Bishop Barron on Reza Aslan's "Zealot"

Another part of a video series from Wordonfire.org. Bishop Barron will be commenting on subjects from modern day culture. For more visit www.wordonfire.org

[@seenthattinker]

Brilliant book review, Bishop. Thank you for your tireless work. May God bless you.

[@matthewbushe185]

I read Zealot and quite enjoyed it. I am a Christian and take the book as Aslan describes it himself, like a puzzle with most of the pieces missing. He uses his best "educated guess" to fill in gaps (AKA adding a perspective he was looking for). I enjoyed the historical context of first-century Judaism with a backdrop of vicious Roman rule. I can read something without it skewing my belief and my understanding. I am glad I read it but I very much appreciate Bishop Barron's explanation of how to approach books like this.

[@katherinedobler1969]

I agree with you.

[@JesusLordOfLords455]

I bet you also believe Guy Fawkes was a bad person too,...🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑

[@Mariusioannesp]

"Wait, for it...Christ's Resurrection" That was awesome.

[@phoenixsoto7312]

MariusIoannesP All Logic and reasoning was dropped at that point 😄

[@brendantannam499]

@@phoenixsoto7312 This notion that someone could come back from the dead really does spoil the story. It would have been better, I think, to preach a gnostic version about regeneration of the human spirit than trying to say it happened historically but that version might not have had the attraction the literal story has.

[@marvalice3455]

@@brendantannam499 especially since the gnostics already were so developed

[@gingeralex4009]

@@brendantannam499 I would be willing to accept that argument if the canonical Gospel writers were indeed Gnostics themselves. But Mark, Matthew, Luke and John all spawned from the apostolic tradition which was highly devout and literalist. If the only surviving gospels were the Gnostic gospels (which in themselves are also quite literalist I might add), you would have a better case. However, as William Barclay points out, the keys to understanding the spirituality and physicality of the resurrection are found in Acts 9 and 1 Corinthians 15. In 1 Corinthians, Paul explains that the resurrected Jesus appeared to the disciples in the same way he appeared to Paul, which as we see in Acts is neither strictly spiritual or physical

[@brendantannam499]

@@gingeralex4009 I very much doubt you read my comment at all.

[@paulschofield3072]

Thank you Father Barron for your insights. It is a difficult world that we live in. Your vocation has taken you to the brilliant platform of KZbin so that your Truth is available to all. Praise the Lord and pass the video camera. Thank you again.

[@diogoepronto]

"All the records of Jesus' life were written, like, at least 40 years after his death, so it's clearly all made up" Oh yeah, of course, because a book written 2000 years after his death by a muslim author who lives in a completely different country than he lived is clearly more reliable.

[@aughalough1]

Diogoepronto, so true!

[@Bamberino]

Not to mention almost all our information of Alexander the Great comes from Plutarch, over two centuries after his death. Guess o'l Alex isn't real!

[@linlin7541]

Touche

[@astrol4b]

@VideoAudioDisco09 yeah the powerful church of 70 a.d. compelled the author of Mark under threath of death, yes.

[@michaelwhite8031]

Don't be an idiot all your life !

[@dmonarredmonarre3076]

Bishop Barron. Your intellectual depth, your highly cultured awareness, your even-temperedness, your penetrating logic, and your relevant commentary all mixed in with your obvious sincerity are slowly nudging me towards the Catholic way and away from the "half-Protestant"/ "half scientific-materialist atheist." Thank-you for presenting one of the true gems of the West, the Catholic Church, in such a confident, reasoned way. As forces such as Islam, Cultural-Marxism, Relativism, Nihilism, Feminism, etc. all RELEVANT, CONSEQUNTIAL actors, are ceaselessly laboring to tear-down both the Church and Western Civilization, you calmly push back, fearlessly armed with culture, language, history and reason. Bless -you sir.

[@TheRidiculouslyOptimisticGuy]

Thank you Bishop Barron! God bless you more!

[@michaelkuhn8929]

So intelligent and well spoken...Love Bishop Barron. He is able to speak to the lay person like me and make me understand complex things.

[@malakmagdy2011]

Love it, Father! Thank you!

[@switzerlandful]

Has Reza Aslan ever challenged any scholars of classical history or first century historians on these issues? I noticed when I look up people like David Wood, William Lane Craig, John Lennox, Bart D. Ehrman or others, you noticed they've been in a lot of debates. They don't seem insecure or afraid to challenge others academically on certain topics. But I've never seen Aslan really go head to head with any authorities in areas he touches on.

[@ivanwalker3522]

So then, your point becomes "Proof Positive" that Mr. Aslan is "Insecure" and "Afraid", therefore and also, because "You've never seen Aslan (really) go head to head with any (authorities) . . . .", his writings and his thesis are of no value? Shame on you!

[@creatorsofreality246]

❤️❤️❤️ big love from Abissynia Ethiopia 🇪🇹 what a wonderful video and a wonderfully blessed man of God

[@gerzy100]

I wonder if Reza Aslam would write a similar book about Mohammed... Christianity has become a soft target these days

[@sarahhasan2572]

Actually he has. www.amazon.com/No-god-but-God-Evolution/dp/1400062136 I understand your point of view but you'd be better served if you actually read the book before criticising it

[@terratremuit4757]

I have read and, sadly, own the book. Where does it question anything about Muhammad's identity as compared to the descriptions in the Hadith and Sunnah? If I remember correctly it is just a dumbed down Islamic history book for the general public. As a history book was is lackluster and lacked the details necessary to fully explain Islamic history, and it certainly didn't break any ground in early Islamic scholarship compared to much more controversial books such as Ohlig and Puin's Hidden Origins of Islam or Luxenberg's Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran.

[@TheFool108]

Umm, he did. It’s called “No god but God: the origins, evolution, and Future of Islam” he uses the same exact process to investigate Muhammad from a historical perspective. It doesn’t discount Muhammad any more than Zealot discounts Jesus. He neither confirmed nor denied the resurrection. He clearly says it’s a matter of faith and not the job of the historian to make any claim on. Have you actually read the book?

[@TALHA-hr6xf]

He wrote more works on Christianity because he specialises in Christianity. This isn’t a case of a Muslim trying to discredit Christianity or jesus. At university, he had a lot of qualifications about religion in general, but the only one he specialised in was the New Testament, hence the books on Christianity.

[@knightowl787]

The Quran affirms Jesus is the Messiah and that he was born of the Virgin Mary. The Quran doesn't portray Jesus as a zealot, that is purely the opinion of Reza and not the Quran. Additionally, the Quran says that Christians must follow the Gospel teachings of Jesus, just as Jews must follow the Torah, and Muslims must follow the Quran and respect both the Torah of Moses and the Gospel of Jesus. Jews must follow the Torah 5:44 We revealed the Torah, containing guidance and light. The Prophets who had submitted themselves to the will of God, judged the Jews by the laws of the Torah. So did the godly people and the Jewish scholars who remembered some parts of the Book of God and bore witness to it. Mankind, do not be afraid of people but have fear of Me. Do not sell My revelations for a paltry price. Those who do not judge by the laws of God are disbelievers. Christians must follow the Gospel 5:46 And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Torah that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Torah that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah. 5:47 And let the People of the Gospel judge by what Allah has revealed therein. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the defiantly disobedient. Jews, Christians, and Muslims have each been given a path to follow. 5:48 And We have sent down to thee the Book with the truth, confirming the Book that was before it, and assuring it. So judge between them according to what God has sent down, and do not follow their caprices, to forsake the truth that has come to thee. To every one of you We have appointed a right way and an open road. If God had willed, He would have made you one religion; but that He may try you in what has come to you. So be you forward in good works; unto God shall you return, all together; and He will tell you of that whereon you were at variance. Muslims must respect the Torah and Gospel 3:84 Say: 'We believe in God, and that which has been sent down on us, and sent down on Abraham and Ishmael, Isaac and Jacob, and the Tribes, and in that which was given to Moses and Jesus, and the Prophets, of their Lord; we make no division between any of them, and to Him we surrender.' 5:68 Say, "O People of the Scripture, you are standing on nothing until you uphold the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to you from your Lord." And that which has been revealed to you from your Lord will surely increase many of them in transgression and disbelief. So do not grieve over the disbelieving people. 2:62 Surely they that believe, and those of Jewry, and the Christians, and those Sabaeans, whoso believes in God and the Last Day, and works righteousness -- their wage awaits them with their Lord, and no fear shall be on them; neither shall they sorrow.

[@zionofriel6313]

Very thorough. Love your stuff Bishop. Blessings! Glory.

[@ewancummins3106]

The basic problem with the insurrectionist argument is that is is flatly refuted by the historical sources, in and out of the NT. Reza Aslan is not a historian. It shows.

[@mehulmac23]

Thank you for answering the modern heresies Fr Barron !! God bless you.

[@unmaskinglies1327]

Fr. Barron is a big fat lie!

[@matthewstokes1608]

God Bless you idiot

[@nikolaip5834]

Honestly though, I have a lot of respect for you commenting and having actually READ the book. Unlike @DavidPakmanshow. I liked your point about how historians take passages in bible that work for their argument, then dismiss other passages that don’t. I guess everyone does that with the bible sadly... but it made me think! Thank you

[@jim22512251]

as a Christian i enjoyed "Zealot", not as the whole truth about Jesus, but as a well written exploration of a part of who Jesus is.

[@qaarulxiram4077]

jim22512251 i am muslim hu beleive in Jesus...a prophet..a man. But reza..is just a creative writer...he knows no more of jesus..than u n me. N his book proofs that. For example..he says...we know..little of jeusu...but i as a muslim know full of jeusu's account..from miracle birth..to his disappearance...no 3 ..no son of "god"...but a great phrophet of Allah sw. On of others...lik3 Ibrahim...moses...noah..n to me jesus..as muslim as me..

[@caligirliniowaworld]

The Buddha, Mohamed, Krishna and so on... all have been deified and given great abilities by very imaginative human beings grasping for hope in humanity’s struggle to give life meaning. Zealot humanizes Jesus in the era, culture and political issues of his time... he becomes more relatable and easier to understand.

[@huskyfaninmass1042]

Who has deified Buddha and Muhammad?

[@chrisgriffiths8454]

St Paul was the 13th apostle. Jesus recruited him after the resurrection, and he was most instrumental in bringing the gospel to the wider world. That's proof of Jesus existence. St Paul stuck to Jesus teachings to the letter. He didn't add anything to it or change it in anyway.

[@nickfromefa]

Chris Griffiths could it also be possible that St. Paul was simply a Roman pawn to subdue the Jewish rebellions by adopting and modifying their messiah story to be more gentle and less rebellious?

[@alfredthepatientxcvi]

@@nickfromefa Another Conspiracy theorist

[@BarbaraMerryGeng]

It’s very possible However, my next question would be, why did the Romans - execute Paul ? Especially since he was helping to ensure the legacy of what I’d now known as the Holy Roman Empire ? What did he do ? Or perhaps, not do ?

[@marvalice3455]

@@nickfromefa possible? Yes. However, you would need even a smidgeon of evidence to say that, and the romans hated the Christians way more than they hated the Jews, so you would need a *lot* of evidence to support

[@SPDATA1]

BS!

[@noelpucarua2843]

If I came across a book about the JFK assignation written in 2003 I might agree that is based on interviews, conversations and research but none of that would make me believe it was divinely inspired. Also, if the fact that Jesus is remembered because of the resurrection then I'd ask why is Buddha, Zoroaster, Mohammad, Moses etc remembered?

[@abdudelgado2260]

Good comment

[@chrispaige8880]

Thank you for this video -- it was a blessing. It's so hard to find anyone defending our faith anymore; everyone just seems to have given up. Indeed, I'm not sure why anyone thinks that Christianity could be a human invention from the 1st Century because St. Paul had no reason to defend the people he had been persecuting and the other apostles had no reason to trust/follow St. Paul. I'm not sure whether they're alleging a conscious conspiracy (for what would be the motive) or if they're alleging an unconscious conspiracy (for what was St. Paul's bias towards Christianity) or if they're just alleging everybody was nuts in some way that led them all to hallucinate the same thing (while remaining otherwise high functioning), but the story never made sense: the Resurrection really does seem the most logical explanation. Again, thank you & God bless!

[@vasohoward790]

It is a conspiracy and St Peter was a woman hater. You need to do some research.

[@antoniov64]

I would like to see what would happen to a Reza Aslan questioning the historicity of the koran and or the life of his beloved prophet.

[@roen6800]

I doubt Reza Aslan is even familiar with the historical problems with the development of Islam.

[@florinteo6795]

Rory Endrizzi. I know how the Quran was written and that it is not how they say it was written. Do you?

[@davidhumphrey7874]

Keir campbell. No he literally DID NOT. I've. Read No God But God and other than a few minor variances (Muhammad being able to read, the location of Makkah, etc), he regurgitates the traditional account of the Qur'an and Muhammad.

[@lokihammerfall7781]

They are historically accurate.(I'm not talking about stories in Quran which also are in the Bible...by the way Jesus is a myth)

[@aughalough1]

Loki Hammerfall, "Wait for it... Christ's Resurrection"

[@rachelefalcone5892]

God bless you!

[@donciwardell2282]

As Always Thank you Bishop Barron 🙏 God's Protection and Blessings be with you 🙏❤

[@rachealbrimberry8918]

It would have been interesting if Fr Barron had been in the audience at R Aslan's interview at the Chicago Library.

[@ArtLogins]

The reason why Jesus is remembered is... the need of his brother to be in charge of the rebellion.... Jacob came up with the idea that losing to Romans was part of Jesus's plan

[@brendos444]

When Christ says that his kingdom is not of this world, I think we shouldn't confuse this with the tendency to think that we will be taken somewhere else. The Christian hope is that heaven and earth join together and that the rule of heaven, God's Kingdom or the Kingdom of Heaven as Matthew puts it, will reign on earth. The point is that the Kingdom of God is not like the worldly kingdoms. It is the rule of God's love, not power and corruption and violence etc. NT Wright puts it well: God's kingdom is not of this world, but it is definitely FOR this world. In that way there are definitely political consequences of the Gospel.

[@brendantannam499]

@@ThePassiveObserver You could go to the end of the Book of Revelation to read this. Or, if you like, you could read N.T Wright's exposition of Paradise on earth.

[@emschafe]

The Church is apostolic. Being an apostle means one who is sent, ie from a sender. This type of structure is pretty common in academia. You have the definitive father of a subject and people define themselves in that realm by their relation to that father. "This guy learned from that guy who studied under Einstein". The father of Christianity is none other than Christ. He sent out the original 12 Apostles, and the Gospels were written from them. So it's like a game of telephone where everyone can hear what everyone else is saying and there are only 3 layers.

[@fz1205]

What did you say? "He sent out the original 12 Apostles, and the Gospels were written from them"! The FACT is that anything ever written about Jesus was written by a person or a community that never met him! Period.

[@michaelrogers4988]

Father Barron, could you comment on the works of Ursula Le Guinn, specifically on The Earthsea Trilogy? I have read The Farthest Shore and I think the are some interesting statements made about a "life of being and life of doing" that reminds me of Aquinas's take on God and being. Thank you, your videos punctuate my weekly routine.

[@jersvids]

3:50 Reza Aslan talks about that in the book. "Is not of this world" according to the ancient texts meant "this system" or "organization" 4:20 other people were performing and performed "miracles" and exorcisms around the time of Jesus as well.The difference between the other insurrectionists and Jesus is that nobody wrote about them almost a century after the fact.

[@guitardds]

Gamaliel echoed the same words of wisdom as you Fr. Barron. Acts 5:35-39

[@kimlersue]

Thank you!

[@entertaininformmedia7836]

My first impression of Bishop Barron. Very impressed!!! We need more voices like this to combat the ignorance of the masses.

[@jihhwood]

Zealot is a book well worth reading -- whatever your religious persuasion. Fr. Barron's critique represents one man's informed opinion, and he has every right to his views. However, thoughtful people willing to read the book with an open mind may very well come to conclusions different from his.

[@christophersmith7412]

His book is at best lazily researched and at worst intentionally misleading about historical facts. Reza claims to be a historical and theological scholar but this book exposes him to be nothing more than a man pushing an agenda. He takes verses that fit his narrative and discards anything that goes against it, his book is aimed at people who have no knowledge of history or scripture, which is unfortunately the majority of people today.

[@switzerlandful]

Yup. David Wood did nice review of Reza's book here kzbin.info/www/bejne/aZuvd4Gqft15qbc

[@livinginwilderness7913]

Reading Reza’s book with open mind, as some comments suggested, is like looking for a crust of fresh bread in the garbage.

[@chrismorrison3696]

This wise man asks why then is Jesus remembered by everybody?" Aslan emphatically points out that not even his enemies denied the miracles. He is remembered because he was NOT a "magician," like other prophets. He was of God. That isn't magic. That's miraculous and beautiful. This book made me love Jesus even more and admire his message. God bless us all.

[@claudiosaltara7003]

It is always a pleasure to listen to bishop Barron.

[@GuineaPigDan]

If it weren't for Lauren Green's shameful interview with Aslan, this book probably wouldn't be receiving the interest it is now. Whether you agree with Aslan's views or not, over-reacting to it like Green did will just draw more attention to the book.

[@rachealbrimberry8918]

Did you know a former Chicago Sun-Times reporter interviewed him in Chicago? Would recommend you watch that video. In depth, probing interview.

[@fz1205]

His book "Zealot" was already a best seller! As he says it only jumped from #4 to #1!

[@pineapplepeanuts]

I used to buy in to the whole Jesus-as-Insurrectionist idea when I was younger. But that was when I knew very little about the Bible - I just went on stuff I was told. Aslan, a CNN regular and darling of the political left, has been eviscerated by believers and non-believers alike for his religious distortions. He's done the same with Islam. The left's growing religion is politics itself, which is exactly what a secularized, Che Guerva-style Jesus aims to serve.

[@indviduation]

Nope

[@gladysseah4213]

I would love to watch a live debate between Fr Barron & Reza Aslan (:

[@Asia10175]

That would be interesting my fellow Jehovahs witness sister....dont these people know that Jesus luuuuuuvz them ?

[@thejasaeljehu]

I would not like to see Fr Barron dignify that Christianity hating Muslim with a debate.

[@unmaskinglies1327]

Reza Aslan win for sure!!!

[@musicfan5520]

@@thejasaeljehu wow & you call yourself a christian??? shame on you

[@abdudelgado2260]

Same, heard both of them talk and Reza will win …. Easily

[@NoName-oi9ev]

what is the painting at 5:16? Very intriguing.

[@hitman1421]

It’s tough to trust the thoughts of a person. Who’s entire existence depends on that idea.

[@jerryg3524]

Thank you Bishop Barron for your scholarly and clear repudiation of the usual arguments presented against the advent of Jesus and his astonishing impact on, and transformation of, human history. R. Aslan is certainly an eloquent speaker, an imaginative writer and a kind of media celebrity.. But I think some of his core ideas on the historical Jesus are quite derivative; he admits so himself. Certain of these ideas are taken from brilliant New Atheists such as Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins, to whom he apparently thinks himself superior (he is not), or those of biblical scholars like Bart D. Ehrman and Paula Fredriksen. Thanks again

[@PhuDuongSTRENGTHTRAINING]

Bishop Barron -- Is there a possibility that some aspects of the gospels were exaggerated, especially due to the fact that the primary form of story telling back in Jesus' time was oral and hence, less reliable? Please respond!

[@TheZealousNobleman]

I think Bishop Barron should work with 'The Great Courses' recording service to make known the truth about Christ Jesus' ministry. If that can be done; as Luke Timothy Johnson has done in return to Bart Ehrman's rhetoric on that same podcast! Amen!

[@jameswatrous1777]

Just read Richard Baukman's JESUS AND THE EYEWITNESSES, which you, Fr. Barron, recommend in this video. It's a very good book. I have not read Aslan's book. In your talk, Fr. Barron, you did not mention anything about the FOX News Channel interview that got people interested in Aslan's book. It would have been interesting if you had some comments on that.

[@user-ng8me7dh2e]

Can someone site the books mentioned so I can get them? Please and thanks!

[@WhereWhatHuh]

Jesus was not a "Zealot" in either the ancient nor the modern sense. He was not a Zeolotes -- an extremist sworn by a blood oath to murder Romans and collaborators. This is the origin of the term Zealot as we use it: to describe an emphatically single-minded follower of a cause. Jesus was not a Zealot in this sense either. He did not follow a cause; He was his own cause. His preaching was about Himself. He declared that He was the light of the world. He declared that if any many is thirsty, they should turn to Him. He declared Himself the bread of life. He called Himself "I Am," which was direct blasphemy if it were not true. He declared Himself to be God incarnate. Those are not the actions of a good man who follows a righteous cause and is consumed by it. They are the actions of a madman -- or of God incarnate.

[@nextchannelnext8890]

Bishop, Father, Your Excellency, after Diagnosing today's spiritual problems found in most "writers" ... please state "the Solution"

[@liljade53]

Jesus

[@RealistNo1]

This man, Bishop Barron, made many of the points I was thinking when I first heard the man Reza Aslan. I cannot help believing that Aslan has a bitter, bitter root with the Jesus he once met through salvation, and probably with his parents as well. Most bitter people refute Jesus or become atheist it seems to me, from bitterness in some event that happened to them that they interpreted as negative. Just hearing that he felt persecuted being an Iranian when he first came, then pretended to be Mexican, then accepted Jesus in college, all that tells me he was running from his own wounded identity, coming from the turbulence of his childhood. NOW that he is humanly educated, and more to the point, AMERICANLY educated, he can identify with his educated colleagues by his picking the bone by which he defined as being wounded. All of it stems from his desperate need to be rooted as a child and having two parents that did not give him that security. I can identify with his perilous plight for I had a similar complaint as a young Mexican girl, but JESUS saved me from all that, and my identity is with the Lord now. I am so thankful for that miracle, for it is a miracle when one can transcend any and all obstacles of being human through the spirit of God, and by acknowledging that spirit coming from Jesus. It is sad to me about Reza. I pray for Reza Aslan, that he will come to know the truth and return to the Lord, this time with complete stripping of human shame, pain, or identity.

[@JR-tl8tg]

so well said, I am just amazed how much damage a wounded soul is capable of, it will take whats false and half truths and turn it into absolute truth....sigh. That's why the family unit is so critical to the stability of society if it's broken by abuse or neglected all of which are clear sign of hurts, will bring about chaos that we are seeing today.

[@lobisw]

As someone said a few years back, many modern historical Jesus reconstructions say far more about the people doing the reconstruction than about the historical Jesus. Though I was originally doubtful of this claim, it seems to be accurate.

[@MCS1993]

Christ and his Church are still alive, still changing the world today. He has changed my life forever.... zealot would have never accomplished this.

[@NGAOPC]

"The Gospels were written decades after the events" was a contention I had heard from an otherwise very secularly-educated Orthodox rabbi who was teaching at several area universities, he appealed to his insider opinion status with his academic peers on the subject to dismiss the Gospel message of Jesus. He seemed to have no idea of the leap in logic of dismissing biographical writings ('bios'), written within lifetimes of witnesses...and likewise, no idea the Epistles precede the Gospels as whole works, the historical seriousness with which they're taken as being very close to their events in some cases even by a handful of years by establishment scholars of Bible, etc, etc - and no comparison to the many-years distance between the many events of the Torah and Old Testament works, and THEIR earliest manuscripts! He lost serious credibility in my eyes after that.

[@paullkaplan4140]

If you read the gospels you soon realise that they are not eye witness accounts. They differ too much on basics like the nativity and the crucifixion. In Matthew he has Jesus birth at the time of Herod the great who died in 4 bc. Luke has his birth in 6 ad when the census was taken. The synoptics has his crucifixion on good Friday with him on the cross from 9 am to 3 pm. John has him executed on Thurs with him on the cross from 12 o'clock noon till 6pm. How can anybody take the gospel stories seriously if the people who wrote them didn, t know the basic facts?

[@NGAOPC]

@@paullkaplan4140I’m not implying the authors are eyewitnesses, but that they had access to them isn’t unreasonable. I would look at Richard Bauckhams “Jesus and The Eyewitnesses” and authors accounting how ancient bios worked; people haven’t globally over history had the same primacy of what constituted “basic facts” or only interested in writing in a late modern mode of history, a mode no one would have had over most of history. People have read them for centuries, and heard them recited for almost 2000 years; why not compose/select one gospel record instead of collecting several, like the Diatesseron or The Heiland? - because the Gospels primary use was liturgical not as modern historical biography- even those differ - but were the best information *available* compared to competing accounts THEN, like accurate personal and place names, reflecting Jewish practice/knowledge and geographic details compared with later “gnostic” gospels - but not necessarily the best accounting or evidence we’d expect now. If I’m interested in a historical figure, and resources are scarce, do I grasp to one account and dismiss all others, or do I look for accounts I trust the most, were most widely read among communities who revered this person, offered wide, converging evidence on most factors (with some contradictions that occur in eyewitness accounts)?

[@knightoftheholyrosary5378]

Peace be with you

[@JenniferJoseph123]

I haven't read this book yet, but I'm getting the sense that this book reflects the Romans' and Jews' view of Christ. It can be interesting to read because we can get the sense to why they crucified Jesus. This can be used as a historical source as well, but not religious.

[@nl2766]

Why is Reza's version more reliable, without any accounts supporting his claum?

[@vasohoward790]

No accounts supporting Christian religion. Just a lot of BS that has been modified over the centuries to support the messages.

[@FlowLai]

@@vasohoward790 Lough at loud. Well that is just untrue, and modern day biblical scholarship has shown that the Gospel accounts are very accurate.

[@vasohoward790]

@@FlowLai No.

[@Terry-nr5qn]

@@vasohoward790 Yesn'tn't

[@vincenttorrieri9653]

Right on Father Barron. Unfortunate the fundamental points of the Christian movement is quickly dismissed as meaningless by the atheist movement. God Bless.

[@GiordanosRetort]

The Bishop's answer back to Aslan is essentially: 'We have it on good authority.' And this is where the crisis of meaning begins for those who's cultures are based on Church propaganda.

[@harrismohsin2355]

You can tell the bishop read this book with a preconceived idea it was wrong. I say this because hes making assumptions about what Reza Aslan's angle. The book was about historical Jesus and he didnt say Jesus was a failed prophet.

[@patriciahenkleman6241]

He is remembered because people think he was raised from the dead unlike the others

[@EustaceKirstein]

5:50 he starts hand-clappin'. You know a man is serious when he starts clapping on his words.

[@TheWorldsStage]

Whyyy👏was👏jesus👏remembered👏

[@messalinavozza1722]

..wow well spoken 🙏

[@danni3387]

lmao he didn't even read the book. his characterization of it is completely wrong, attributing arguments to it that it simply doesn't make.

[@JesusLordOfLords455]

@@danni3387 I thought this also, why couldn't Jesus be a zealot AND also be the Son of God? I believe Paul never stopped attacking the Jesus movement,...just changed his tactics. The book of James definitely seems to speak against Paul's "gospel of grace".

[@niallhogan1565]

We are talking about a man who lived two thousand years ago with no radio , tv , or any other mass media available yet he is still the center of World history. As far as Mr Aslan is concerned he will be forgotten a month after he dies

[@wehart2950]

Jesus wasn't just a man allegedly. He was a God. If a God were actually born in the form of a man and it wasn't just another version of many similar savior God's from that area you'd think someone would have written something down about it at the time. It looks more like the Jesus myth was made up years after Jesus allegedly existed. The entire story is ridiculous really.

[@Rosenzweigjcb]

Regarding the morals and ethics of Jesus, these weren't unique teachings as well. Hillel the Elder and works from the end of the Second Temple era share very similar values of golden rules, respecting your fellow man, and so on. I've heard one historian label the Gospels as a work very fundamentally connected with the Jewish view of morals, ethics, and relationships to other men (at that time). So the since that Jesus had divine sources for these humanitarian values isn't exactly very fruitful. As for Jesus being successful giving reason for his resurrection, I'm not sure. The point that differed with Jesus from other self proclaimed messiahs is that his followers would later preach to gentiles, especially those in Rome, because they had an explicit faith in revelations and the end of the world as we know it. More importantly, Christianity allowed Romans a religion that offered them more hope and happiness in their lives. Roman religion was complicated and didn't promise much for the peasants. Christianity offered a lot for the peasants and they could see sincere followers dying as martyrs for the religion. That's why Christianity prevailed as opposed to Bar Kokhba.

[@QU1RKONE]

Thank you for your videos, Bishop Barron. As an ex-Catholic that would love to once again find his faith I do appreciate you sharing your insight and opinions. I’ve not read Reza Aslan's "Zealot" so I am unable to comment on the book itself. That being said, I do have a few issues I would like to raise. First is your comparison of the anonymous authors of the canonical gospels to an investigative journalist preparing a story on the assassination of John F. Kennedy. I believe that characterization to be inarguably incorrect. The anonymous authors were not ancient journalists, impartially chronicling their objective observations. They had an agenda. They had something to sell. Human nature is human nature regardless of whether it’s 70 A.D. or 2015 A.D. One sells by making what one is selling relevant to specific group of people at a specific point in time. Much like the sermon I hear this Sunday would be vastly different from any sermon I would have heard three hundred years ago. BTW, I do not intend for use the term "sell" to come off disparagingly. Second is the substantial reliance on eyewitness testimony. With all the technological advancements that have been made the legal and judicial systems have primarily adopted scientific and forensic evidence (blood, DNA, semen, hair footprints, surveillance video, etc.) and are using eyewitness testimony preferably to corroborate evidence that has been attained by some other means. Having a family member that is a detective I can say they have long understood the shortcomings of eyewitness testimony. I’ll add a link to an article at the American Psychological Association highlighting the many flaws and inaccuracies of eyewitness testimonials in case someone is interested. Lastly, dying for one’s beliefs does lend any credibility to the argument whatsoever. I’ll use the specter of 9/11 to illustrate my point. On an unrelated note, I’ve read N.T. Wright’s “Who Was Jesus?”. I thought John Dominic Crossan’s “The Historical Jesus” was more comprehensive and engaging. Keep up the great work! ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ The Limits of Eyewitness Testimony www.apa.org/monitor/2011/12/eyewitness.aspx

[@research1982]

I love these people who apply these rational, logical approaches to the gospels and Jesus and God. These people who desperately cling to their minds alone to process all of this. As if, our limited minds can actually process God and that in this incredible, magical world that we exist in, think of all the amazing things the mind has accomplished, that this world that can be so understood by the mind. This is just the physical world, think about how amazing just our real tangible world is, if this can exist, is it so impossible to think Christ has risen from death. Why would Christ's story persist? People cling to their rationale like it makes them superior. Your brain is limited, your brain is your assistant. It is not what should be leading the charge in your life, it should help you along the way. Trust me, from my own experience, if you deny, that part of us that goes beyond rationale, beyond the mind, then you will suffer. There is a whole other side to us, that is our true guide that people just dismiss to their own dismay. Your brain excels at making you unhappy and it cannot process the father so how can you trust it to explain Jesus in a true way?

[@ravissary79]

they're not even using their minds very effectively. They share this almost desperate need to view Jesus as a flat monochromatic figure... which no one ever actually is. It's the worst sort of pseudo intellectual phony "reason" based arguments.

[@giftedtheos]

The Father didn't specifically mention the books by N.T. Wright, Ben Witherington, and James DG. Dunn at the end, but I'm sure he meant these: "Jesus and the Victory of God" -- N.T. Wright "Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, Volume 1" -- James DG. Dunn "The Jesus Quest: The Third Search for the Jew of Nazareth" -- Ben Witherington I'd also throw in, "Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity" by Larry W. Hurtado, which refutes any notion that high Christological views of Jesus evolved overtime.

[@DS19194]

The difference between the JFK example and the gospels is rather clear is it not? The gospels were written based on word of mouth alone, there was nothing written down about Jesus prior to the gospels and none of the gospels were physically written by anyone who actually met Jesus. It's like playing telephone with someone's life. Details are going to be added and forgotten and amended. On the other hand, a JFK book in 2003 has a ton of first hand accounts and information to work from. Bishop Barron, I challenge you to do better than this example.

[@Tsentralnaya]

RE: The Resurrection Defense around 6:00 - As a Catholic myself I don't think that's the only explanation, far from it. The soft, i.e. non-violent, message, the caring, charitable message, could in itself have been a popular alternative to a messiah who would only bring more devastation into an already inhospitable world. Giving meaning to suffering which would have been ever-present, and lest we forget about the influence of women to the movement of Christianity. The popularity of the message with "middle-class" (for lack of a better term) women could have done wonders for the message of Christ. My own wife has certainly softened my own heart and made me take the faith more seriously. Respect to your opinion, but I think relying on the resurrection is a weak defense. This is especially true in a world and land where miracles (and demonic influence) abounds.

[@nikkhare5788]

Mark, Luke, John and Paul don’t sound like middle eastern names. What were their original names?

[@patriciaasmar9132]

Excelente!

[@barnabyrt1012]

Well said, father Barron.

[@MGR1900]

Father Barron, please make a video about the new KZbin comment section and how the Google people fixed something that wasn't broken in the first place.

[@stephenmerritt5750]

It would seem to me a book such as that wouldn't deserve mentioning. I had never heard of the book or author and after this I will likely forget.

[@snowman1722]

That's a mature response lol. This book disagrees with my beliefs therefore I shall forget it.

[@stephenmerritt5750]

@@snowman1722 That's nonsense. I don't need to read that book anymore than I need to read 'Mein Kampf', and for the same reasons. Has nothing to do with some obscure belief system. Unless, of course, you think Adolph has something to teach us all.

[@joywisdom6598]

You Go 👍🙏👼 Bishop !

[@MySpace662]

Jesus taught eastern philosophy to his disciples that was misunderstood by theologians, when Jesus spoke of "My kingdom is not of this world", he was talking abou life after death and that the soul continues to live on.

[@adriancoliba]

Where did Jesus learn eastern philosophy?

[@MySpace662]

@@adriancoliba India and Tibet

[@Flamenco4U]

"Wait for it..."--I love it! (6:05)

[@filthyswit]

Barney Stinson!

[@Flamenco4U]

There ya go! Ha ha!

[@Richard_is_cool]

The only thing that *makes sense* is that he died and then un-died. How can you not see the paradox? What you said on Mark is quite right. As Mark was so close temporaly to the source, I invite you all to read the infancy narrative of Mark, what Mark wrote as to the Resurrection, teachings of Christ after Resurrection and Ascension. Seriously, grab the book and read it for yourself.

[@BoylenInk]

Richard S. Read in Mark 16:6 And he said to them, Do not be amazed; you seek Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He is risen, he is not here ... Mark 10:32-34 ... And taking the twelve again, he began to tell them what was to happen to him, saying, Behold we are going up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man will be delivered to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death, and deliver him to the Gentiles; and they will mock him, and spit upon him, and scourge him, and kill him; and after three days he will rise. (Also, Mark 8:31) So what if Mark doesn’t mention an infancy narrative; neither does John.i

[@SuperSundevil1]

Father, what are some great books on the historical Jesus?

[@anthony........]

Brilliant !!!

[@ravissary79]

And what's worse, to call Jesus just an insurectionist is to completely ignore the Qurran's perspective on Jesus, and that perspective is clear: he was a prophet, a miracle worker, was born of a Virgin, and the only sinless person who ever lived. The Qurran's only major departure from the bible on Jesus is over his divinity, details of his death, and whether he was resurrected. And Aslan's perspective on these Qurranic accounts that differ from the bible also totally violate the Qurran as well. He's not just taking a pair of scissors to the bible, but also the Qurran. He's attacking the bible as a theologically heretical Muslim and a liberally secular thinker.

[@assetpr]

Don't see that the disagreement has a reasoning foundation. While Reza wrote from a historic perspective, the Bishop argued from a faith perspective. There is no debate. It's a futile verbosity. Debate facts against facts, and faith with faith. Mainstreaming is so clumsy trying to win an argument for likes and popularity, then, missing the point of a debate, which should be arriving to a conclusion that benefits everyone with new knowledge. This is a childish practice. Why the Bishop didn't debate in front of Reza?

[@rondaria]

"Debunkers" ought to read Cold Case Christianity by J. Warner Wallace, a homicide detective. Fascinating and extremely lucid.

[@Yesica1993]

Seconded! J. Warner Wallace does a great job. He was an atheist way into adulthood and a cold case detective for much of his career. Because of this, he has a perspective and approach that I have not heard elsewhere.

[@analopes471]

Can anyone tell me which painting those are?

[@rachealbrimberry8918]

to be a little more kind and not reduce R Aslan's work as nothing more than materialistic, I would say he is stuck at the beginning of his faith journey, as a Christian. He needs to question and reflect on why he'd write a book about Jesus in the first place.

[@marcusaurelius5837]

I think the best argument is not the resurrection of Christ, but the martyrdom of the apostles. Why would the apostles risk their lives proclaiming a gospel they did not whole-heartedly believe in?

[@poemsbyshannon9910]

I think this is a very good point in general about how movements catch on. I don't want to wade in on the historicity of Jesus, because I am out of my depth, but I want to highlight this as a great point about movements. If group X is willing to die for their cause, and group Y is not, what are the odds of group X's or Y's ethos catching on? Reminds me of the great Taleb's "Minority Rule" medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15

[@grayman7208]

aslan's view is not hard to understand ... if you understand islam ... aslan is looking at christ with the false viewpoint of a muslim.

[@helpchristians6236]

Would you say the same about Dr Bart Ehrman?

[@grayman7208]

@@helpchristians6236 actually, yes. of course ehrman is not muslim, but he manipulates data to serve his agenda.

[@ChachiTelevision1979]

Awwwww, yeeeeeahhh -- Fr. Barron bringing the smackdown! (That's how a jerk talks). Wonderful video, Father. God bless you.

[@TainaUke]

Can anyone give a list of the books referenced at the end by Fr Barron? Thanks

[@TainaUke]

Are you seriously assuming everyone is fluent in english?

[@MouthwashTyphoon]

Taina Uke E.P Sanders, D.G Dunn

[@MouthwashTyphoon]

Taina Uke Richard Balcolme (not sure about the spelling

[@MouthwashTyphoon]

Taina Uke Richard Balcolme (not sure about the spelling

[@JeansiByxan]

If Jesus didn't say "My kingdom is not of this world" would that not undermine political authority, and hence not serve the Church's agenda.

[@jenniferkim2263]

U r so fair when enemies coming like flood god will put a standard against them

[@slowflowful]

Hello Father, I was wondering if you could comment on Moses and how he recieved instructions from God the father. It would be really great if you could clarify if he actually audibly heard the voice of God, and if that's even possible, possible in the sense that God revealing himself would blow our puny minds.

[@valsbookvoyages3344]

Jesus could be remembered by everybody because he won popularity. There were other rumored figured who could perform miracles: Apollonius of Tyanus, for example. Apollonius had followers who called Jesus a false leader, and Jesus' followers called Apollonius a false leader. It sounds a bit like a popularity contest, and that could easily be why Jesus is remembered and those others aren't. There are plenty of groups mentioned in the Bible who are stated as "bad" groups, but since we do not have their primary texts, we cannot know that "historically, that's probably the truth," can we?

[@carolcollins6739]

The Gospel of Mark is proof enough if you need it. Reza Aslan is out to make a buck and looks like he is making it. I will not bother to buy or donate to his dowry.

[@rachealbrimberry8918]

to be a little more kind and not reduce R Aslan's work as nothing more than materialistic, I would say he is stuck at the beginning of his faith journey, as a Christian. He needs to question and reflect on why he'd write a book about Jesus in the first place.

[@carolcollins6739]

how kind

[@anthonyshea6048]

I don’t think the Bishop actually got through more than the introduction of the book. Maybe skimmed the first chapter. Or had someone who read it talk to him about it. I’d be really interested to see a video of him taking the book in full and talking about each point seriously. Or even better, talking with Aslan himself. Aslan never ever says the book is meant to ‘debunk’ the Bible. He agrees with a lot of what you said in this video. I wonder who this video was for?? People who are asked questions about the book, but also haven’t read it?

[@billy1132]

Praise Our LORD GOD, in JESUS's Powerful Name👏 After 24 spititually darkened yrs😲 from 1972 till 1996, i was set Free from the roman 💒 when i read my bible that CHRIST's Salvation is Only by His Grace thru my faith in HIM n HIM Alone!! Not on any man made non biblical rituals n traditions of this 💒 who's top hierachy "covered up" centuries of paedophilia amongst some of their priests who were denied of marriage!!!!

[@BishopBarron]

Wil liam Come on, Friend. That’s a lot of bluster. Paul says that salvation comes from “faith working through love,” and he urges us to “work out our salvation with fear and trembling,” and he assures us that we can have faith sufficient to move mountains but without love we are nothing. Don’t give up so quickly on the Catholic Church’s far more venerable reading of St. Paul.

[@ntroyfreeman]

I know that this video is 10 years old, but the Bishop's rebuke of the book ultimately comes down to post hoc ergo propter hoc. People worship Jesus as a Messiah today, therefore he was probably Messiah then. I don't think the Bishop is dumb or lying. I just think he reads the Bible with faith, which is why he fails to understand the merit of cross-referencing segments of text against each other. He has faith that the four gospels are the inspired word of God, so it wouldn't make sense to him that someone why someone would believe some parts and not believe others. Those who read the Bible without faith are more likely to be drawn to literary and anthropological methods, because they're going into the text from a different perspective. Honestly, calling a book like "Zealot" herecy is more honest than "debunking the debunkers" because the disagreement isn't intellectual, it's spiritual.

[@thedeepadventexpedition]

There is a difference between scholarship and propaganda...the easiest way to dismiss these sorts of books, is I believe to learn to identify the difference. Propaganda is generally self-disputing and non-credible on the basis of being propaganda. After all, hate is a hard thing to hide away in silence, let alone when one is speaking from a place of hate, dismissal or generally in hostility.

[@myhealthtoo]

Well haven't read the book but I will and you bring some important points that is logical but I think the thousands that saw his miracles is unforgettable experience this a lone is proof. I think the manner in which we or people present Christ has some what damaged its creditability I have experienced the miracles of God and I have seen Jesus when I was 9 years old.

[@chilufyajosh2220]

Father Baron why can't you debate Reza Aslan on this very topic.. Am an agnostic believer... It seems to me Reza made a very clear distinction between the historical Jesus vs the Jesus of faith