I love that Bart said he wrote a book arguing one way but then later wondered if he took the wrong side. Sign of a true researcher.

Now, THIS is the kind of podcast/lecture/information that I LOVE: exposing discrepancies in the Bible but more importantly explaining WHY and the MOTIVATIONS behind these discrepancies as well, all backed up by historical facts! Thank you very much Dr. Ehrman for sharing this knowledge with us, and Megan for hosting this podcast so beautifully.

Bart makes New Testament minutiae fascinating. Megan is an outstanding host and interviewer. Top class!

After a long day of work at the nursing home, time to sit down and listen to this lecture. Thanks Megan and Bart.

41:00 I have always wondered about the discrepancy between the Ascension accounts in Luke and in Acts. The timeline in Luke makes it very clear that Jesus ascends on the day of his resurrection, while Acts is just as clear that happens forty days later. It's nice to know that Bart is just as confused as I am.

It's always a great day when a new Bart/Megan video is up!!! As an ex Catholic who has been intrigued with the world's religions, I always learn so much from these. Thanks Bart and Megan!

Thank you Bart! An absolutely FASCINATING take on forgiveness vs atonement. I never even considered it as a factor, but it's key to everything I've been trying to figure out.

It has been at least 4 hours since the last time I watched a Bart Ehrman KZfaq video! I started my day by rewatching the one with Alex 'O Connor that came fresh yesterday, and after that I rewatched (for the 10th maybe time) the debate with Robert Price. Thank God for this notification and new clip! Phew!

What I enjoy about Bart is his fascination with the scholarship, without the blinders of faith. He's more human than his critics!

This discussion, more than any other, has made me excited about the importance of textual criticism. Fascinating!

These technical episodes are my favorite of this series. Thanks and please do more.

I hate when I'm so early there's not enough comments to read while I listen

Always find Dr. Ehrman’s explanations fascinating. Since he repeatedly notes that the author’s of the Gospels are anonymous and could not have been written by their namesakes, I always find it troubling when he refers to a Gospel’s author as Mark, Luke, Mathew or John. Seems like the author should be referred to as the “author of Mark, the “author of Luke”, etc.

I never noticed before the slight but actually significant differences in Luke over others when it comes to social and moral ethics!! 😮

Man this is so deep. It’s crazy to think we all once believed the bible was divinely inspired

Great discussion.

Great Job Prof Bart Erhman and Megan Lewis . These videos are super excellent . Thanks again

If Jesus went off by himself to pray, how would anyone know what went on? Did someone spy on him? Did he come out and say, “Wow, your not going to believe what happened to me. I was actually sweating blood!”? I have a lot of questions like this. Like how would anyone know what went on between Jesus and Pilate? Obviously none of his followers would have been privy to that. What about his forty days in the wilderness? Who witnessed that to write about it? I always liked the sermon on the mount, but who was there taking notes for Matthew to write about it 50 years later?

Always fascinating to hear what probably really happened in contrast to the familiar narratives we’ve all been brainwashed with since childhood. Thanks Bart for doing this important work!

31:36 - So in Luke's view, why does Jesus have to die if it's not for atonement?

Variant in Luke 2:48: One variant occurs in Luke 2:48, where Mary finds Jesus in the temple and says, "Your father and I have been looking all over for you." Some scribes changed the wording to omit calling Joseph the father, altering the dynamics of the dialogue. Variants in the Last Supper scene: The Last Supper scene in Luke contains variants. Specifically, the language referring to Jesus' body being broken for the disciples and his blood being shed for them is missing in some ancient Greek and Latin manuscripts.

Thank you. This helps me understand Luke. I still have many questions, so I will continue my search for answers.

Love your talks. I find them so captivating

As an atheist, I've gotten interested enough in Ehrman's scholarship pointing to the differences between the various gospels' theologies that I'm considering buying a study Bible. But I'm not sure whether a study Bible includes information about early versions of the text, which is such a crucial element of Bart's interpretive strategy. Does anyone know whether study Bibles deal with earlier versions? If not, what other sources might I consult without having to painstakingly compare all the different versions?

Another great episode!

The distinction between atonement and forgiveness is fascinating! The change over time has very interesting doctrinal ramifications.

Great content as usual. You are good people too, very clear talking about your kids. Impressive human beings!

I wish Bart dealt with Marcion's gospel of Paul and Steve Mason's 5 points of placing canonical luke in the second century.

Excellent episode. 👍

I've read the Bible cover to cover three times and I've read countless portions over the years. Many thanks to Megan and Bart for detailing some of the controversies I've noticed from my very first reading of the Gospels. I love the 'detective' angle of the analyses.

Great discussion on some important theology. Mark says atonement, ie some form of restitution while Luke is about forgiveness. The last supper must of been very stressful for the apostles. So it may not be surprising to get some differences in recollection.

Bart is great. I dont agree on everything with him but he is a hero when it comes to biblical scholarship.

This was a very satisfying discussion. Textual variants are Dr. Ehrman’s forte.

Interesting! Thank you!

I think it would be great to reference chapters/books of yours that are dedicated to these topics. Its a plug for you, plus we could read them afterwards and have this conversation to go on to better understand what we're reading. EDIT: at the end they say "Misquoting Jesus" and "Orthodox Corruption of Scripture"

less filler, more technical language, thanks!

39:30-39:38 In the same way the protoevangelium of jacob describes the physical details of Mary’s birth to combat gnosticism and marcionism that verse in “Luke” describes the physical suffering of a flesh-and-blood person.

Are there any other free courses?

Thank you.

ooh great hair!! I love this idea of how things change over time.

Ehrmans laugh is infectious. So great

On the question wether the writers were basing their Gospel on oral tradion or on Written sources, we can be sure they might have had plenty of written sources, but they mainly based there story on the Septuagint.

Where do we send questions?

I hope you guys can splice up some footage of your respective stays in the UK when you get back 😊

How about Marcions redaction and ground building work in the 2nd century. I recently heared that his collection and selection is the proto-gospel all 4 gospels derive from. Wouldnt it make sense?

I know that the autographs don't exist, but I'd love to read a version of the Bible that is actually based on what the experts believe to be most original. Is there such a thing? For example, I've long been told that NRSV is the best version, but even it still has things like Luke's 2-cup Eucharist.

Fascinating thank you

I should have listened till the very end of the podcast before writing my previous comment because Bart refers to this infancy gospel of Jesus in discussing oral tradition.

Question - how do scholars arrive at an approximate date for the writing of the original gospels?

Thank you

Thank you Magen and Bart for the life giving massage I say this because I rise as a child in a Greek family in Greece in a Jehovah’s Witness religion my grandmother got baptism in j/w religion in1924 I am third generation in the religion I spent 60 years of my life with many many ?? That no one can give me answers that did not make cense to me when I ask the Elders of Jworg they missed understanding me eventually desfelowship and call me apostasy attitude now the last 10 years family friends shunned I thank you dr Burt for your hard work to make life better for people like me see the light at the end of my waste life with the JWORG relationship as they told me at the last elders meting the read me a scripture from Corinthians they are handing me to satin likely from Burt happening to have a debate and I fell in his strong arms and wake me up by his logical knowledge being from Greece I understood historical arguments made sense from the start I use you wealth of information knowledge to help for those help themselves I referred tham to your channel I am free from nonsense now and smaller things Do mater thank you I don’t believe in Satan but if the Elders of Jehovahs w say you are I am honest the lucky ex Greek Jehovah’s Witness ever lived ❤ 😂 thank you Σας Ευχάριστο από την ❤❤❤❤

Such a pity that the other major religions do not have people like this man with the courage to speak the truth.

I've been going thru your Misquoting Jesus Q%As and as a (retired) (historian-- (ancient, medieval ) I very much enjoy the scholarly argumentation. Having taught the early church it occurred to me the reason there was so much theological conflict among the various Christian groups because all of them wanted to claim the brand "Jesus." In this theory, there were some key religious ideas with wide appeal: the end of this world, the appearance of the Son of Man or God, the coming of the Kingdom of God, etc. At a very early date, this complex of ideas got associated with Jesus of Nazareth and the battle for control of Brand Jesus was on. This is not a rigorous analysis, but it might be something that gives modern stt students something to chew on, and why people cared about such odd ideas and symbols.

Bart is the best because he found interest in the bits others ignored.

I would like to know how widespread the ability to read and write was during the writing of the gospels. I'm not even sure the disciples could read or write except for Mathew. That is one reason why I hesitate when thinking of the gospels actually being written by the apostles or disciples.

A lot of eye-opener information. One can still remain faithful but based on facts and deeper understanding on what they believe in.

The idea of Home Alone Jesus in the temple is hilarious.

Is Luke originally a Marcionite gospel? Does the lack of an atonement component make it more likely to have come from a Marcionite source?

I could listen to Bart preach for hours.. 🤗

enjoyed it but...Who was Luke? Did he write the original version of the gospel in Aramaic or Greek? could he have knowledge of the Greek language and to what extent? has his apparent knowledge of the classical Greek literal texts affected the way he writes and presents the events, as compared to the other evangelists?...all questions that Megan could have asked.

Needed a discussion of the version of 2/3 of "Luke" that existed before the writer of Acts rewrote it.

As a born and raised Jehovahs Witness. Indoctrinated in one teaching. It is so great to here these logical bible reviews.

Why not do an episode on the lost years of Jesus? It would be interesting to know what he had been doing during his youth and where he was.

Dr. Ehrman talks about Luke writing this and Luke writing that, but I thought that the attributions of the four canonical Gospels are considered to be a late, and therefore questionable, development. If so, it seems that it should be noted from time to time since that should affect the reliability of the factual claims in that book of the Bible.

Bart is " just a Textual Critic" is among the dumbest things William Lane Craig has ever said. (And thats saying something)

Bart, tell us about the Ethiopian Bible.

sound bit 30:03 i looked in the received text, KJB, in Luke 23 there is no mention of the curtain tearing. what is dr. ehrman saying? Luke's Gospel does not mention the tearing of the curtain at all before or after Christ death.

But why did Luck replaced the doctrine of atonement with the doctrine of forgiveness? And if in Luck the people have access to god before Jesus's death then what is the significance of dead and resurrection in Luck's theology? There seems to be a quite radical departure here from, let's say, Paul.

A question: I've long been troubled by premises of textual criticism (eg prefer hardest passage) because it seems to systematically sift texts in favor of making them look as strange as possible. Same for identifying which quotes in the New Testament are "really" by Jesus (prefer the ones that the early church would hate the most). I understand the need for this - it's not like there's a better set of criteria lying around offering better results - but here's the question: How much work is put into trying to double back and say "ok, this perfectly reasonable saying might well have been one of his anyway", or "this weird text is too weird - I bet the scribe needed to get up and drink some coffee and try again", or does all argument stop when the weirder choice has been identified?

How long did manuscripts from the early Roman Empire typically last?

The :Chronological Bible dances around the resurrection stories Luke v Acts are you familiar with it?

fascinating

At about the 50 minute mark, Ehrman argues that annual trips to the Jerusalem temple would have been beyond the financial means of the Holy Family in the Galilee. I trust that his intuition is correct, if the Holy Family were farmers or farm workers. But the NT makes a point about them that Joseph was a carpenter, not a peasant. Moreover, recent archeological work in the area establishes that there was a posh recreational area nearby where Romans went on holiday. The article I read about that archeological research suggested the craftsmen like Joseph might have been employed there and thereby relatively well-off and able to make annual trips to Jerusalem.

The discussion of the childhood of Jesus reminded me of a lecture in Great Courses on gospels and other writings that that were excluded from the New Testament. In one in particular, Jesus is shown, as a child ,first discovering his supernatural powers in much the same way as Superman as a boy is depicted in films and comic books discovering his super strength and other powers. In the case of Jesus, these writings depicted him as becoming angry or frustrated with a playmate or a village adult and stricking them dead.! It is so bad, that the villagers come to Mary and Joseph and say basically, if you can't control you're kid, we are going to exile you from the village!

I wonder if Bart and Megan will make an episode titled "The Genius of the gospel of Luke"

The UBS committee labeled Luke 22:19-20 as {B}, or “almost certain,” according to Metzger. It isn't the only atonement passage in Luke-Acts anyway. What about Acts 20:28? If atonement is your reason to think a passage isn't original, that's no reason at all.

Bart my name sake u are a good scholar. Thanks a bunch u both

It seem to me that one can think that the author of Luke may have written parts of his gospel referring to Joseph as father before he wrote the parts about the immaculate conception and virgin birth. . . and never realized the contradictions so caused. It is also possible that someone other than the original author added those parts.

Luke, לוק, is the gospel of the "latter" part of multiple portions of grace. These lessons taught to the 12 would have dealt with the 3rd part of the trinity which is the holy spirit. "Be ye holy." Holiness fills the mind with the word of God. It is a quickening of the mind. We are called to love God with all our heart, soul and mind. On the way of life, מערה is the most distant beginning, the quickening of the heart. With mark, we are established in the way. Matthew, מאת or with theo, μετθεου, we begin the second leg of our journey, the quickening of the soul. With this commitment and confession wee accept the will of the father as our will. This enables us to change our actions. Luke takes us into the holy of holies. The gospels are not meant to be copies of one another. Having luke faith will carry us further in a storm. Luke faith attributes us with three times the light of mark faith. Mark gave us authority. Matthew gave us power. Luke gives us might. (There is no Q.)

Now I want a 'Home Alone' style movie with Jesus protecting the temples from thieves.

Is Ethiopic a synonym for Amharic?

Love their glasses - they should get a sponsor 😂

67 minutes, this one. Nice

I can't help but to think of someone saying, "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain".

Gets properly interesting from 15:20 onwards ...

Megan, is the book on Sumerian, volume 2, ready?

According to the general consensus of scholarship *(even critical Christian scholars),* YHWH was originally incorporated into the Canaanite pantheon as a son of the Canaanite high god El before inheriting the top spot in the pantheon and El's wife Athirat (Asherah) before religious reforms "divorced" them. If you want to see if El is fictional, just read his mythology in the Ugaritic/Canaanite texts. His pantheon in Ugarit is called the *Elohim,* literally the plural of El. Interestingly, the Biblical god is also referred to numerous times as Elohim. "When El was young, he came across two beautiful Goddesses washing their clothes in the Sea. They were Athirat (Asherah) and the Goddess Rahmaya, and, after buttering them up by cooking a meal for them, he asked them to choose between being his daughters or wives. They choose the latter and became the mothers of the Gods Shachar "Dawn" and Shalim "Dusk"." *"First, a god named El predates the arrival of the Israelites into Syria-Palestine.* Biblical usage shows El was not just a generic noun, but often a proper name for Israel’s God (e.g., Gen 33:20: “El, the God of Israel”)." "I should add here that it is very clear from the grammar that the noun nachalah in v. 9 should be translated “inheritance.” *Yahweh receives Israel as his “inheritance” (nachalah), just as the other sons of El received their nations as their inheritance (nachal, v. 8).* With this verb, especially in the Hiphil, the object is always what is being given as an inheritance. Thus, Israel is given to Yahweh as his inheritance. ((Here I’m indebted to Dan McClellan.)) It would make no sense for Elyon to give himself an inheritance. Moreover, as I’ve argued elsewhere, it is not just the Gentile nations that are divided up according to the number of the sons of El. It is all of humankind, i.e., “the sons of Adam.” This clearly includes Israel. And the sons of Adam are not divided up according to the number of the sons of El, plus one (i.e., plus Elyon). They are divided up, according to the text, solely according to the number of the sons of El. *Thus, that Yahweh receives Israel as his inheritance makes Yahweh one of the sons of El mentioned in v. 8. Any other construal of the text would constitute its rewriting."* *"The Most Heiser: Yahweh and Elyon in Psalm 82 and Deuteronomy 32 - Religion at the Margins"* based on the *majority scholarly consensus.* (Written by Thom Stark who is a Christian) *"Michael Heiser: A Unique Species? - Religion at the Margins"* (A second response to Michael Heiser) *"Excerpt from “Yahweh and the Gods and Goddesses of Canaan” by John Day - Lehi's Library."* *"The Table of Nations: The Geography of the World in Genesis 10 - TheTorah.com"* (Excluding the short narrative on Nimrod (vv. 8-12), *which appears to be a later addition,* Genesis 10 contains *70* names of nations or cities, a number that was symbolic of totality. Similarly, the descendants of Jacob were *70* in number (Gen 46:37; Exod 1:5), *as were the sons of the supreme Canaanite god El, with whom YHWH became equated.)* *"Ugarit - New World Encyclopedia"* (Ugaritic religion centered on the chief god, Ilu or El, whose titles included "Father of mankind" and "Creator of the creation." The Court of El was referred to as the (plural) 'lhm or ***Elohim,*** a word ***later used by the biblical writers to describe the Hebrew deity*** and translated into English as "God," in the singular. El, which was ***also the name of the God of Abraham,*** was described as an aged deity with white hair, seated on a throne.) *"Mark Smith: Yahweh as El’s Son & Yahweh’s Ascendency - Lehi's Library"* (Mark Smith is a Catholic) *"God, Gods, and Sons (and Daughters) of God in the Hebrew Bible. Part III | theyellowdart"* *"02 | December | 2009 | Daniel O. McClellan - Psalm 82"* (Daniel McClellan is a Mormon) *"Elohim | Daniel O. McClellan"* (Refer to the article "Angels and Demons (and Michael Heiser)") *"God's Wife Edited Out of the Bible - Almost."* (Pay attention to whose wife Asherah (Athirat) is in the Ugaritic/Canaanite texts and how she became the wife of YHWH/Yahweh) *"Yahweh's Divorce from the Goddess Asherah in the Garden of Eden - Mythology Matters."* *"Asherah, God's Wife in Ancient Israel. Part IV - theyellowdart"* *"The Gates of Ishtar - El, was the original god of the bible."* *"The Gates of Ishtar - Anath in the Elephantine Papyri"* (In addition to Asherah (Athirat) being the consort of Yahweh, it also appears some Israelites also viewed the Canaanite goddess Anat(h) as Yahweh's consort) *"Canaanite Religion - New World Encyclopedia"* (Refer to the section "Relationship to Biblical Religion") *"The Syncretization of Yahweh and El : reddit/AcademicBiblical"* (For a good summary of all of the above articles) Watch Professor Christine Hayes who lectures on the Hebrew Bible at Yale University. Watch lecture 2 from 40:40 to 41:50 minutes, lecture 7 from 30:00 minutes onwards, lecture 8 from 12:00 to 17:30 minutes and lecture 12 from 27:40 minutes onwards. Watch *"Pagan Origins of Judaism"* by Sigalius Myricantur and read the description in the video to see the scholarship the video is based on. Watch *"How Monotheism Evolved"* by Sigalius Myricantur and watch up to at least 21:40. Watch *"Atheism - A History of God (The Polytheistic Origins of Christianity and Judaism)"* (By a former theist) Watch *"The Origins of Yahweh"* by Derreck Bennett at Atheologica.

1:01:57 This statement by Bart best illustrates his inability to comprehend specific vital aspects of Biblical literature despite his obvious scholastic abilities and his importance as a commentator on the NT.

"there has to be some kind of oral tradition" because its either that or someone would have had to have written it down immediately. This ignores a rather glaring and obvious third possiblity - that many of these stories just come from elsewhere. Could be stories about someone else or could be the author's imagination. I mean the point of the gospels was never to write history - it was to make theological points. This is driven home by the video we just watched about Luke and scribal changes. I'm not saying that it's impossible there is some oral tradition involved, i just think it is pretty minimal.

LOL my teachers at the Evangelical Theological Seminary from where I graduated (1986) would be fighting you both to the teeth LOL Excellent lecture, too bad standard christian people dont want to learn the basics of greek, but will give their lives for King James/Reina Valera (the spanish translation of KJ bible lol) translation as the WORD OF GOD. Thanks you so much for your serious commitment to clear this subjects.

sound bit 29:00 dr ehrman states " when luke copied mark'..." what does dr. ehrman mean by luke copied mark? i wasn't aware the the Gospel of Luke was a copy of Mark's Gospel.

There's excellent harmony between each of the gospels, and between the gospels and Paul, and between Paul and the other letter writers. Much ado about nothing as Shakespeare mentioned.

15:34-15:42 This isn’t quite under those parameters, but i think “Luke” 2:48 and “Luke” 3:23 contradict each other and couldn’t have been written by the same writer. “Matthew” 1:18, “Mark” 6:3, “Luke” 3:23 and “John” 8:41 all state or imply that opponents used Mary and her birth of Jesus to deride him and his followers. “Luke” 1-2 reads like a mid second century orthodox apologetic combatting these implications by claiming Jesus was a legitimate child who was held in high esteem by the establishment. P.S./Edit: “Luke” 1-2, etc. doesn’t predate justin martyr by very much. Around a decade probably.

How fascinating and I can't help but wonder How the the these alterations to the bible by scribes where God mentions So woe to those who write something down with their own hands and then claim, ‘This is from God,’ in order to make some small gain. Woe to them for what their hands have written! Woe to them for all that they have earned

A great religious novel is "The Living End" by Stanley Elkin.

The best precision"bunker buster," Bart Ehrman

If you were to read 4 different books about Woodstock from 4 different authors that attended the 3-day concert, would all 3 be identical or would some have different experiences? Why should 4 separate accounts be expected to be the same? Also, I would expect to have even more variations of the copies after a few hundred years of handwritten copies. I see no reason to reject the whole narrative based on some human error.

Regarding the forgiveness versus atonement: Forgiveness is atonement. Using the example of 1,000 dollars being forgiven, when you forgive that money, then it is you who are paying for it. The 1,000 dollars is still gone. Someone has to pay it, i.e. "atone". By forgiving the other person, you are the one who pays by accepting that you lost 1,000 dollars. This is also a problem governments don't seem to understand. They say, "we'll just forgive your debts." What does that mean? That means they are going to make someone else pay for it. The debt doesn't magically disappear just because you forgive. Someone always has to make atonement. In order for God to forgive someone, he had to place that debt onto someone else. Jesus was the someone else.

Bart D Belt Icon. What belt did Jesus wear?

Ehrman is amazing. Am I the only one who’d love to see what an original Bible would look like with insertions, deletions and plagiarisms? Also remove all of the clear fables like any tales of Jesus’ birth and youth.