5 Misconceptions Bible Skeptics Spread About The New Testament (feat. Dr. Bart Ehrman)

Here Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to discuss common misconceptions about the New Testament and early Christianity. The misconceptions are:
“The First Council of Nicaea canonized the New Testament”
“The valley of Gehenna was a place where Jerusalem burned its trash, which is how it got its fiery image”
The Nag Hammadi library was buried out of fear of violent persecution from the proto-orthodox, as evidenced by Athanasius of Alexandria laying out a list of orthodox books very similar to contemporary New Testament canons”
“The “Gnostics” were a specific sect of Christians which had their own congregations far apart from other Christians”
“The narrative of Jesus’ virgin birth, the celebration of his birth on December 25th, his 12 followers, dying for world peace, etc. was lifted from the Roman religion of Mithraism”

Check out and sign up for Dr. Ehrman’s webinar here (thanks for the support!):
gmskeptic--ehrman.thrivecart....
Check out my last video with Bart Ehrman:
4 Misconceptions Christians Spread About The New Testament (feat. Dr. Bart Ehrman)
• 4 Misconceptions Chris...
------------------------------------------FOLLOW------------------------------------------
Twitter: / gm_skeptic
Facebook: / gmskeptic
------------------------------------------SUPPORT------------------------------------------
Patreon: / geneticallymodifiedske...
PayPal: www.paypal.me/GMSkeptic
------------------------------------------Resources for atheists in need------------------------------------------
Find a Secular Therapist: www.seculartherapy.org
Recovering from Religion helps connect those who are leaving or have left their religion with support, resources and community: www.recoveringfromreligion.or...
Resources for Ex-Mu’s: exmuslims.org/join-us/
The Deconstruction Network: www.phildrysdale.com/
This video contains 100% therapeutic grade skepticism.*
*This statement has not been evaluated by the FDA

[@GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic]

Check out Dr. Ehrman’s webinar here (thanks for the support!): gmskeptic--ehrman.thrivecart.com/did-the-christmas-story-really-happen/

[@michaelschweigart3517]

I'm not Christian, but I do believe in the Bible. I think it's *all* symbolic/metaphor; non of it is literal, even the stories in Genesis or the stories of Jesus. I'm more or less follow the ideas of Neville Goddard and Dr. Joseph Murphy

[@michaelschweigart3517]

...I also believe in reincarnation

[@andrew_owens7680]

@Jamal Ramadan Everything of value criticizing Islam was done by scholars in the 19th century. I am Muslim and I have read many of these attacks. Modern anti-Islam writers like Ibn Waraq offer nothing new and haven't a fraction of the scholarship. These 19th century colonial missionaries from Germany, England and France understood the Quran and Sunnah to a high degree and were Arabacists at a very high level. Neither were they as dismissive of Arab culture as modern writers who are trying to write Arabs out of history for political reasons.

[@AndyX]

love the work you do but your videos are always so dimmly lit and erie ,,and the narration is so sollumn and somber ...brighten things up bit bro and try to be a little more cheerfull... thanks for the work you put in

[@angrydoggy9170]

@@andrew_owens7680 What strikes me the most is that there’s no such thing as a defined Islamic culture/believe. Just as with Christianity, there’s a multitude of different interpretations often refuting each other stances.

[@0nlyThis]

It's so refreshing to hear a biblical scholar say, "Actually, we don't know".

[@GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic]

He’s a critical (secular, historical) scholar rather than a theologian, so if the material evidence is lacking, ignorance it isn’t used to defend religious preconceptions. Definitely refreshing.

[@freddiereadie30]

Bart has said in the past that he is Agnostic, so for him to say "we don't know" is a fair claim.

[@jursamaj]

@@GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic See Carrier's recent discussion with Godless Engineer ("Dr. Richard Carrier Responds To Bart Ehrman's Holy Koolaid Interview"). Ehrman *can* do the things you say, but on some topics he doesn't. In reference to your "critical (secular, historical) scholar", it has to be remembered that Ehrman's training is entirely as a theologian, not a historian. Yes, there is some overlap, but there are important differences too.

[@coolhluke8089]

EXACTLY...

[@kelvinloeb812]

@@freddiereadie30 He has said he sees himself as an atheist because he believes there are no gods. He also has said for purposes of debates etc he is agnostic because he wouldn't assert there isn't a god without being able to prove it

[@i_am_anxious0247]

I love that you’re consistently criticizing your own camp. Most people don’t do that sort of thing

[@logans.butler285]

My point exactly. Many well-intentioned skeptics (ex: Rob Bell) continue to spread the misconception of Gehenna. Gotta love Ehrman's honesty. GMS deserves more credit than most internet theists give him 💯

[@Lerian_V]

Cosmic Skeptic does the same hing too.

[@dessertstorm7476]

The trick is to not think in terms of "camps"

[@thefisherking78]

You're on the right track, but only the first.. half.. step. It's not about camps. It's only about what ideas are supported by the most evidence.

[@i_am_anxious0247]

@@thefisherking78 people denying the existence of schools of thought is funny to me. There are schools of thought, i.e. “camps,” and most people only critique those that disagree, i.e. those outside their school of thought, i.e. those outside their “camp.” So one someone goes out of their way to critique people they agree with, it’s commendable because people don’t usually do that.

[@thescoobymike]

As an ex-Christian myself, one of my biggest pet peeves is when people get things wrong about Christianity There’s already enough real things that are wrong with it so there’s no need to make up fake things

[@VideoGamerabc]

What would they make up?

[@leyrua]

@@VideoGamerabc One of the big ones that irritates me is the claim that the Bible is "unequivocally pro-life", when it contains SO many instances of God commanding people to kill infants...

[@gracehaven5459]

@@leyrua "the Bible and Jesus are pro-life!!" *insert story of Isaac* the lovely pro-life message that you must be willing to kill your children and family for God at a moments notice 😆😅😅😅

[@VideoGamerabc]

@@leyrua If I'm not mistaken God even uses abortion via some sort of potion to test if the woman was faithful to her husband

[@nelsonking]

@@leyrua Your comment illustrates your severe lack of understanding of the Bible mate.

[@Oldmanplum]

6th misconception about the New Testament: calling non-canonical and gnostic Gospels hidden, secret or "forbidden" rather than what they actually were, unpopular

[@The_Trident_Master]

No, they were uninspired

[@blarglemantheskeptic]

@@The_Trident_Master nice claim. Do you have any evidence?

[@PamSesheta]

Well, history is written by victors, so competitors that come second place can have their prevalence stamped to oblivion, but yes, the gnostics were not “forbidden” so much as less popular.

[@The_Trident_Master]

@@PamSesheta I hardly think the early Christian’s were victors

[@blarglemantheskeptic]

@@The_Trident_Master so, no evidence for your first claim, so moving on to you make new ones.

[@Lightborn1311]

Christian fan of Drew here. This video (and the companion one) have really made a positive impression on me. If you are a Christian reading this comment, be sure to watch this whole video and the companion one about misconceptions. You are losing out on the pursuit of truth and growth if you choose not to politely and sincerely engage with our atheist brothers and sisters.

[@sailcvl3976]

Well said. The lord said to test your faith. Props to you for doing so.

[@TheNocturnalLogician]

I actually respect you a lot just for this comment. Having an open mind is the most assured way to reach true and proper understanding. While I am critically anti-religion, for my own reasons, I still consume a ton of information on it, so that I can properly understand what is being said, taught, done, etc, within certain groups/circles.

[@roguepsykerhaaker4813]

This thread is just really cool and seeing it makes me really happy

[@ApostateProphet]

This is an excellent exchange. I can't express how annoying it is when people bring up the Mithra issue. Thanks for bringing up these questions.

[@chandlersleziak6416]

@Apostate Prophet Hey AP! It's good to see you here sir. You are one of the best Ex-Muslim Skeptics I have ever subscribed to on the internet. Keep up the good work that you have been doing with debunking the claims of Islam. 😎

[@belialord]

Who needs Mithra when we have our true prophet of Islam!

[@belialord]

@@adambartlett114 The reason you can't tell is because you don't follow AP. If you did you'd know he is our true prophet of Islam! It's a recurring joke in the community.

[@alanw505]

I 1000% agree with you. There is no contemporary evidence that Mithra had anything close to the attributes of Jesus...and I'm an atheist.

[@claires9100]

I love that you commented on this channel. Love your work too. Danke shön

[@davidcates2639]

As a Christian who tries to listen to arguments of those who believe differently than me, I appreciate you doing a video like this. I wish the dialogue between Christians and atheists/agnostics weren't so fire-and-brimstone filled from both sides, and I just wanted to thank you and Dr. Ehrman for presenting both these and the other videos in such a collected and inviting manner.

[@magicrectangleEnt]

Just gotta quibble that only one side can actually be fire-and-brimstone filled in this dialogue, since most non-religious people by far don’t believe that everyone who disagrees with them will be tortured forever for it

[@TheChenny73]

Street Epistemology is where these discussions are constructive.

[@blakerbro9603]

@@magicrectangleEnt facts

[@Joyride37]

@@magicrectangleEnt thats true, i think the more negative rhetoric from the agnostic/skeptics camp (when conversation breaks down) manifests as the belittling tone of “believing in magical space fairy” and dismissing anything biblical as “made up”. Rather than as a fascinating collection of documents that mix real historical events with anachronistic culture memory of oral traditions with theology

[@Nai61a]

@@Joyride37 Look, I understand where you're coming from, but the implication of what you say is that "God" and belief in "God" should be accorded some kind of a priori respect, that it should be handled with kid gloves, as it were. Why should that be, when the beliefs associated with many "Gods" are used to judge, discriminate against and vilify those who do not hold them? Moreover, it is my - anecdotal - experience that the softly, softly approach is not terribly effective at changing the way people think and challenging bad ideas because, rather often, it leads to the "agree to disagree" conclusion and the theist goes away with the idea that it is just a matter of opinion. I try hard to steer a middle path when discussing "God"-existence claims with theists, but I don't think it is wrong to point out that they DO, at bottom, believe in a kind of hidden, magical, celestial father-figure.

[@nerianasims1849]

Almost everyone I know who left a fundamentalist religion only left the religion, and kept their fundamentalist thinking patterns the same. Manichean morality, us vs. them, incredible guilt about things they should not feel guilty over that they then impose on others, etc. I am so happy whenever I see someone who works to move away from that like you do. It's extremely difficult, or it wouldn't be so uncommon.

[@JacquesduPlessis11]

That is very interesting, I have had the opposite experience. Most of the fundie types I know when they left their religion, went far away from that type of mentality. The one exception was the guilt. I think the indoctrination left a strong mark of guilt on all of them, which is sad.

[@lawsonharrison6927]

I have noticed that some people are prone to dogma. Whether it be theistic or secular.

[@JM-ot8ux]

@@lawsonharrison6927 What are the kinds of secular "dogma" that you refer to?

[@robertludwick-forster9617]

@@JM-ot8ux “the only path to happiness is through wealth” is one such example

[@JM-ot8ux]

@@robertludwick-forster9617 I don't think that's a specifically secular dogma. I think it's an opinion that some people express openly and some dress up in religious "prosperity" gospel. It's more about capitalism promising the greatest good for the greatest number ("In human history," they like to say) that conflates happiness with material prosperity. That's never been far from Christian dogma, anyway.

[@kraziecatclady]

Thank you for this. I loved it. I've been an atheist since I was about 8 years old. I grew up in a Christian community and got a lot of nasty language as a child from well-meaning people. As an adult though, initially I was relieved to find more atheists start to emerge, but more recently I have also seen a growing number of atheists who are rude and disrespectful to Christians for not agreeing with their views. I have seen it to the point where some people (not just Christians, but other religions as well) are starting to associate that behavior with Atheism as a whole. I feel like people who behave like that are no better than the people who ridiculed me as a child for not believing. That kind of behavior does nothing but breed hatred/resentment. This video was excellent because it was solid discourse while still showing respect to each other's belief system. Good questions were asked and answered in a logical and professional manner. There was no yelling, there was no name calling either. There are plenty of times where Christians try to explain something related to their religion in a civil and accurate manner, but the other person ignores their input just because they don't agree with the religion as a whole. A lot of Christians are quite surprised when I agree with them about something related to their religion or the Bible because the statement they made is true or makes sense to me. There are some things in the Bible that atheists will use as some sort of cannon fodder to debunk the entire book, but many of the inconsistences or strangely described things can be tied back to translation errors. Especially when it comes to people mentioning unicorns in the bible. It is only the King James Bible that mentions them and there is a very strong chance when taken into context, they may have been actually referring to the one-horned rhinoceros which has a latin name of rhinoceros unicornis. I don't think the mention of a possible mistranslation invalidates everything else within the text. There is also a possibility that the virgin birth may also have been a translation error because the word for virgin and the word for being unmarried were the same in I believe ancient Hebrew, but I could be wrong on that one. Mature conversations like this one encourage trust and respect for one another. I look forward to more videos like this one in the future and I wish more people would act like this.

[@corporatecapitalism]

Yeah I’m trying to work on not sounding like an asshole when I’m debating

[@philliphessel6788]

On the ‘virgin’ confusion, my understanding is that Hebrew had two distinct words but the Septuagint translation into Greek used a word that could have either meaning. That seems to me a minor point next to all the factors that make Isaiah’s prophesy clearly not a reference to Jesus. I speculate that perhaps the main reason for the “virgin birth” story in Matthew and Luke was the scandal the writers admit, that Mary got pregnant while betrothed but not yet wed. Nazareth was a small town; gossip (true or false) tends to get around a small town, and its most famous son was probably not the only one to get out of town.

[@kraziecatclady]

@@philliphessel6788 it probably doesn't help that not many people could read or write back then either and sharing stories/information via word of mouth can lead to a lot of variations especially before someone capable of writing is able to transcribe the content.

[@nickman9639]

What I love about GMS is he doesn’t have an underlying allegiance to any tribe. It seems he genuinely welcomes and encourages criticism of his own ideas and wants his viewers to think for themselves. His attitude reminds me of theramintrees

[@DudeTheMighty]

It's very good to see, yeah! Leaving one echo chamber for another doesn't really gain you anything...

[@Chrysostomus_17]

But Ehrman is part of his tribe. Ehrman is as much as an anti-Christian atheist as GMS.

[@nickman9639]

@@Chrysostomus_17 There’s irony here but if it is a tribe, its a tribe that is anti-indoctrination, not anti-christian. You can be christian and not indoctrinate others which I think both GMS and Theramintrees would be happy to be friends with. And by encouraging criticism of their ideas theramintrees and GMS avoid the tribal problem.

[@Chrysostomus_17]

@@nickman9639 Yeah sure make 20k videos all about debooonking Christianity and yeah totally not Anti-Christian. Come on, let's be honest. Let's also be honest about indoctrination too. Everyone says it's a bad thing but anyone that has children knows that indoctrination is how you pass your values onto the next generation. So the truth is that everyone likes indoctrination. And don't tell me secularists are "anti-indoctrination" when it's literally the law that children have to go through 12 years of state indoctrination inside a quasi-jail. Also known as mandatory education.

[@jacobostapowicz8188]

No he wants everyone to hate Yahweh and the bible instead of dealing with the real issues within the church peoples ideology

[@LearnAboutFlow]

This was very good and is, honestly, the ONLY way to talk about these things - factual evidence OR stating it's not clear so you can't say either way.

[@stephendevore]

+1!

[@LearnAboutFlow]

@@a.i.contacttracer305 Are you delusional like A.I. Contact Tracer? What gave you the impression I'm an antivaxxer, comrade?

[@stephendevore]

@@a.i.contacttracer305 Uh, I don't know anything about that.

[@lxUn1c0]

I wish Dr. Ehrman had gone into a little bit of detail about what DID happen at the Council of Nicea, because it's always good to replace myths with factual knowledge.

[@GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic]

Fair enough. If you’d like, you can check out the video about the Council of Nicaea in the card box

[@markusklyver6277]

The purpose was essentially to unify Christianity by defining revealed doctrine more precisely: the intent being to define unity of beliefs for Christians. It also decided that the Christian Eastern shouldn't coincide with the Jewish one. The Council of Nicaea dealt primarily with the issue of the deity of Christ. The doctrine of the Trinity was stated in its final form 50 years later, in 381 AD. The idea of the Trinity was first formulated in a more fleshed out form in Council of Constantinople in 360 AD, i.e, *after* the First Council of Nicaea.

[@ivanfaught9997]

@@GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic where would I find this card box you are talking about? I do not see a video about Nicea in your video list either.

[@westg463]

@@GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic as a atheist do you not acknowledge natural immunity?

[@wisekong6371]

@@GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic hey would you like to do a video on the fossil evidence we have on the existence of giants? I'm an agnostic atheist and i would like to know the truth about the existence of giants

[@Weekendinspirations]

Time stamp: 2:09 First Council of Nicaea... 3:44 The valley of Gehenna... 6:19 Nag Hammadi library... 9:19 The Gnostics... 11:08 The narrative of Jesus...

[@ghostreyn]

Coming from Paulogia's video to here, two great You Tubers posting within an hour of each other, its a good day already

[@nicholasholiday941]

I want to thank you for your ability to discuss issues clearly without interjecting your beliefs, or lack of beliefs. We rarely hear/see factual discussions about religion, pro or con.

[@mr.sniffles7268]

Thank you for addressing Mithraism, I have seen it frequently cited by people who won't put in the effort to validate their sources. Same with the council of nicea. You should also make a video addressing the false idea that Christianity is a copy and paste religion from Horus. Although I'm an atheist, I think it is extremely important that we address these false claims because they impact the integrity of our group.

[@glenncalkins4764]

It was the Trinity that the council of Nicea dealt with. The 4 gospels were taken up at the Synod of Hippo in 393. The point is that the "correct" Gospels weren't set in stone for hundreds of years. Some one did group just those four together earlier, but the Church didn't canonize them till 393.

[@markusklyver6277]

​@@glenncalkins4764 That's not entirely true. he Council of Nicaea dealt primarily with the issue of the deity of Christ. The doctrine of the Trinity was stated in its final form 50 years later, in 381 AD. The idea of the Trinity was first formulated in a more fleshed out form in Council of Constantinople in 360 AD, i.e, *after* the First Council of Nicaea.

[@crhu319]

@@glenncalkins4764 Vulgate (Latin) Bible was 402

[@joshuam4835]

@Faith and Love Can you demonstrate this?

[@crhu319]

@Faith and Love nothing except that you, an idiot, believe it. Your testimony discredits it all and drives people from faith. Idiots always destroy what they love.

[@billielachatte4841]

Wow Dr. Bart Ehrman is everywhere nowadays! I've been following his works for almost a decade and I'm really happy that he's getting more mainstream recognition.

[@dongeonmaster8547]

I've been an atheist for thirtyish years and I don't remember ever hearing any of these talking points before.

[@mashah1085]

Strawman Argument

[@NerveBag]

Same here. I thought these were going to be a little more mainstream. I've never argued about any of these things with Christians. I'm guessing 99% of Christians have never even heard of any of these topics. 😂 Love the channel and Drew's kind, calm, measured discussion of such contentious issues, though. He's a role model for all of us on both sides.

[@britishrocklovingyank3491]

This is more about when an insufferable Christian debate bro meets an insufferable atheist debate bro. Most atheist, like me, just don't debate these points because it's pointless too.

[@MichaelWestonAnimates]

"It's hard to recognize who's a Gnostic and who's Gnot"

[@YeenMage]

I learned about these in the seminary - before my formal education part began as I was expected to seclude with the Augustinian monks (or friars if you must, strictly speaking) for a while, that is. I learned them from the piecemeal discussions of certain Catholic priests who studied critical Bible texts and archaeology among themselves. With what pieces of information I have, I arrived at the same archaeological and historical conclusions as Dr. Ehrman on my own. I don't know, it's just that all info fits like a lock and key?

[@Juiceboxdan72]

Like the X-files, the truth is out there I guess :)

[@ThePoliticrat]

So, unless something really weird happens within the next ten years of my life, I currently have no plans to attend seminary and become a priest; however, how does one go sequester themselves with Augustine monks? Because that actually sounds like something I probably need.

[@Tore_Lund]

Protestantism does not regard Hell literally either, likely as it arose from differentiating itself from Catholicism and absolution payments, but they use the same argument against interpreting Gehenna as Hell.

[@ThePoliticrat]

@@Tore_Lund Maybe not mainline Protestantism or old-school Calvinism. But modern, evangelical, fundamentalist, neo-Calvinist Protestants who hold to a literal reading of the Bible certainly do.

[@Tore_Lund]

@@ThePoliticrat I'm European, I know only old school Protestantism.

[@logans.butler285]

Kudos to Dr. Ehrman for pointing out the misconception of the valley of Gehenna. Andrew M. Henry from ReligionForBreakfast stressed this too in his video on the history of hell, but many well-intentioned Bible skeptics continue to spread this myth. Now that's honesty from Dr. Ehrman. Kudos to you too Drew for intending to clear misconceptions spread from believers as much as skeptics - a sign of sincerity that many internet atheists wouldn't have.

[@shriggs55]

In the back of mind,I started to that that if skeptics don't site their sources or point to references-or-even give the other side of the story sometimes-then you might want to take what they say with a grain of salt-and if they quote Bible scriptures that your not familiar with-check that out also, in context.Anyhow,these thoughts have finally started to move from the back of my mind to my frontal lobe :)

[@tongakhan230]

In Jesus' day, the use of GEHENNA just symbolised DESTRUCTION. Whatever was thrown into this ongoing fire was destroyed. The carcasses of dead animals were thrown into it too. Whatever fell away from the flames, the worms ate it. The RCC came up with the torture chamber in outer space notion for obvious reasons. If there is such a place, then the worms would have to be sinners too to be present there.

[@shriggs55]

@Faith and Love What's so hard to understand that there's absolutely no proof or evidence that the bible is the absolute,inerrant,and perfect "word of god?" And what's so hard to understand that non-Christians(billions around the world)would automatically accept,without a second thought,that the absurdities in the bible are real,even though nothing supernatural/miraculous has ever been proven in the entire history of humanity? As I said,it comes down to excepting the word of an ancient book written by some ancient men for....reasons? Besides,most of the Bible goes against what we know as reality in modern times.

[@johndoney2665]

@@shriggs55 In end how are you going to get around the birth, ministry, crucifiction,and resurrection of the Savior of the World?

[@shriggs55]

@@johndoney2665 I don't need to "get around it" because even if those things actually happened,they happened 2,000 years ago, to and for,mostly Israel,and have nothing to do with anybody in modern times.There is no solid evidence supporting the validity and truthfulness of the Bible,let alone the events it described therein.All "believers" have in support of their holy book is hearsay,testimonials,and "witnesses" from 2,000 years ago.Even in a court of law-at least here in the US-the lawyers and the judges-will not go on witnesses alone,because they can be subject to many different infuenses,threats,biases,and even altered views based on disturbances,misjudgements,and even drugs.They require solid evidence. So why don't I just take the words of some ancient writers of an ancient book-as though they were words straight from the lips of God to their ears? Nah.Ain't buying it.

[@SibleySteve]

Dr E is the best. As a graduate of a midwestern Baptist college who studied Koine Greek and loves history, I really enjoy his books and video. Funny enough, I was introduced to his work when asked to lead a series of instructional VHS videos at a local Sunday School class for Lutheran adults. His lectures on the NT were so refreshing to me that I devoured any of his other free lectures then after reading his book God’s Problem I realized I was a full fledge disciple of his. I love the juxtaposition of skepticism with respect for the historicity of the text and the spectrum of critical literacy that he brings to biblical studies.

[@AlanCanon2222]

I've been guilty of holding one or two of these misconceptions in my life, before and after deconversion, and am always happy to brush up on what the historic and archaeological records actually show, and what is wrong, or pure or informed speculation.

[@markl2322]

I enjoyed this. I do believe in God, and consider myself a Christian. I was raised Roman Catholic, but haven't been in the Church for many years. One of the things that has bothered me very much over the years is hearing people argue against having any beliefs because they feel that religion is ALWAYS bad, or that religion has been responsible for more wars, or poverty, or hang nails than any other cause...but no proof is ever offered to show if this is true. However, I can say, truthfully, that my upbringing as a Catholic has been of great benefit to me over the years, because it gave me a moral base from which I may take guidance on difficult issues, or in difficult times. My solutions to these problems might be diametrically opposite to the moral base I mentioned, but it does give me a good place to start. I don't know exactly why I'm revealing all of this here, other than the fact that I think I'm safe in not getting my head bitten off because of it.

[@sailcvl3976]

I couldnt provide statistics, but I do believe that religious conflict is likely one of the greatest destructive forces throughout history if we consider wars, genocides, slavery etc.. I don’t believe that all religious faith is always damaging, but I do think it is inarguable that religion in general is high up on the list of destructive forces. Perhaps not the direct teachings of the original church leaders, but christianity and islam have been used to justify a lot of horrors. Holocaust, american slave trade, killing of gays, burning witches and blasphemers, killing of jews basically everywhere. I dont mean to be combative, just wanted to speak my peace. I am sincerely happy for you that your faith has improved your life and I hope it continues to. It’s the crazies that use religion for bad things that are the problem.

[@riverofthewood]

If your childhood religion gave you moral guidance, but you have to modify it... How is that any different from any other religion, or no religion at all?

[@dma8657]

If after careful consideration you reach moral conclusions that are opposite to the moral base of your religion, then you see you are more moral than that religion. I’m not assuming anything about you; i’m reading what you wrote. You are better than your religious beliefs. I wish more people would realize the same about themselves.

[@martinjoseferreyra1961]

As a Christian I'm very grateful to see you being autocritic. We often lack that capacity

[@ElliottWong2024]

Thank you Drew for doing this informative interviews. Dr Bart Ehrman, if you're reading this, I want to appreciate you for all your lifelong work as a scholar. Sincerely, a Christian myself.

[@nitewindow]

Your questions were excellent and I found this format very helpful and I hope there is more to come from you and Dr. Ehrman.

[@gfxpimp]

This was good. I've read several of Ehrman's books, but I don't think I knew all of what was covered here. Good job!

[@huh4963]

As a Christian, I do think it’s nice that people look into my religion (or others)

[@shootydang7135]

Hey man, your channel is amazing. It helps me feel so heard and understood after losing basically my whole community due to my beliefs changing.

[@signmeupruss]

The title of this video is "5 Misconceptions Bible Skeptics Spread About The New Testament", but I hear these regularly from Christians themselves including clergy. It's not just Bible skeptics who say these things. And, I think one must ask the question, if Christians themselves believe wrong things, including things about the Bible, should anyone take them seriously in any way except as the political force they want so strongly to be?

[@ParanormalEncyclopedia]

This is one of the things I really respect about your channel (and to be fair a number of other atheist channels here on KZbin). The dedication to being as factually correct as possible. As a Christian (still) it annoys me to no end when people dig out old bad arguments. THere's plenty of things about CHristianity that SHOULD be criticized (yeah I'll admit that both in the Bible and in our history) but at least keep to the facts not just misconceptions.

[@brocklindseth7278]

I admire the fact that you watch things like this while being a Christian.

[@ParanormalEncyclopedia]

@@brocklindseth7278 he's fair in his criticism and does videos like this to keep things grounded its an easy channel to enjoy.

[@redgreen1500]

@@brocklindseth7278 I think more Christians than most would expect watch these sorts of things. We are not all as blind in our faith as popularly conceived. Some sure, but certainly not all.

[@ElliottWong2024]

@@brocklindseth7278 Drew is pretty nice. That's why we can tolerate him. Heck, I'll even say that I've liked him ever since his first public conversation with Sean McDowell.

[@DCronk-qc6sn]

I never drink but when I do, I like tequila.

[@torebelthoft4471]

The oldest Mithra cult came from Persia and was very different from the Roman Mithra cult. Mithra is also a part of the zoroastrian religion as the symbol of the earth and what it gives us. The celebration of Mithra in zoroastrianism are in october and are called Mehregan (Mithras day) Fun fact, the airport in Tehran are called Mehrabad (Mithras place)

[@vincentparrella272]

Drew i heard your conversation with Sean on his channel, your a breath of fresh air,We all have certain biases Christian and non Christian, but you seem to be keeping with a fair line of discourse and i Love you and hope you and your family are well.❤

[@cuckoophendula8211]

Again Drew, I love these videos that hover around the topic of religious studies! And again, I'd be fully for you going through a religious studies major so we'd be able to see more videos like these! EDIT: oh wow! The seminar is tomorrow!

[@jblevin385]

This is what "Fair and balanced" looks like. Thank you for helping me align my beliefs with reality, keep it up!

[@rujo2k]

I remember reading that same Mithras/Jesus trope in a rather dense, scholarly book called "The World of Myth" many years ago. I understand that this text is used in schools, so it's clear to see how these sort of misconceptions get perpetuated.

[@NeverlandSystemPunkGirlChloe]

I really LOVE how you explain things and your candidness.

[@Saezimmerman]

So relieved to hear that Dr. Ehrman was collaborating with you on this. I have one of his books in my wishlist, and I held my breath as I clicked on your video thinking that I may have misunderstood his credentials or credibility.

[@rnnyhoff]

Enlightening, sobering and calming presentation of "just the facts, ma'am" ... as a skeptical searcher, avowed humanist, I welcome this respectful interchange. Thank you.

[@minmax5]

Great video! I'm glad to hear I had never even heard these misconceptions before, but I found learning about them very interesting. I would love to see some more content like this. Thanks!

[@tannerjack9520]

Speaking of misconceptions Bart Ehrman is full of them!

[@ems7623]

I'm not embarrassed to admit that even I, a PhD art historian who specializes in the modern era, still believed the Council of Nicea myth about the the biblical canon until just a couple years ago. I had to correct myself as i was preparing to teach for the first time an introductory survey course which covered Late Antiquity. I have to tell you that, having had this experience and having taught for 20+ years now, there are certain historical periods that have more than their fair share of historical myths attached to them. They are:. Late Antiquity and Early Christianity, the Aztec civilization, the Vikings, West Africa before colonization, early Islamic civilization, ancient Judaic civilization, Carthage, and the Celts. These topics are littered with historical misconceptions and misrepresentations. There are others who will probably join this club in the future, as we finally learn more about them.

[@SheikhN-bible-syndrome]

Manny p hall talks extensively about the council of nicea and lays out an entire 1.5 hr long lecture about how the council of nicea decided on every single book that went into the Bible and then what to do with the ones that didn't get into the Bible and it goes completely 100% against what this guy is saying and seeing as how Manly p Hall was the highest ranking Mason of his time and rewrote the majority of their literature that was lost I'm going to say he's probably right in this dweebs not

[@diansc7322]

@@SheikhN-bible-syndrome man I've read the canons of the council of Nicea and none of them mention anything about the canon. They do speak about the trinity and when to celebrate Easter (the actual topics the council talked about). Also the masons were created like 1500 years after Nicea lmao

[@SheikhN-bible-syndrome]

@@diansc7322 the modern factions perhaps but the brotherhood dates much further back And any info you find on the council is what they want you to find and by no means reflects reality

[@diansc7322]

@@SheikhN-bible-syndrome so how the heck are you going to find the truth if you can't research by yourself, if all info is changed how are we supposed to know what happened

[@SheikhN-bible-syndrome]

@@diansc7322 that's a question worth finding the answer to.

[@BootlegSonicToy]

So going to Gehenna was basically going to Brazil

[@mervynsoo8353]

😂🤣

[@Outspoken.Humanist]

Excellent. Thank you. In particular the Mithras section. I had long discarded the notion that Mithraism informed the Christian tradition but I was under the impression that many of the stories were the same but the timelines did not indicate which came first. To discover that we actually know almost nothing about Mithraism is interesting.

[@julianmcmillan2867]

This reply is really late, lol. The skeptic attempt to link the deified Jesus to parallel traditions at the time is common. I've seen claims that Jesus is actually stolen from Horus. Or that Jesus is actually Romulus or Sol. What is most likely is that early Christians, trying to make sense of their supposed Messiah's humiliating death, rationalised a resurrection narrative based on their exposure to common cultural themes at the time. Sort of the same effect as saying to a toddler "Your dog spot went to the great doggy park in the sky". The risen god, Jesus, is Christian improv.

[@braden_m]

This was VERY very helpful to me. Sometimes I forget where I get information and stuff like this blends in with some of the more scholarly stuff Ive come across, and so content like this seeking to clarify the discourse is indispensable. My thanks to you and Dr. Ehrman

[@aikido7]

BIBLICAL ILLITERACY IS RAMPANT. There is no description of the resurrection event in the four gospels. There were no texts, so medieval painters tried to fill in the blanks. The non-canonical Gospel of Peter is an early Christian writing that describes the actual resurrection. "And in the night in which the Lord's day was drawing on, as the soldiers kept guard two by two in a watch, there was a great voice in the heaven; and they saw the heavens opened, and two men descend with a great light and approach the tomb. And the stone that was put at the door rolled of itself and made way in part; and the tomb was opened, and both the young men entered in. "When therefore those soldiers saw it, they awakened the centurion and the elders, for they too were close by keeping guard. "And as they declared what things they had seen, again they saw three men come forth from the tomb, and two of them supporting one, and a cross following them. And the heads of the two reached to heaven, but the head of him who was led by them overpassed the heavens. And they heard a voice from the heavens, saying, 'You have preached to them that sleep.' And a response was heard from the cross, "Yes." "

[@braden_m]

@@aikido7 wut

[@aikido7]

@@braden_m A description of the actual event of the resurrection can be found anywhere in the Christian Bible.. No. Place. Anywhere. Nowhere.

[@braden_m]

@@aikido7 I guess I’m just confused what that specific thing has to do with my comment

[@aikido7]

@@braden_m I admit I am puzzled by the term "WUT." Does it have any thing to do with the Qanon conspiracy ???

[@nicolistruszkowski3355]

Definitely something to research on, and ponder. A good conversation starter.

[@geertien]

I feel you’re gravely missing the point here. The first point is usually used to be critical about the Bible being the indisputable exact word of God, as it has been decided much later what is actually canon. I never heard about that specific council even, but when specifically it was decided is completely besides the point. The second point I mainly heard and discussed while I was still a Christian and it was about disproving the idea that people had that the Bible described “Hell”, as the place described here actually refers to a real world place, that is true regardless of whether they burnt trash there or sacrificed children. The third and fourth point are awfully specific and are even debatable as indicated by the answers so I don’t think you can really call that misconceptions. This also holds mostly for the fifth one. Moreover, I never heard of this idea, the idea that is commonly shared here (amongst Christians and non-Christian’s alike) is that Jezus was not born in December, but that the celebration of Jesus’ birth was moved to this period to coincide with the holidays of pegan people concerning fertility (with pine trees for example, which explains why we have them at Christmas) to more easily convert them. That might of course also be untrue, but again I’d hardly call it a misconception.

[@TeleportRush]

The final one usually is what they discussed but more broad, as in, there's about a dozen or so surviving stories about people who did parts of jesus's story before he did.

[@canwelook]

Gehenna an atheist misconception??? The King James version of the bible (not exactly an atheist document) translated Gehenna as hell. And Christians for almost 2000 years have spread the myth of eternal burning in this place. And Jesus (e.g. Mark 9:43) describes it as a place of unquenchable fire for the souls and bodies of non believers where the worm never dies. Their interpretation of Jesus' words have been used for millenia to justify Christian claims of eternal torment for non believers.

[@shriggs55]

I'm always open to being corrected-and-today I was.I think it's safe to say that Dr.Ehrman knows what he's talking about,although I'm sure he has his detractors.I am guilty for spreading some of this misinformation and myths myself,via the internet and one on one conversations.I probably would have continued such information if it wasn't for this video.So,thanks a lot-and thanks to Dr.Ehrman,also.

[@brocklindseth7278]

Well said. I've done the same and I very much regrett it.

[@Lerian_V]

@@brocklindseth7278 Have you asked God for forgiveness though? Lol

[@delphi247]

You are an amazing example for how one should conduct themselves in argumentation and general skepticism. Thank you for showing that it is entirely possible and (helpful!) to try to pursue truth instead of only aiming to reinforce your own beliefs.

[@wessexexplorer]

I’m very skeptical of the Christmas story. All over Europe, winter solstice celebrations occurred with Saturnalia in the Roman world being well known and having much resemblance of Christmas traditions, such as gift giving and feasts. That the church wishes to claim this is just a co-incidence is exactly what I’d expect people in power to say if they wanted to replace the existing winter solstice celebrations. May be they did that with Easter too🤔

[@ethanmcclain7570]

Easter is a hard no on that. Easter is intentionally dated based around Jewish Passover due to theological reasons concerning the time of Christ's death and resurrection.

[@capitalb5889]

@@ethanmcclain7570 but the Passover feast is mentioned during the passion story

[@ethanmcclain7570]

@@capitalb5889 It is, especially during the Last Supper

[@jessewilley531]

So you're saying that modern translations of The Bible should say 'Baltimore' instead of Gehenna?

[@clauaome25]

Philly 🤣🤣

[@jessewilley531]

From my few visits, Philly wasn't half as bad as Baltimore. I mean, at least their Children's Museum wasn't a few doors over from a strip club.

[@brocklindseth7278]

I wish that the comment section on Fox News clips had even a fraction of the civility, respect, and politeness that the comments on this does. I'm a fan of GMS and Dr Ehrmans, but I tip my hat to all of you, too.

[@Gaddsch]

really like your videos. You pretty much seem to be that self-reflecting person, that highly senses the benefit of the community and strives for it, that society needs. And thats exactly that kind of characteristic i highly appreciate. Youst want to let you know! If you once visit germany and need a guide or a place to stay in southern germany, let me know. Now or in 10 years doesn't matter. Cheers!

[@blindazabat9527]

It's funny how this scholar laughs dismissively at a letter written 30 years after the Council of NIcea by someone who attended it but gives so much credits to accounts of the resurrection of Jesus also written at least 40 years after the event allegedly took place and from popeple who weren't eye-witnesses.

[@ajaxwillis3962]

I'd never heard any of these beliefs before. It's interesting, but it confused me a bit. How in the world did any of them get spread around so far and deep that it would need to be addressed like this?

[@hayuseen6683]

The typical way, people relaying to people what they heard from other people. Same way people heard sitting too close to the tv will make you blind.

[@capitalb5889]

Some seemed pretty insignificant, but the Council if Nicea is quite well known as the point at in which the current canon if the Bible was agreed. I didn't know it was incorrect.

[@jakalair]

My friend and I got one of these wrong last night. This is why having conversations about this is so hard. Human memory, at least mine, is crap.

[@danielmacmaster5822]

I respect your willingness to address multiple points of view. Good job.

[@henrimourant9855]

You should also checkout Tim O'Neill he's an atheist who tries to debunk atheist misconceptions about history.

[@danieleyre8913]

And O’Neill’s also a hilarious arsehole who doesn’t shy from giving some of the more cretinous peddlers of misinformation some deserved ridicule and mockery.

[@cygnustsp]

I saw a recent interview with Bart, he's done so many I can't remember with whom, but as an ex Jehovah's Witness I found it funny when he said y'know the JWs actually got a lot of things right.

[@cygnustsp]

The whole Gehenna thing, it was drilled into us over and over that the place was a continually burning fire that annihilated everything and to JWs that means eternal destruction, not a place to torture souls. I'd never heard that the whole thing was invented in the 13th century I gotta look into that.

[@patrickngunjiri5340]

@@cygnustsp the Jws actually explain gehenna very well in their insight book just like but explained but with finer historical details.. and then explain what jesus meant by saying you'll be cast in gehenna....eternal destruction to Jws just means death with no resurrection...you cease to exist and never come back again

[@jackeilhigh]

Beautiful and this is why I love this man. Fair is fair.

[@madmarcus1382]

Great video, Drew. Thank you.

[@lemondrizzlecake7766]

Uh, I definitely was taught in (non-religious) school that the Council of Nicaea canonised the new testament. Brain shattered. How could this make it into history textbooks for so long when the connection is so flimsy? I had never heard of the other misconception but then again, I am not very deep into this specific debate so I'm not surprised.

[@NovaSaber]

I was actually taught that one in a Christian school.

[@crhu319]

Nicaea was long before St. Jerome's Vulgate Bible of 402, and even after that Augustine authorized including Revelation when prior to 410 sack he had opposed it.

[@canwelook]

Fine. The council of Nicea has been misrepresented. Good to correct this myth. But bottom line ... so what? The correction changes nothing of real substance. The church and Roman leaders still did those exact same things, just at a slightly different time and place.

[@lemondrizzlecake7766]

@@canwelook I was just curious how such a misconception could make it into textbooks, that's all.

[@canwelook]

@@lemondrizzlecake7766 my response wasn't criticising what you wrote. I was challenging why the video didn't just correct the fact instead of dramatising it as a "misconception spread by bible skeptics".

[@timeshark8727]

Wow, Ehrman is getting around lately... not sure if I'm glad about that or not. I find him to be interesting, and far better than most of the regular Christian apologists, but still not the most honest of presenters. He relies on a few too many fallacies for my liking, things like "argument from scoff", "arguments from authority", and "strawmen".

[@user-uu2cj9ct3j]

I get that a lot of skeptic channels are probably happy to get a scholar on their channel to discuss with, as this isn’t always an opportunity, but it has been a bit tiring… I agree. But a man’s got to advertise I guess.

[@dma8657]

So you think he’s a christian apologist? Interesting.

[@timeshark8727]

@@dma8657 I know he's not a Christian, and its mean to put him in the same category as their apologists... but its hard not to sometimes. Its just... the scholarship around the bible is so astonishingly bias, probably due to centuries of limitations and belief requirements. When people ask him to present some of his evidence his favorite response seems to be to giggle and point vaguely to some nebulous "scholarly consensus", and that irks me. This is especially the case when people try to talk to him about historical Jesus. When someone points to the consensus in most fields, fields that don't restrict their historians and scientists with belief clauses and limitations on their findings, they can usually also use that starting point to find good, evidence based, reasoning and information... not so with Christian scholarship.

[@martinjoseferreyra1961]

I'm a Catholic, but rationally I'm not in favour of one idea or a set of ideas, I just support truth-seeking. And this is genuinely truth-seeking. Let's not let our visions of the cosmos disclaim sincere hunger for Truth - even if we think they are wrong

[@alienplatypus7712]

This is great, the best way to fight the still pervasive concept of "Atheism is a religion, it takes faith to be an atheist" is to publicly analyse our own and each other's beliefs to help make sure we don't believe anything unfounded.

[@russellmiles2861]

Oh I don’t know. I always figure the best book for Atheist is the Bible.

[@billyhw5492]

Should a PhD not make mistakes like saying that no council ever even talked about the canon before Trent? He sounds more like a Sunday School teacher.

[@MAX-tw3qz]

It's all the scholars, scribes and teachers have even done, it's sustained entire civilisations.

[@arachnophilia427]

it's a slight misstatement. no council specifically ruled on the canon until trent. though several early snyods did list what was in their canon, and it's pretty much current back in the 4th century

[@mvic81818]

These are very specific detailed references to the Bible. People like Bill Maher never talk about stuff like this, let alone make these false claims.

[@ojrmk1]

Love this. The only thing that pisses me off more than people I disagree with using misinformation is people that I nominally agree with using misinformation. They're letting the side down.

[@yourbigfatdog992]

that backround looks so good, very pretty lighting :)

[@samuelviden7412]

But there are five misconceptions listed in the description... :)

[@TeleportRush]

To say that the first council of Nicaea has 'nothing' to do with canon is a little disingenuous, imo. Correct me if I'm wrong, but interpretations were discussed at this council, correct? Specifically, in order to reach consensus on aspects of the religion such as the trinity. This, would undoubtedly mean that it had quite a lot to do with canon, even if it didn't set the whole canon in stone, it was attempting to forge a canon in at least some respects.

[@travisborst528]

I had thought this my self...

[@andrewsuryali8540]

No. In Nicaea as far as we could tell there was no attempt to determine the baseline of sources (canon) when discussing the Trinity. See, BOTH sides started their arguments by citing the same source: Origen. At this point in time the entirety of the Church still thought of Origen as their best theologian and both original leaders of the disputation (Arius and Alexander) based their interpretations almost solely on Origen's works. Athanasius, who took over the political maneuverings, didn't actually present his own ideas. He was just pushing Alexander's, which were based as much on Origen's works as Arius' were. What actually happened was two factions of Origen's students fighting over their interpretations of what he said. When they went to scripture they cited the same scriptures cited by Origen to formulate his theology. The Church didn't start looking at things from first principle basis until Ephesus (two councils later) thanks to the influence of the then-recently-deceased Saint Augustine of Hippo's view on canon and adherence to a single set of teachings reaching widespread acceptance. The biggest irony is that, thanks to the precedent set at Ephesus, the second Council of Constantinople in 553 finally condemned Origen, which technically meant BOTH Arius and Alexander were wrong! However, by that time the Trinity had become entrenched in Church theology.

[@TeleportRush]

@@andrewsuryali8540 In other words the argument is semantical on what 'canon' means. Plus, if they are citing scripture, it means they ARE establishing parts of it as canonical. Just because the argument 'they laid out the full canon' is wrong doesn't mean the argument 'it had nothing to do with canon' is right The main point of the first incorrect argument is to combat the idea that the bible was written while the story was still fresh anyway, which most christians without historic knowledge believe

[@redundantjovianthor2225]

Can't wait till there's closed captions/subtitles to accommodate my hearing impairment! but here's MY misconception: How is, if "God is the word and the word is god", writing not idolatry?

[@pxnchx93]

We need more of this.

[@nicodemusedwards6931]

Growing up as a Christian, one of the big truths I held was this idea. “Even if the word of god is perfect, people aren’t. People lie, cheat and twist words. So sometimes, if people say something is the word of god, they might just be using that for their own ends, or not know they’re using it for someone else’s ends.” I’m agnostic now. If there is a god, I don’t believe it to be a knowable thing. I guess I could be considered an agnostic deist maybe. But... I think there’s some wisdom in what little me thought. That you have to be careful about what you believe and why the person saying it said it. If you’re a Christian, or if you hold any faith, more power to you. But... be mindful and don’t be afraid to seek truth, even if it feels uncomfortable. Your god gave you a keen mind and wit to combat lies and deception, not fall prey to them. Edit: This also goes the other way around. We have big brains with the capability of comprehending and creating truly awesome things. So take the time to educate yourself and not spread lies or misconceptions that just divide people unnecessarily.

[@hayosh9309]

I think you’ve learned the valuable lesson from Frank Herberts Dune series, overall message “beware of charismatic leaders”.

[@heavenbound7-7-7-7]

Nicodemus Edwards "I’m agnostic now. If there is a god, I don’t believe it to be a knowable thing." If God has revealed himself to us through Jesus Christ what makes you think he's unknowable?

[@nicodemusedwards6931]

@@heavenbound7-7-7-7 ... Because that requires god to have revealed himself through Jesus. Which is something I don’t believe.

[@ChrisSmith-xh9wb]

How refreshing to hear some actual facts. I too thought that Gehenna was a rubbish dump(I knew the rest as well), and have often brought his into discussions about Hell. It is intriguing that such an error could have become so entrenched.

[@andrewsuryali8540]

It's entrenched because it isn't entirely an error. There WAS a rubbish dump in Gehenna, or rather there have been several rubbish dumps there over the centuries. That has been proven by archaeology. It was a depression in the ground right next to a large urban center with ancient history of habitation, so occasionally trash would be dumped there. The misconception is that the whole valley was purposefully being used as a rubbish dump.

[@ChrisSmith-xh9wb]

@@andrewsuryali8540 Thankyou for the information. That was helpful.

[@canwelook]

Rubbish dump v place of child sacrifice. Nice to be precise. But not a big issue. The only big issue is whether death is mere extinction (Judaism), or eternal torture for non believers (spread by Christianity).

[@ChrisSmith-xh9wb]

@@canwelook All the historic associations of Gehenna (and there are others) add to the depth of the metaphor. , The distinction between the two positions on life after death is not clear cut. NT descriptions of the fate of unbelievers are varied and metaphorical (Gehenna/fire, darkness, ejection, destruction), and although unpleasant and eternal it is not clearly defined. In the OT Daniel speaks of those "sleeping in the dust of the earth" rising to either "eternal life" or "shame and everlasting contempt". The more important issue for Christians is that, to save us from this fate (which was not designed for us, but for "the devil and all his angels"), Jesus offered himself as an atoning sacrifice. This sets us free from the consequences of condemnation, whatever they might be.

[@canwelook]

@@ChrisSmith-xh9wb I'm hearing you think that whether non believers are subject to eternal suffering (spread by Christianity) or simply extinction (spread by Judaism) is not clearcut. Have you ever thought why not? Christians have, virtually universally, believed for millenia that hell is eternal torment in a firey hell. Now you say people are confused about this because it is not clear. So... given this major confusion amongst devout Christians, do you believe your bible god is not interested in them knowing the 'truth', or interested but incapable of communicating clearly?

[@TechBearSeattle]

Two possible misconceptions that I would be interested in hearing about regarding Nicaea, if you were to do a follow-up. First is that the supporters of what would become the orthodoxy deliberately put the Arian bishops out in the exurbs, and then arranged to have the doors to the council sealed with no further admittance after the orthodox bishops had arrived but the Arian bishops had not. Thus, the orthodoxy became the orthodoxy as a result of blatant political and logistical maneuvering and not because of the orthodoxy being more popular among believers or having the alleged support of God. Second is that only bishops were invited, and that forms of Christianity that did not have the rank of bishop -- like most schools of gnosticism -- were therefore entirely unrepresented. Or similarly, that the invitations were specific to ONLY the controversy between proto-orthodox and Arian schools, leaving everyone out who were already seen by both groups as heretics, again resulting in orthodoxy being defined purely by politics and not at all by merits or divine inspiration.

[@jesskcanada]

Great video, love this style. The only thing is, I've heard so many different versions of "Dec. 25/the virgin birth, etc., are based on ______" besides just Mithras. It would be nice if the misconception addressed by Dr. Ehrman was broader, covering the various common claims and not just the Mithraic one

[@justaguy6100]

That was an interesting revelation about the Council of Nicea, though you could have added that it's significance would have been establishing the Xtian trinity. BUT for me anyway, it does beg the question of who rejected such tomes as the Book of Thomas and Judas from being part of the canon.

[@andrewsuryali8540]

Gospel of Judas was already condemned by Irenaeus by the end of the 2nd century. It's pretty safe to say that it's one of those books which were never going to be considered for canon by the proto-Orthodox. Gospel of Thomas (the famous one, not the Infancy Gospel) is a more difficult case as we know some earlier Church fathers considered it scripture but Origen clearly considered it heretical. One hypothesis is that the Gospel of Thomas we have is not the same as what the church fathers before Origen were reading. In fact, only three of the sayings of the present Thomas would have directly contradicted orthodox theology. It may be that originally there was a perfectly acceptable Gospel of Thomas, but someone later circulated a gnostic "update" that was then rejected by the proto-Orthodox.

[@tongakhan230]

Easiest way to figure that out is, if God wanted those books included in the Bible they would have been.

[@justaguy6100]

@Tonga Khan Ok and if God had wanted us to fly, he'd have given us all unlimited airline miles.

[@diansc7322]

@@tongakhan230 so why does he allow different denominations to have different books? Ethiopian Orthodox bible has 81 Catholic (majority of Christians) has 73 Protestant has 66

[@tongakhan230]

@@diansc7322 : There is ONE BIBLE. That is the one translated in to over 3,000 languages. No other book has even reaches the 100 language mark. Thus, giving all humans the opportunity to learn about God and his purpose. Satan tried to get the Bible destroyed. The apostate church suppressed, and even tried to destroy the Bible. People who dared to read or translate the Bible were burned. However, God protected his Word. Even today, Satan is trying various tactics to distort God's Word. Adding books and such. It doesn't matter because God's holy spirit moves peoples hearts to know the truth. Just think. Did the first Century Jews who became Christ's disciples carry a Bible around with them. Or any scroll of scripture with them? These were kept in Synagogues. John 6:65 He went on to say: “This is why I have said to you, no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.” Of course, having the Bible does help. Jesus in prayer to God: John 17:17 Sanctify them by means of the truth; your word is truth.

[@MG-ot2yr]

Its all kind of irrelevant when the big picture still remains that Christianity is a product of a lengthy series of religious syncretism, branched off of Judaism, which too was branched off of Canaanite beliefs, which were influenced by Mesopotamian and Egyptian myths. Sure, you can argue over some of the specifics but doesn't change the fact that its myths that evolved from earlier myths.

[@SinHurr]

Gilgamesh pissed about missing the back logged royalty checks.

[@Otherwise88]

So it's all fanfiction?

[@markusklyver6277]

@@Otherwise88 Like most religions, yes. Humans take and blend ideas from each other all the time.

[@MG-ot2yr]

@@Otherwise88 Pretty much, though in ancient times a lot of the blending of religions came from the blending of cultures due to constant conquering of territory. But others are intentional plagiarism, mostly because its easier to sell to people if it has some elements of familiarity....a good example would be Mormonism, Smith hijacked the Jesus myth and repackaged it.

[@SheikhN-bible-syndrome]

@@Otherwise88 fanfiction is what we have in Hollywood today back then they had allegories that were flamboyant so you would not forget them and they have a completely different hidden meaning to the one being red

[@stevenmeyer8211]

This was an education for me. I had sort of taken it for granted that the Christmas story was lifted from Mithraism. I do, however, wonder to what extent the date was chosen because it coincides roughly, with the solstice.

[@farlado5459]

That's the general pattern for date selection for Christian holidays: the goal was to align Christian holidays with dates of more general celebrations other religions had, to make it easier to transition people into a Christian faith.

[@erikboncoref.7020]

It's interesting that Dr. Erhman actually distinguishes the fact of having people who understood the writings of the Bible -I know that the actual topic was the New Testament, but it could be applied to the Old as well- with a more symbolic approach instead of a literal one; this, according to my actual understanding, is the very point, and what's being missing during the vast majority of the biblic discussions around

[@dharmadefender3932]

The Nag Hammadi library probably WAS buried because of persecution The early Christians were no different than ISIS was. You can find this on Hixiey's book "the Darkening Age" As for lifted from Mithraism, that's probably untrue. But they were both mystery religions like Mithraism was.

[@Chrysostomus_17]

If the early Christians were like ISIS they wouldn't have spent 300 years celebrating their peaceful martyrs. They would have waged a very bloody war against the Empire but that didn't happen. They literally conquered the world's greatest empire through pacifism.

[@khill8645]

@@Chrysostomus_17 Just look up Arianism and early sectarian Christian violence - a bishop was murdered at Ephesus and regular inter-sect violence happened in Constantinople and Antioch (one such event even reportedly resulted in 3k deaths). Expand the scope to the first couple of CE centuries in the Middle East as well, and you get the conflicts between the Eastern and Syriac Christians versus the Western Christians, and things get a *lot* more contentious. The early Christians were a lot of things, but paragons of pacifism isn't one of them.

[@andrewsuryali8540]

The debate about the Nag Hammadi library is currently centered around the question of what the cave was. If it was a sort of hermit retreat, then the burial was actually a common way to store things in the middle of the desert. Other hermit retreats in Egypt and Syria also display similar preservation of perfectly common documents. Retreats were not occupied year-long, but when they were occupied the inhabitants expected to be able to do stuff like deepen their spiritual learning, so it was common to bring their own reading materials. However, the remoteness of the retreats also mean it's a massive pain to lug books around every year or every few years, so it was more reasonable to keep a library on-site. Of course if you kept a library in the middle of nowhere nobody would be able to maintain it and keep the books in good order, plus people might ransack it for valuable books. So you bury the library, then next year when your fellow monks want to go, you tell them where the books were buried and they dig them up, and after they finish, they bury the library again, and so forth. Therefore, if the cave was actually a hermit retreat, the books were probably not buried due to persecution originally. It was just how they kept libraries back then. Instead, persecution might have been the reason the retreat fell out of use and the library was left there.

[@Chrysostomus_17]

@@khill8645 Well of course you're going to see violent incidences because by your own metrics you're expanding the timeline to after the conversion of the Roman Empire and taking the Middle East into account as well.

[@khill8645]

@@Chrysostomus_17 Wait, so your assertion is that because early Christians didn't actually go to war with the Romans under Hadrian, when it was arguably the strongest militarily it would ever be as an empire, is proof that they weren't violent at all? I can't even begin to explain how irrational that is, but thanks for proving that no matter how illogical an argument is, someone is willing to make it to further some theological axe they're grinding.

[@flowingafterglow629]

The thing I don't like about your Mithra question is that you really loaded it with the "directly lifted" from Mithraism. There's a lot of baggage implied in the question that I think goes beyond the normal claims, to the point where I think it is even dishonest.

[@Huntanor]

I agree. Using the general Christian definition of a usable source we have secondary sources for external rites of the mystery cult. People discussing their rite as witnessed by out sides and their general public facing behavior. It primarily non-contemporary Christian source that accused them of stealing rites. It's hardly made up based on a few ritual alters. Also many scholars think it's cult based on the old Persian Zoaratrian Mithras cult and that's another source of the idea it had Christian like rituals. Zoarastrian practices is a widely accepted source of many Christian rights and ideas that a great deal more is primary source supported. Is this proof of literal stolen rites? No. It's it suggestive of the idea other non-christian ideas influenced early Christians? Absolutely.

[@gonufc]

Very cool! Would be great to have a video about the proper known truths of Nicea considering there is so much conjecture about it. Was it motivated by Constantine's mother in reality? Did it really have any kind of "Executive Editor" status in terms of scripture selection and rejection? Was it generally accepted by most Christian sects of the time (especially given their new found legal status!). All things claimed and disagreed about. Personally I find it most fascinating that a society can effectively do a complete 180 (over some time of course) on their religious "Beliefs" (or accepted statuses) purely based on social normalcy- it is a fascinating lesson for how people will _buy into_ these stories due to what actually amounts to little more than peer pressure.

[@mrsenstitz]

Is there a school of philosophy or discussion about this subject? I find it fascinating.

[@geraldbrienza4474]

I love Bart and agree with everything he writes except the historicity of Jesus. What are your thoughts on that?

[@zdvxr]

I believe in Jesus and I pretty much agree with Bart. That’s all I have to say.

[@geraldbrienza4474]

@@zdvxr : when you say believe in Jesus, do you mean as a historical person, or as described in scriptures?

[@Lerian_V]

@@geraldbrienza4474 Jesus was a historical person.

[@geraldbrienza4474]

@@Lerian_V not likely. Read Dr. Carrier’s “On the historicity of Jesus.”

[@Lerian_V]

@@geraldbrienza4474 I have been following Carrier since prior his doctorate. I have read his works. He claims he does not know definitively whether Jesus Christ was a historical person. Have you read Ehrman defense of Jesus' historicity? Let me know if you have and I'll suggest more books to read.

[@blindazabat9527]

The simple fact that understanding the Bible needs apologetics shows how unreliable a source it is. The longer you talk about scriptures, the more meanings can be contorted into whatever meaning one desires. If God had intended to communicate his Word to mankind, he would have used much simpler means of communication. That we are still trying to understand the scriptures some 2000 years after their writing is a blatant failure.

[@emperorofpluto]

Fascinating. Really enjoy your work. Always interesting and thought-provoking. One thing that always impresses me is the dedication with which you share your own experience and perspective an inspiration for those who still suffer at the hands of fanatics. Mithraism is fascinating but as BE points out, we have no direct evidence of their beliefs other than the surviving sacred sites. It's always fascinated me how there are at least four large churches in Rome (like San Clemente if I remember rightly) where the church was built over an intact Mithraeum which is perfectly preserved. This naturally led to speculation that the followers of Mithras simply pretended to be Christians while continuing to worship Mithras in their sacred underground sites, using the churches above as camouflage. Makes sense.

[@saintbrian2852]

Did you know that evolution is racist kzbin.info/www/bejne/maW5Yomhrqxka6s ⬅️

[@tuqann]

It was common in ancient times for scripture and holy text to be buried rather than destroyed out of reverence and devotion (Muslims have a similar culture that is frowns on destroying Quranic scripture documents that is prevalent to this day). The dead seas scrolls are a fascinating collection that gives us a wonderful insight to how the villages that populated the Dead Sea Vally region. Shame much of the collection was damaged or sold on thr black market denying us a piece of our human history. Thanks for the informative video!

[@jimlovesgina]

I treat the bible much like any other book of fiction. I don't go looking for inconsistencies. I just don't recognize any claims to the supernatural as fact. You should be able to demonstrate something is true without the use of a book full of anecdotes. Show me the evidence for your god or I will just go on dismissing your empty claims.

[@KenLord]

Bart's grand tour of all the youtubes to sell his webinar is getting a bit tiring. But this particular instance went a lot better than his latest appearance on Holy Koolaid ... where he pretty much laughed at and blew off questions collected from viewers that he deemed to be meaningless due to being posed by people who didn't know enough history to ask meaningful questions ... instead of actually trying to enlighten the audience. I suspect he scared off a bunch of people who otherwise would have attended his webinar.

[@azuradawn5683]

I totally agree - he seemed a lot more likeable and open here..

[@Anthropomorphic]

I recently heard of an interesting theory regarding the Nag Hammadi texts: they may have been buried as funerary goods. If so, then some of the tropes ancient Gnosticism has come to be known for may actually not have been as prominent at the time. The reason the texts have such a consistent preoccupation with stories about the creation and end of the world may be because those themes were seen as symbolically appropriate for a grave, or because they were favored by whoever they were buried with. The theory is indirectly supported by the fact that the proto-orthodox authority figure who banned the texts had no actual power to enforce the ban, and had made decrees in the past to little effect - or so I heard, anyway.

[@user-gk9lg5sp4y]

Another great video Drew

[@MontyVierra]

This is curious. I've never heard any of these claims. So, I wonder, who's made them? Certainly you could name somebody in each case. That way, even though you have a scholar who says they're wrong, we could see, if we wanted to, why they may have made their mistake. For example, I don't know of any "Mithra claim." On the contrary, the December 25th date being unsupported was recounted to me by a Jehovah's Witness, who said that it was all the Catholics' fault for appropriating a Roman holiday. For me, the Fox News War on Xmas began with the JW. Maybe I should watch the other video you recommend.

[@BluePhoenix_]

The closest thing i heard to any of these claims was that the new Testament canon being established by popular vote.

[@bradirons]

I am a Christian who loves your content (and that of people like Telltale). You are so fair that even when I disagree with you, I have a tremendous amount of respect for you. Thank you!!

[@MrFearDubh]

Dr. Ehrman is exactly right that the canon was not established (or even discussed) during the First Council of Nicaea. However, he seems to misspeak when he says that the first time the canon was brought up in a church council was the Council of Trent. He seems to be forgetting the Council of Rome from 382 CE which did address the books of the canon prior to Trent. He can be forgiven for making a mistake in a live interview, however. Thank you for this video. I love listening to Dr. Ehrman!

[@MrFearDubh]

Dr. Ehrman is right that the later Council of Trent did reestablish the canon of the Catholic Church in response to the Protestant Reformation, but dd not alter the canon from that established in the Council of Rome in 382 CE.

[@blondopawz]

So why are people so afraid of not existing if you wont burn? Even tho all of us literally didnt use to when we weren't born?

[@EpicGamerWinXD69]

While I absolutely couldn't agree more with on tackling both myths about the bible christians seem to believe and myths that atheists believe that bible contains, there is one minor thing I would have changed. Personally, I would have released this video first and then on myths christians believe. Why? Well because I'm personally a proponent of the idea "cleaning out your own yard before complaining to your neighbor how badly their yard looks", sort of speak. Hopefully my explanation made sense, but if it didn't, I can try to elaborate further if needed.