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 not written into the ancient human DNA nor did it exist in the roots of our Western cultural heritage, in Greek civilization from the literary and philosophical greats of Homer and Plato onward or in the Roman world from its earliest history to its first Christian emperor Constantine many centuries later. The sense that anyone should help random strangers in far-away places was simply not part of the moral equation.
Why then is it part of the equation today? Why does this urge to provide assistance — for some of us quite intense, for others admittedly faint — seem like moral “common sense,” not just among religious folk but among agnostics and atheists as well, a common sense that affects not only our individual psyches and actions but also widely-held social agendas and governmental policies?
My argument in this book will seem obvious to some and implausible to others: the impulse to help strangers in need is part of our modern moral conscience because of the teachings of Jesus. My claim is that as Christianity spread throughout the ancient world after Jesus’ death, it revolutionized the understanding of ethical obligation, leading to a fundamental transformation in the moral conscience of the West.
This claim will seem counter-intuitive to a lot of people; that’s why it requires a book rather than two paragraphs! But the book is easily accessible and full of information not widely talked about or known to matter (how often do you yourself spend time thinking about Epicurus, Seneca, or Basil the Great?) (and how could most people possibly imagine they might be interesting?!?). And, in the author’s humble opinion, important. Maybe I said that already.
My publisher (as publishers always are) is interested in promoting pre-sales, purchases of the book before it comes out. To that end, we are making some nice offers. Check them out. Tell your family and friends. Put up some billboards. Here they are.
Free Companion Bonuses for Love Thy Stranger
Readers who preorder before February 15 will gain access to some educational extras. These are meant to extend the historical questions explored in the book and to give readers a chance to engage more directly with the issues I address in the book.
- A free two-lesson companion course, taught by yours truly, exploring the historical and ethical themes of Love Thy Stranger
- A live online event with me, including a moderated Q&A, scheduled for February 15.
- Additional curated materials — including three videos that I will prepare for the event (and only the event): one on the serendipities that happened that led to this book in the first place, one on why a non-believing agnostic-atheist would write a book celebrating a key element in the teachings of Jesus; one on a scarcely-known secret of publishing a book like this. These videos will be released only only to registered readers
From my end, a pre-order would do me a favor; it (weirdly in my view, but so it is) significantly affects the book’s visibility and reach even well after publication, and so helps historically-grounded scholarship find a wider public audience.
Unlock Your Access
To gain accesses to these extras, you only need to follow two simple steps:
- Pre-order the book. It’s available at all major book retailers or at your local bookstore.
- Visit www.lovethystranger.com to register and access your bonuses. Be sure to preorder and register before February 15 to attend the remote-pre-launch party with me.

Hello Dr.Bart Erhman
Where did the idea of the eternal punishment come from?
Is it a christian invention?
That’s the topic of my book Heaven adn Hell. There were Greek precedents that Christians in the second century combined (probaby without knowing it) with the teachings of Jesus to lead to the idea of eternal hell.
I am very, VERY, interested in seeing the enormous bibliography that you must have compiled in writing this extremely ambitious book! I am also interested in knowing what relevant scholars you have presented this work to for review!
Can you give a sneak peek at the bibliography and names of such scholars, especially the names of classical scholars not interested in supporting or refuting Christianity but simply interested in studying classical literature?
I imagine the process involved in your research could not have been simple: you mention DNA in your preview above. Kudos for branching out beyond your expertise and rigorously studying the specialized works of biologists! That must have been intense; and difficult, given that the impulse to aid another is considered by most biologists and zoologists to predate human origins. I am very excited to see how you debate both scientists and scholars of the classical period! Can’t wait!
I don’t include a bibliogrpahy in the book. The classicists I consulted included James Rives, Elizabeth Vandiver, and my brother (!) Radd Ehrman. Hope you enjoy the book!
Jesus did put a new emphasis on a moral obligation to strangers, but it has its roots in a biological impulse toward reciprocal altruism which paleoanthropology shows was present in archaic Homo.
Sure, humans have a natural tendency towards reciprocal altruism. You scratch my back, I scratch yours. That’s evolution, plain and simple.
But Jesus’ teachings went way beyond that. Loving your enemies, giving to people who can’t pay you back, caring for complete strangers – that’s not just “biology at work.” Matthew 5:44 and Luke 6:35 are radical because they demand self-giving love with no expectation of return.
And early Christian communities actually lived this out, not just talked about it. They fed the poor, sheltered widows, and cared for outcasts in ways that went completely against the norms in the Greco-Roman world.
Biology explains the instinct, but it doesn’t explain how Christianity systematized and normalized it as moral “common sense” for centuries.
But that’s exactly how evolution works. Adaptations that evolve for one reason become extended for others. Reciprocal altruism is not a “conscious” impulse, not something one does with expectation of return. It’s an unconscious adaptation, an extended behavioural phenotype. R.A. resulted in care for injured and infirm in archaic Homo, probably obviously starting with family and then tribe but this basic impulse became extended over time as our “tribe” enlarged. Keep in mind I didn’t say RE explains Jesus emphasis on moral obligation to strangers, I said it is the “root” of it.
I am not disputing that Jesus was a new phenomenon in putting a new emphasis on what he found in Leviticus 19:18. But it was an extension on what was already there. It’s like taking feathers that evolved for insulation and mating display and later adapting them for flight.
Couldn’t have put it better, myself! Excellent explanation!
I appreciate your work greatly and have learned a great deal from it. I do, however, have a concern about the framing of this project based on how you’ve described it here.
Highlighting the influence of Jesus’ teachings on concern for strangers may well be historically interesting, but presented in isolation it risks reinforcing the idea that Christianity itself is inherently or uniquely moral.
Given Christianity’s long history of exclusion, coercion, violence, and moral ambiguity — often justified by the same scriptures — this strikes me as an incomplete ethical picture.
In the current political climate, it seems entirely foreseeable that a selectively positive account of Christianity’s moral influence will be seized upon by bad actors to legitimize control, exclusion, or harm under the banner of “Christian values.”
I understand that all books have a limited scope. But when that limitation predictably distorts public understanding and reinforces moral authority claims that Christianity itself does not deserve, I think it raises an ethical question about framing and context — not intent.
I am afraid that this book will cast a dark shadow over all the good you have done.
I doubt you’ll feel that way once you read it — but we’ll see! I make a big emphasis that Christianity is not uniquely moral!!
Thanks for your reply! I definetly want to be wrong. I have no doubt about your intentions. There is just so much bad news lately, and we don’t need more. I think that one of the main sources of harm of Christianity (and other religions) is that they are seen as being somehow virtuous or a basis for morality. People tether themselves to that image to provide cover for their bad actions. I compare it to a money laudering organization. The good, sincere members give it a positive image, which acts as the ‘front’, and the bad actors hide behind that – so it basically acts as a ‘sin laundering operation’. I feel like we don’t need to add to the image. I don’t have an ax to grind against Christianity. I’m agnostic, but my father, grandfather, and 2 great grandfathers were Lutheran Ministers, and I grew up in a very positive Christian environment.
I agree! I regularly have people tell me that without Xty there would be morality. And that I myself have no reason to be moral since I don’t believe in God. Hmmm… Thanks for letting me know (I think to myself).
“I myself have no reason to be moral since I don’t believe in God”: exactly how I used to feel about non-Christians a couple decades ago. Understanding how morality could have evolved without a deity was crucial to my final mental de-conversion from Christianity. Bad actors may misuse your book (just as they misuse a lot of things non-Christians have said and written), but I think it will be very useful for those on the edge of de-conversion but still hesitant to take the leap of non-faith.
DNA is a part of this. Besides humans rats, dolphins, elephants and other primates help strangers. In a world of movement and migration everyone could be a stranger. Those who helped strangers got more help and more probable survive to multiply their non egoistic genes.
There are even other religions which order to help strangers.
I was going to pre-order anyway, as usual, but thanks for rewarding us who do. It’s appreciated.
Obviously, your latest book will arrive here in Croatia on holy Never!!!
I also don’t know if I can and how to Pre-order the book from Split and have all goes to it.
Thank you Geomirko
Is ebook also eligible for the pre order bonuses?
Yes.
I can’t wait to get my hands on a copy of this book!
In The Righteous Mind, Jonathan Haidt explores (among other things) why travelers leave tips for waiters they’ll never see again. He connects this behavior to what psychologists call the “free rider problem,” describing it as built-in mental mechanisms that subtly nudge people toward generosity, even with strangers. Others argue that the distinctive forms of generosity often associated with “Westerners” are a product of the Enlightenment.
I hope I’m not over-simplifying Haidt and others, but I think you’re onto something here. The first explanation doesn’t fully account for the historical scarcity of empathy towards strangers prior to Christ, and the second struggles to explain the earliest records of Christians showing radical compassion toward strangers long before the Enlightenment ever emerged. I’m really looking forward to seeing how you develop this argument!
Is there any mention in Love thy Stranger of the recent book Dominion by Tom Holland which I think covers similar ground?
Yes, I mention it in a footnote. It’s a remarkable book by a remarkable scholar. But it’s very different from mine, as you’ll see when you read it (mine). One of his chapters is similar to one of my overarching themes, but for the most part they are very different books.
I’ve preordered! I’m curious since you talk about charity and financial generosity in your book, do you talk about the administrative tax on charitable giving? I find it demoralizing at times knowing that money being given is often paying for organizational overhead rather than actually reaching those it’s meant for. I love how your blog really does give all proceeds to charity. I know some administrative costs are necessary, but it seems some organizations capitalize on the needs of others. “Poverty Inc” is an eye-opening documentary. Also, massive churches… the cost of keeping them operational seems counterproductive. I wonder if Christianity didn’t make a mistake when it outgrew people’s homes. It seems to me those humble beginnings were the best way to build community and provide for one another.
I don’t really get into that (I stick with the first several centuries of Christianity and how they transformed the way we think about morality), but it’s an extremely interesting topic. It’s always good to check what a charity’s overhead is!
Dr. Ehrman, I began listening to your latest book on Audible. I realized that Robert Petkoff is narrating it. He also narrates all the Star Trek novels. Are you a Star Trek fan? 🙂
Art Holdsworth
I was a fan of the original low-budget TV version! (And the first couple of movies).disabledupes{ba8f402abbb0065105a26c0459f88ab8}disabledupes