Is Matthew's Jesus the MOST Jewish? With Dr. Bart Ehrman

No video

Is Matthew's Jesus the MOST Jewish? With Dr. Bart Ehrman

Рет қаралды 4,063

Digital Hammurabi

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 40

@pinball1970 6 ай бұрын

Great to see Bart on DH. Megan is great interviewing Bart on his channel.

@SupremeScientist 6 ай бұрын

Thanks for this interview! I can't afford the course right now but it sounds exciting! 💯

@truthseekerpeace 2 ай бұрын

Thank you for this interview. Very grateful for both of your works. My eyes are opening 😔😭🙏

@jameshenn2051 5 ай бұрын

Thanks!

@AbdulHannanAbdulMatheen 6 ай бұрын

👏🙂 Yay Digital Hammurabi, Megan and Dr Bart.

@jamiegallier2106 5 ай бұрын

Great interview. ❤😊

@geraldmeehan8942 6 ай бұрын

Thank you Dr Ehrman and Megan

@barnsweb52 Ай бұрын

14:00 - is altered. They sit on Moses seat, but do what he told you to do (Moses). Refer to Nehemia Godorn - Hebrew scholar.

@animaerapstarark76 2 ай бұрын

Man i went through almost more than half of your videos, and i checked your entire playlist, its all suemrian or akkadian, Egypt or biblical topics. nothing really on Assyrians ? pretty confusing to me 😂. do you know Simo Parpola ?

@tawan20082008 6 ай бұрын

thanks !

@Natsar-Torah 6 ай бұрын

"they [natsarim] have the Gospel according to Matthew in its entirety in Hebrew. For it is clear that they still preserve this, in the Hebrew alphabet, as it was originally written.- Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 29.9.4

@ChrisBV 6 ай бұрын

Mark 1:1-8 appear to have been copied from Matthew 3. Likely done by a later editor, to explain who John the Baptist was.

@ChrisBV 6 ай бұрын

I believe the phrase "in those days" near the beginning of a gospel indicates the original beginning of the text. Thus the original beginning of Mark is 1:9, and the original beginning of Matthew is 3:1. Which suggests that the antisemitic passages could have been added later, by editors working for the Roman church.

@ChrisBV 6 ай бұрын

And the original beginning of Luke is 2:1. Now Marcion went to the church in Rome with some documents that he proposed should become a Bible; these included most of the letters of Paul and a gospel with the nativity story removed (by Marcion). Marcion was excommunicated as a heretic. Is Luke 1 a reaction to Marcion, doubling down on the nativity of Jesus by adding the nativity of John?

@animaerapstarark76 2 ай бұрын

You know whats funny. If i wrote a letter, and did not mention my name, but yet people who know me and knew that i wrote that letter and were present at the time said i wrote that letter after i died, i mean its pretty obvious i wrote the letter. No need for people of those times to lie, multiple sources attest to matthew being written by Matthew. Bart adds his own subjective feelings and intertwines them with biblical literature. its an inaccurate and disingenuous lens to look through. for example if i am Christian, and i am studying an ancient Babylonian text, i will not do so with a christian perspective, because its not respectful towards the text.

@johnrohde5510 6 ай бұрын

Why the self-correction of Israel for Palestine. It certainly wasn't Israel at the time. In terms of modern geography, do we have any reason to believe Matthew lived in what is now Israel rather than what is now Israel?

@memorydrain7806 3 ай бұрын

Because Matthew (if the guy was real) lived in the Roman Province of Judea. Not Palestine.

@johnrohde5510 3 ай бұрын

@@memorydrain7806 iirc Ehrman - along with most other scholars - thinks the guy who wrote the gospel of Matthew was a Greek speaker who probably didn't live in Judea. And Judea isn't Israel either.

@memorydrain7806 2 ай бұрын

@@johnrohde5510 Right. But we're playing along with who the character Matthew was. Ah, but it is. Israel is the people that have occupied that location. It's also the name of the kingdom that was established in the early Iron Age. This was well before it was called Palestine.

@johnrohde5510 2 ай бұрын

@@memorydrain7806 Israel is, according to the OT, the name of a people, rather than a place. As far as history goes, there's no evidence for a united monarchy and if it existed, it's borders would not have corresponded to modern Israel. There is evidence for a northern kingdom of Israel and a southern of Judah but their borders don't correspond to modern Israel either.

@barnsweb52 Ай бұрын

Bogus alert! Mark defies Matthew - just look at the conclusions - totally different. Also, Mark is hap hazzard - Matthew is organized lessons and conclusions.

@stayinyourlaneplease 5 ай бұрын

So grateful to God that your channel is barely getting any views. Your part in the Great Deception could have been much bigger, but I am glad it wasnt.

@jamiegallier2106 5 ай бұрын

🤣

@MrKojiro69 4 ай бұрын

For those of us who really like DH and want it to do well it’s great that you were gracious enough to give a view and a comment! Perhaps you should take a page from your own name and ”stay in your lane”

@Vicky_C87 29 күн бұрын

You know the more you comment the more you're helping the channel. Better to keep your thoughts to yourself if you want to see the channel not do well.

@Natsar-Torah 6 ай бұрын

Well the reason Matthew was written in 'high level Greek' was because it was originally penned in Hebrew (kept by the 1st century Natsari and Ebionites), and a Greek-Hebrew scribe then translated it to Greek for the greco-roman (pauline) world. That high level greek translated version is what survived, while the true followers of Messiah hid in caves and holes in the ground from the jewish persecution.

@pisse3000 6 ай бұрын

Source on that?

@Natsar-Torah 6 ай бұрын

referenced in the early church fathers, like Jerome, speaking (negatively) of the early Ebionite and Natsarim Jewish believers (from James and the Jerusalem church) that they had the original gospel of Matthew in its Hebrew form. Jerome admitted they had it in its original hebrew form, but he despised it being he despised Judaizing believers anyhow. @@pisse3000

@jeffmacdonald9863 6 ай бұрын

@@Natsar-Torah The reference is from Papias and we only have it in quotation, without the full original context, but it implies the text he mentions to be a sayings gospel, which our Matthew is not. Textual analysis also strongly suggests that it was originally composed in Greek. If not, the translation would have needed to be a very loose one

@Natsar-Torah 6 ай бұрын

no.. here is the quote "they [natsarim] have the Gospel according to Matthew in its entirety in Hebrew. For it is clear that they still preserve this, in the Hebrew alphabet, as it was originally written.- Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 29.9.4... you can find more with a simple wiki search. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazarene_(sect)@@jeffmacdonald9863

@Allothersweretakenn 6 ай бұрын

@@Natsar-Torahfalse

@animaerapstarark76 2 ай бұрын

@alexpaulson3303 2 ай бұрын

Assyriology is study of the near East, not just Assyrians!

@animaerapstarark76 2 ай бұрын

@@alexpaulson3303 Understood but almost nothing is about Assyrians. Any Assyriologist i look into, had the main focus " Assyrian " but they also educate on other civilisations as well. Why not be an Egyptologist ? 😂