Loading...Last weekend I escaped from all the distractions of daily life in Durham to our mountain retreat in order to write. I’m here in solitude, Sarah is in London for the holidays. I’ll be joining her next week. I have all the amenities of modern life here: but no TV, no neighbors, no noise, no traffic.
Writing is very hard under the best of circumstances. But oh boy is it easier in the best of circumstances. Most scholars find it literally impossible to write during the semester. Just can’t do it. You have classes. Class preparation. Students to meet. Departmental meetings. Committee meetings. University commitments. If you have a graduate program there is a constant flow of work: advising, scheduling, working with students on exams, directing master’s theses and PhD dissertations, helping students with pedagogy, counselling them about professionalization, reading their prospective conference papers and articles for publication, oral defenses, reading groups. It’s a lot. Then if you have an active speaking schedule or do other local service commitments… well not much writing gets done. For most of the even best intentioned professors, very little indeed during term time.
The upside of the university professorship, of course, is the time off. Holiday time is highly welcome, but most of the free time is spent first grading then getting ready for the next semester’s courses. For most professors, the summer is the one time they can do any serious work. A lot of my colleagues are so mentally exhausted at that point that it’s hard to do as much as they’d like, even if they put in the hours.
That’s why the beneficent cosmos created sabbaticals, time off from other duties to do research and writing. It wasn’t so professors could watch soaps and eat bon-bons for a semester, or a year. It’s so they can do what they’re getting paid to do: be active and productive scholars.
I have taken full advantage of my academic leave, and am now at a point where I can start showing it. This ten-day retreat is my burst into it.
As many of you know, my current project is …
If you’re not a blog member, you should join! You get five posts a week, almost all of them on intriguing issues connected with the New Testament and early Christianity — not the fluff you normally find on the Internet, but serious scholarship from a historical perspective. Joining is cheap and easy, and all proceeds go to charities helping those in need.
Fantastic insight into a process I know nothing about. Thank you for sharing.
I thank you too.
Hmm, wondering why the katabases of Enoch didn’t make the cut…?
For the Bible you mean? Good question. I guess it just wasn’t circulated or popular enough?
Dr Ehrman,
“Off to London for the holidays” – do you mean London, UK?
If so, are you giving any talks there that the public are able to attend?
I’m afraid not. My wife is a Brit and we go over there a good bit for family. Maybe next summer I can have some kind of blog dinner though….
That sounds like a good idea and i would like to apply….
Best wishes and Happy Christmas, Andrew.
I know this I would be going beyond the scope of your project, but it would be interesting to add in an Eastern katabasis, such as either the Egyptian or Tibetan Book of the Dead.
Yes, I thought about it. But I ended up deciding that these had little relevance for the development of Christian ideas….
I am asking for a straight-forward answer from Mike Licona that I believe is critical to understanding the scholarship of evangelical scholars. Why won’t Licona *honestly* answer it? We know he believes in the “testimony of the Holy Spirit” because he says so on his facebook page.
Question: Does Michael Licona, as an evangelical Christian, believe that the resurrected Jesus sent a spirit, the Holy Spirit, to “dwell” within him, “testifying” truths to him, including the historicity of the bodily resurrection of Jesus?
I don’t know the answer. My guess is that he would say yes, but that the historicity can be established on strict historiographic grounds as well, without faith or the Spirit.
People believe the “Holy Spirit” tells them so many different things, from love your neighbor to kill your children (yes, some people have really thought the latter and, tragically, acted upon it).
Dr.Ehrman, in a conversation with a Christian friend recently, the topic of the intent of the Gospel writers came up. My friend insisted that there was nothing those writers could gain by penning false reports. They weren’t monetarily recompensed, and writing anonymously seems to indicate that they weren’t writing for fame or honor. Why else would they write the gospels, except as a history? (He argues)
How would you respond?
I agree, they probably had nothing to gain. But your friend’s assumption is that they knew they were giving false information. That’s not the case at all. They thought what they said was true. Just as he himself no doubt says all sorts of things about, say, ancient Israel or Jesus that are factually not true — but he doesn’t know it. He says what he says because he thinks it’s true. Almost certainly that’s the case with the Gospel writers as well.
Thank you for responding.
I guess I’m talking about when they employ literary devices, such as the sayings on the cross. Don’t scholars think that most of those sayings were invented by the Gospel writers (as opposed to being part of the oral tradition) to further their overall narrative?
I suppose that’s the answer, but I would love to see a blog post on the intent of the gospel writers. It can’t be solely to record oral history, because each book seems to have a definite (and different) theme.
Yes, they were certainly invented. But there’s nothing that indicates these writers themselves invented such things, knowing they were false. More likely they were stories floating arund that they heard. I talk about this kind of thing a good deal in my book Jesus Before the Gospels.
You have all the amenities of modern – civilised – life there: no TV, no neighbors, no noise, no traffic. Yay! Best of luck. May your thoughts and pen flow freely!
Already signed up for your UNC seminar on the subject in Feb. Looking forward to it, really interesting subject.
Great! It’s tricky getting all this research into four lectures, but I’m going to try to pick the most important and interesting stuff. We’ll see!
Although it can’t/won’t be part of your current project, I am wondering if (in you research) you encountered any concepts of katabasis in Eastern (e.g. Chinese) traditions/cultures.
I”m afraid I’ve never moved farther East than ancient Mesopotamia. But I’d love to know what’s out there! (There are certainly, in the modern world, traditions of Near Death Experiences in East Asia, which are interesting to compare with those in the West. Unlike the western versions, Jesus doesn’t show up in them! Well, unless the person is already a Christian)
What is katabasis?
Sorry, I thought I defined it. It means “going down,” and it’s the technical term for narratives of a living person visiting the realms of the dead.
Good to see you have an escape place in the Blue Ridge Mountains.
And right next to the Smokies. Gorgeous part of the universe.
You are one of a kind and I have been privileged to know a lot of very gifted people. As Trump once said at the start of a hurricane: “Good luck! Be safe!”
So what do you hope to accomplish with this book? Is this fresh ground for academics or is it well-trodden ground but you have a fresh take on it?
It’s an interesting question and not easy to answer, since in some ways it is definitely yes and kind of yes. I think I’ll write a blog post on it! Thanks.
Bart,
While you are writing new books, I’ve been reading some of your older ones. I just got through reading your book Misquoting Jesus and Luke Timothy Jones’s response book, Misquoting Truth. There’s one argument that Jones makes that seems strong to me, but I don’t know enough about the evidence to judge the merits of his claim.
In Misquoting Truth, Timothy Jones makes a claim about the authorship of the Gospels. In a nutshell, he claims: “When each congregation received a copy of a Gospel, the congregation also received an oral tradition about the origins of that Gospel. As a result, when it became necessary to describe names and authors to the Gospels, every congregation connected the same author’s name with the same Gospels.” If it weren’t so, he says, we wouldn’t see a unity of title in the churches across the Roman Empire.
He points out: “The identification of the author of a Gospel never varies in any New Testament fragment or manuscript that has its title intact. This unity of titles isn’t limited to one region of the Roman Empire – examples of this unity may be found in manuscripts from the western portions of the ancient empire all the way to North Africa, Egypt, and Asia Minor. [if there wasn’t an oral tradition of authorship attached to a Gospel,] Each church would have connected a different author with each gospel. Churches in Asia minor might have ascribed a Gospel to the Apostle Andrew, while churches in Judea might have connected the same Gospel with James or Jude.” But that’s not what happened.
Can you please give me some help with this one? Thanks!!
It’s a great question, but like lots of great questions very complicated. I know a lot of people (including authors) like to have a one-line answer to an argument, but most good questions are harder than that. I deal with the question at length in my book Jesus Interrupted (pp. 102-12). I *started* answering it here as a comment, but my answer got longer and longer, and I realized I need to write a whole post on it, in part so others can see it. So I’ll do that! Very, very short answer (answeirng a question with a quesiton!): yes, by around 200 CE there was an oral tradition giving the names of the authors of the Gospels. But when did the tradition start? (There were also traditions that Jesus had been a mischievous Wunderkind, a bratty Son of God as a five year old, circulating at this time. Do we think those traditions are “original”?) Anyway, I’ll get to all that later in my post.
Dr. Ehrman,
Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman, in their book, The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology’s New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts (2002) concluded the traditional archaeology of the Davidic and Solomonic period is wrong. Therefore, the Biblical David and Solomon cannot be historically accurate.
Furthermore, the Saul-David-Solomon story is less than historically accurate and therefore they must be relegated to characters of historical fiction because the historically accurate Saul is Labayu, Labaya who was in correspondence with Akhen-aten, centuries earlier (Amarna Letters, discovered 1887). Because David must be connected to Saul, David is moved back from approximately 910 BCE to 1340 BCE or David did not succeed Saul, allowing Solomon and David to remain in the 910 – 880 BCE time frame.
This weakens the historical accuracy of Jesus who was claimed to have been a descendant of King David. David is not firmly established in history at 910 BCE because Saul-Labayu/a wrote to Akhen-aten and correspondence is found in the Amarna Letters.
Question #1: Not only from a genealogical perspective but from a broader historical perspective, the things that David and Solomon supposedly did could not have been done 300+ years earlier. David and Solomon of the 1300s BCE must have different biographies than the David and Solomon of the 910 – 880 BCE time frame?
Question #2: That the bold line between David and Jesus has become a dotted line or even a broken line changes Jesus’ backstory, yes?
1. Yes, I completely agree with their analysis. Most of the stories about David and Solomon — virtually all of them — are legendary; 2. Yes, I think it’s impossible to demonstrate that Jesus was connected with David through a patrilinear line. That said:
3. He was almost certainly connected to David through *some* kind of genealogical line, since virtually all Jews in his day would have been, given how genealogical lines spread over the generations; 4. None of that has any bearing on the historicity of Jesus or of anyhting he said or did (issues to be resolved on other grounds)
Bart
None of that has any bearing on the historicity of Jesus or of anything he said or did (issues to be resolved on other grounds)
Steefen
Six Degrees of Separation (film)
The plot of the film was inspired by the real-life story of a con man and robber who convinced a number of people in the 1980s that he was the son of actor Sidney Poitier.
Given two people, one who traces his family tree back, along a string of real human beings vs one who traces his family tree back to a character of historical fiction, the former has a better record of descent / record of ancestry than the latter. The latter is somewhat fraudulent, misrepresenting his record of descent. This does have bearing on the authenticity of Jesus.
This is important New Testament Criticism.
Let’s look at some verses relevant to Jesus as Son of David:
Mt 1: 1
Mt 12: 23
Mt 15: 22
Mt 21: 9 where Jesus is a Solomon figure as Son of David to be crowned king
Mk 10: 48
Mk 12: 35
Jn 7: 42
Romans 1: 3
2 Timothy 2: 8
Revelation 5: 5
https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Jesus-As-Son-Of-David
Let’s say the Biblical Jesus was a descendant of a 10th Century BCE northern Pharaoh (whose name means My star [not David’s Star] rises in my city [not David’s city] ) instead of a descendant of a 10th Century BCE King David, Jesus’ theological and biological anchor in pedigree would be disqualifying.
Sure we can say, the Pharisees, the common people, the authors of Mt, Mk, Jn, 2 Timothy, and Revelation were all mistaken, nevertheless, the historical Jesuses: 1) the Woe-Saying Jesus, 2) Jesus of Gamala/Galilee with his mariners who fought Vespasian and Titus at the Battle of Galilee; and the Biblical Jesus all still existed.
10 verses in the New Testament have lost some if not all credibility with David being a character of historical fiction, or worse, a 10th Century pharaoh who would know, via amduats, something about the valley of the shadow of death, comforted by thy rod and thy staff [any visit to a museum with an Egyptian wing would show the flail and crook symbol of resurrection, iconography of Osiris, Lord of the Resurrection].
Dr. Ehrman: Mike Licona has posted my full name, details about my business, and my geographical location in his recent guest post here on your blog. He has provided sufficient information for any right-wing nut job to track me down at my place of business.
As a paying member of your blog, I expect my private information to remain private. Please instruct Mr. Licona to remove my identifying information from your blog immediately.
Sorry, I don’t know what you’re talking about. Please send me a private email with the details, at [email protected], and I will take cre of it.
Have a well deserved holiday and Merry Christmas.
Thanks! You too.
I recall reading a comment you had made about Albert Schweitzer on how he was studying in medical, writing a book and learning music all at the same time.. I am not sure if that’s the order in which you spoke of him.The point is he was a busy man. You sounded impressed by his work ethic and so was I. It does not surprise me when you say you love these challenges and balance your life/work commitments. Dan Dennett, probably said it best when talking about the secret of happiness, ” If you want to be happy, find something greater than you and dedicate your life to it “. Just curious, you may have answered this in the past, who has influenced you in your life/work the most? BTW, wherever you are it sounds your in tune with nature. Don’t hesitate to call upon us if a scribe is needed. Enjoy the most wonderful time of the year, Bart.
I haven’t had just one person who has inspired me in my work, but many many, most of whom you would not have heard of, but they include great 19th and 20th century scholars, in addition to Schweitzer, from F. C. Baur, to Walter Bauer, to Adolf von Harnack; Fenton John Anthony Hort and Brooke Foss Westcott; and my own teachers such as Jerry Hawthorne, Cullen Story, and Bruce Metzger. And many many others, all of whom had mind-boggling work ethics and complete dedication to their scholarship.
I don’t know if you have already addressed this but have you considered the historical significance of mind altering drugs within the ancient religious traditions? We have a pretty good idea many substances we’re available as attested in: https://www.ancient-origins.net/opinion-guest-authors/drugs-ancient-cultures-history-drug-use-and-effects-006051.
More specific, I personally think of the many auditory and visionary experiences depicted in both Hebrew and New Testament Scriptures that appear similar to those caused by hallucinogenics.
I don’t think we have the evidence to decide one way or the other. Our historical records are just way to sparse.
Prof. Ehrman,
Will you be doing another guest spot on the Unbelievable podcast during your time in the UK? I really enjoyed watching the video of your last debate with Peter J Williams. Merry Christmas!
Not this time. But possibly after my next book is out.
> For this book there has been tons of English, of course, but also a whole lot of French, a good bit of German, and some Italian.
Perhaps a bit off the topic of the thread, but do you find anything of use in the Iberian romance languages (Spanish and Portuguese and variants)? I assume that if you read French and Italian those wouldn’t be hard to pick up.
There are occasionally Spanish articles, but not as many as the other European languages.
How did the “small, insignificant people” inadvertently launch a religious revolution that transformed the world?
I think this was a question you asked and one I’ve been asking that is the basis for my course, When Christians Were Jews. An analogous question is how did this small, insignificant people produce a “Moses,” without whom there would be no Jesus, and no Muhammed. That’s a study of roots! Can you as a historian account for this happening? Aren’t you tempted to think there’s more to history than history? You must have when you were at Moody. I find these questions fascinating. Because I cannot bring myself to accept divine agency in the world or the idea of a divine mover, I’m stuck, as I imagine you are. Where are you in addressing these issues?
Here’s the other question I am searching for an answer to: How did it happen that Jews could believe that God could impregnate an earthly woman who could give birth to a god/man? Then, if Jesus was god, how could god be killed? That’s a serious question for a court of law.
I’ve listened to enough of your lectures to know that you don’t buy any of this theological mystery stuff, and I’m with you with the notion that Jesus was an apocalyptical prophet. I’m fascinated by your discussion of the theological and apocalyptic evolution that occurred after Mark.
Thank you again for reading my questions and thoughts. I will sign up for your blog and gladly contribute to your charity.
The first question is the precise topic of my most recent book The Triumph of Christianity. The second question: I’m not sure many Jews did believe in a virgin birth. It would depend on whether we think Matthew was Jewish or not.
Hi Bart, would you mind giving us a few ideas about note taking tricks you use when doing research? Thanks
I have to determine early on whether *everything* the person says is worth taking notes on, or just some things, or if … anything. Or if I just need to write a paragraph summarizing the view set forht.. Do I need particularly memorable quotatoins. It just depends how important and novel it is, and whether I either completely disagree or am not learning anything from it. If the latter, I’ might just write a sentence. But I do it all on a word processor and just have large folders by topic.