jainism, Judaism, and Buddhism.
The one teaching of Jesus I have not found in other groups is “Loving your enemy”.
I look forward to reading your book.
Thanks!
Gradient scales is one way to understand this topic. I’ll use obsessive compulsive behaviors and autism spectrum disorder as two examples. No single behavior is a concrete example, but a spectrum exists within which tendencies toward certain ways of behaving within the spectrum.
Have you considered treating altruistic behaviors withing a spectrum that can be indicated by certain characteristics?
I’m not planning on approaching it scientifically that way, but I think you’re right, it’s a broad spectrum on multiple registers (intent, motivation, result, effect, etc)
if I’ve understood this correctly, it sounds like your argument is not so much that Jesus was a uniquely transformational and innovative moral teacher, but that the post-resurrection Jesus *movement* became a conduit for carrying *Jewish* moral frameworks into what became “the West”? Which in some senses would be an unintentional and ironic side-effect of what started as a “final generation” apocalyptic sect.
But that also raises the question of how much Jesus deserves the *credit* for this outcome. It also raises the question of how much an argument like this can avoid feeding “Christian supremacist” narratives of Christianity/Jesus as being unique and ethically superior to every other philosophy or religion…
My argument is that Jesus universalized the Jewish notion of helping those in need so that it applied not only to fellow Jews but all people. Other Jewish teachers may have done the same, but it was the followers of Jesus who took this message and spread it through the empire eventually to transform the moral conscience of the west (since it was not the view held in the culture widely previously)
How will you define altruism? I get the sense you think it cannot be pure but exists to varying degrees. At what degree does it become virtuous?
Animals demonstrate altruistic behaviour. Orcas have been observed feeding wounded family members. One of my Labradors once stopped eating (big deal for a Lab) to check on the other when the other started coughing. These examples are limited to family/friends yet suggest that type of altruism is natural. What’s to stop it from extending to strangers?
My wife once saw a picture of a baby alligator and said it was cute. I see why finding human babies cute helps people pass on their genes. Why a baby alligator? Perhaps it’s a form of spillover. Could the same occur with altruistic behaviour?
Normalcy depends on context. Aggression is good if you need to hunt or protect your family. It is bad if it inclines you to pick a fight you cannot win or decline a chance at mutual benefit. When is egoism vs altruism appropriate?
If altruism developed independently in different cultures, might that suggest there is some natural tendency to be altruistic, and that over time this developed to be viewed more an obligation?
Yes, I’ll have a discussoin of what altruism meand — to evolutionary biologists (typically it involves behavior that benefits others and what causes it) and philosophers and psychologists (who are also or even more often interested in motivations) On some level it’s definitely in our DNA, but “motivation” is a tricky topic, and I’d say it’s almost impossible to think in terms of any action that is *purely* without (potential or real) egoistic motivatoin
What about altruistic behaviour towards animals? I’m not sure to what extent, if any, that existed in the ancient world. Plenty of people in modern times are activists, vegans, and willing to feed the stray cat. Would you argue that was influenced by Judaism and Christianity? If not, where does that come from if not a natural inclination to care for others or be compassionate?
I think that people have competing drives and instincts, and that much of the variation between people comes from temperament. There is no doubt that social mores influence behaviour as well. Nature and nurture. Will you be drawing on psychological and anthropological evidence?
Yes, I will, in part to show what’s distinctive about the Christian ethic that developed, which is not evolutionarily or psychologically “natural” but driven by social and cultural pressures. In antiquity: virtually no sense of altruism toward animals. They were to serve.
Forgive me if this a repeat of something you have already said – also forgive if the example detail is wrong: If Jesus has a pattern of expanding Jewish law (ex love your neighbor —> love your enemies) then wouldn’t it make sense that he would teach to expand a tradition of helping family / similar social economic “others” to all “strangers”? It then becomes hardwired into the future western societies as the message was spread even outside the church since more than just Christians benefit from the practice. I guess your premise just makes sense to me. I’m glad I’m not the one having to support it through historical research.
Personally, Jesus may be the inspiration for altruism in general but not to the point of action. Action for me comes from the access to information (the need) and the good feeling I get when helping others (the reward). It feels more hardwired than learned. Thank you for the opportunity to input.
Yup, that’s pretty much what I’ll be arguing.