The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture: the Textual Corruption of the New Testament | Dr. Bart Ehrman

[@History-Valley]

➡📚amzn.to/4aVHFM6 [Purchase his book!] ➡📚purchase the course! [historyvalley--ehrman.thrivecart.com/corruption-of-scripture/]

[@walad8387]

KalauMuhammad 、！羅？わ、、れ

[@satoshinakadashi]

This is the most intense interviewing style I have ever seen.

[@annabrown5256]

Jacob is the king of awkward pause, youll get used to it

[@satoshinakadashi]

@@annabrown5256 you’re right. Since posting this comment I’ve watched many of his videos, and the awkward pauses have grown on me.

[@hello21467]

This is one of the best interviews I've ever seen with Dr. Ehrman, thank you for sharing!

[@bobshreders5038]

Great episode! Probably my favorite on your show. Learned a lot. Very very interesting. Need a part 2!!

[@_.Sparky._]

Thank you Jacob. Yet another important, informative and stimulating show.

[@peterhook2258]

Dr. Ehrman, your Chiasmus argument is brilliant and genius. ty for sharing.

[@neurobits]

Just a disgusting liar.

[@moorepoint6619]

Always a pleasure listening to you sir

[@danbreeden8738]

I agree 👍

[@kurtoogle4576]

The reading of Jesus having a "son of God" revelation while being baptised makes his theology make a LOT more sense (RE: ritual cleansing and faithful connection, we can all be sons of God). It also makes the convoluted layering legendary interpretations of being a literal son of God make more historical sense.

[@aronmarc5575]

Remember🪞RedMeMer God🪞baj👈 Aron🪞merA🙃Vjew Box=Arc👉AroN👈Lite⚡️ Srink=Royal TainT👉MarC👈Atestar The Bread opH Life=LipHe=EVE orr AronMarc 👉🥭👈 OgNaM iS a BoT orr Tree ♍️ SpiCaaCiqS MariAMS🪞SmairAM Marijuana🙃EvenRiJevv 🏗 Möse waS We77 Drawn uP 🏗 MaYaGaiN👈 Ya'll NuYok aGaiN👈 pHalhs Anatomy🪱 Appendix🙃tibMegan 🥚inner. Only 7000 remain inn MaY ProState tuA MinD🎀BooTie 3trisex69minD TeSla🪞AlSeX🙃Tails. tiP iS NairLaSaiF 👈 Cisturn 💤 GOD👉it's Me Job💎PolAriS 👈Ajain Minner 👌 Ya'll Noe iS inn ✌️ PieCeS☯️SacAid👈 The Son's of Aron We'Re We77 Awar3👈 AbOt tunnelS☯️SlawNF inn MaY HidDenn HamLet 👈 VOLTAIRE Cann indeed flood your WORD WAR SIMULATION ImManuel Kant hEar🌽booK👈 Uroc MaY buch 🥖 HpAol SunArU👈HEAVEN in Hebrew👌 THE LesSon👈 iS A Fr33D MaiSon👈 with A German HarT 👅👈staG deR ❤️‍🔥VenisoN 👈 Ezekiel 36:26 “A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.” Hitherto OrrLeeAnnS CounTi DiNaS'ehBreWWerdHe'SamiB ✍️🏻The pen runs and laughs. 🍀SeikColeenGi🙃SouthKonsChip 🎶UabjeM🍐ateS🎀nnugs☕️

[@gk10101]

yes and it agrees with psalm 2:7. someone made a big mistake tinkering with that

[@dbaargosy4062]

it helps wisdom for Love, fear of The Lord Is The Beginning of Wisdom, How Much Greater Is God Counts Fear of Him As Love, And Says They Will Be My Children And I Will Be Their God.

[@youtubeaccount3230]

@@gk10101that's for David however, when David became a prophet

[@gk10101]

@@youtubeaccount3230 the writer of Hebrews indirectly quotes psalm 2:7 to apply to Jesus (Hebrews 1:5). it doesn't detract from the original context of psalm 2 but many times scripture is used as a pattern, a "type and shadow" of something later fulfilled in the life of Jesus.

[@Ellis307]

Does anyone else wish that Bart would “go into the weeds” far more often? I could listen to his in-depth weeds analysis all day long.

[@annabrown5256]

The book The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture is incredibly in depth, its all weeds

[@destiaptah2197]

Well...when YOU ARE ON WEED all day long... every day... then you will go in depth weeds... just like ...BART SIMPSON here !

[@dmwallacenz]

This interview is aimed at a general audience, so Professor Ehrman is deliberately not going too deep. If you want the weeds, you're supposed to either enrol in one of his courses or buy one of his books.

[@MrBadway_636]

I just can’t believe how easily I fell to Christianity😞

[@I_Fish_In_A_TIE]

He's selling his book. Don't let him effect you.

[@oztheberean]

I hope you didn't come to this conclusion off this one video. And funny especially since Bart was an evangelical.

[@MohamedIbrahim-kz8yl]

Ask God to lead you and he will lead you to the truth.

[@boxcar2364]

I was raised Christian, threw away religion entirely as a teenager, and was drawn back to seeking God by something inside of me that was very restless and discontent. As an adult, I’ve recommitted my life to Jesus… because of Who He is and what He’s done for me… not because of religion or filial piety or whatever. It’s been very freeing to have my own journey with Jesus… and to find that He is so much bigger than religion. When I see light, I see Jesus. When I hear truth, I hear Jesus. And when I know the Word of God written on my heart and I compare it with any text… I remember that the only actual Word is a Life Giving Spirit and The Bible, in any form, as perfect as humanly possible, can’t possibly be held to the same standard of perfection. Ya know?

[@Hallahanify]

​@boxcar2364 you're weak minded, you couldnt deal with your mortality or the meaninglessness of life. So you made up a story in your head that gave you answers.

[@bigbrutal_0179]

As I continue to look into the history of the bible, one thing that comes up is how we do not have the original writings. Since I never heard anyone contest that claim, I’ve never heard the reason how we know this to be true. For example, Papyrus P52…how do we know it isn’t part of the original manuscript and not just a copy?

[@CKennethBauer]

Good point. We’ll never know for sure. If you ask Him, He will reveal to you, what you’ll need to know, that of what actually matters. You wouldn’t be able to prove that either, but your faith in it, is what is real. That is the undeniable proof everyone is seeking, and not finding in manuscripts, churches, bibles and books written by people with all of the knowledge in the world of Christendom at their fingertips only to become an Atheist.

[@pjosip]

simple answer: the paper shelf-life is few decades max.

[@real.evidence]

@@CKennethBauerAsk 10 Christians to ask their god what they need to know about the manuscript traditions of the new testament and they will each provide a different answer, often conflicting answers. Which Christian, if any one, received the correct answer? And who evaluates these answers and determines which one, if any, is correct? Faith is not a reliable guide to determine the truth of anything, as Christians summarily dismiss the faith of believers of other religions. Faith is an implied admission that one doesn’t have evidence on which to ground reasonable belief. Faith is the antithesis of intellectual honesty.

[@CKennethBauer]

@@real.evidence Yes I agree with you. This “thing” that became a book then a religion/s is not what it was is intended to be used for. I wonder about all those prays left unanswered as the individual not getting the point. Curiosity of God leads on to prayer. The purpose is to realize the truth and to turn away from your natural self as a denial and thus an acceptance of God. This is faith; leading to more prayer as now an established relationship leads to more understanding… not knowledge. So you can ( in the individual ) be “reborn”. This process is not a collage course or a youtube show where “doctors” tell of their knowledge. Knowledge in scripture is a joke on them, a trap. So people can dedicate their lives going round and around about something they don’t even believe in. People didn’t find God in knowledge, no kidding must not be real then, As a human declares, God didn’t answer your prayer about what breakfast cereal you should eat, wow I guess he is not real then, right. Religion, fake, manuscripts, fake, pope, fake. Only maybe 1% of the new testament “gospels” is all that is necessary. The rest bares whiteness to the change taking place inside you as you turn from your natural life towards God. Research this, on a psychological basis the teaching threw Christ are perfect. Turning the other cheek, loving your enemies, forgiving, understanding. All things we fail at especially “christians” the lesson is for the believer and to realize the lesson “Yes thats why I shouldn’t steal I get it now” and in prayer than God for the lesson. This He can accept into Himself when His believers die.

[@DiogenesNephew]

​@@pjosipBro, what?

[@derjogderjog8031]

Dr Bart is like listening to the Rolling Stones music to me...I always find it very enjoyable and entertaining...You cannot help but take note of Dr Bart's passion for the facts and evidence and his research capabilities...and his wonderful ability to communicate this stuff to not so smart people like me on this subject matter....Moreover, I have also noticed how careful he is to not offend even the fundamental apologists who are always taking a shot at Dr Bart... In my opinion...us non-believers are fortunate to have his knowledge available...not to discount many other very good ones as well...out there...

[@trilithon108]

That was loaded with scriptural information. A real study. The Syriac Diatessaron was an interesting piece of info close to the end. 🎉

[@Assyrianking507]

Good say

[@victorialawhon2251]

King James did a number on the Bible. Remember each so called translation is going to be done by a person or people wuth certain agendas

[@Jimyblues]

Excellent interview no interruptions or long questions disguised as opinions, biblical scholarship is my hobby ❤

[@tonyfrederickson6692]

Again watching him, My faith in Christ is strong.

[@mcosu1]

I know that I asked a long-shot, off-topic question about Christian atheism, but in my defense: a. Ehrman is an atheist, b. Ehrman regularly talks theology, despite the denial, and c. Zizek is one of the most popular philosophers in the world and his latest book is titled "Christian Atheism." Still, I am grateful to Jacob for fielding the question!

[@andreaurelius45]

No such thing as atheism. And definitly no such thing as Christian atheism. This is because you cant have it BOTH ways. And no matter what, one STILL has a spiritual awareness. ....that is because there is something to be spiritually aware of.

[@real.evidence]

@@andreaurelius45The existence of atheism is a fact as many people do not believe in the existence of a god or gods. Theism is the belief in a god or gods. Thus, atheism is simply the null hypothesis and the response to an assertion of the existence of a god or gods. The concept of spirituality has no normative definition among theists, and every person who describes themself as spiritual has a different definition. It’s an absolutely meaningless concept.

[@danielsnyder2288]

​@@andreaurelius45NonBiblical citation needed

[@andreaurelius45]

@@danielsnyder2288 ....was that supposed to be incisive?....marshmallow sharp, you are.

[@dbaargosy4062]

​@@real.evidence you arguing a-typical, a-theist ?

[@robinstevenson6690]

Interestingly, Hebrews 5:5 reads as follows: "So also Christ did not glorify Himself to become High Priest, but it was He who said to Him: “You are My Son, Today I have begotten You.”"

[@youtubeaccount3230]

No doubt that was the original from Luke taking it from Pauls letters

[@robinstevenson6690]

@@youtubeaccount3230 That may be from the original Luke (as seen in Codex Bezae), according to Ehrman. Regarding Paul, however... ...Paul appears unlikely to have been the author of Hebrews, according to scholars, and it seems unlikely that there is much of Paul in Luke, since Paul's letters didn't set forth a very detailed account of Jesus' life.

[@JopJio]

This was said about solomon. It even says Solomon in the torah 😂😂😂The anonymous author just fabricated the verse.

[@robinstevenson6690]

@@JopJio What's significant about Hebrews 5:5 is that it confirms the language in Luke 3:22. It supports Ehrman's theory. Early christian writings often "borrowed" and reappropriated OT texts.

[@LukeAllen-sb4mx]

Regarding changing scripture, one should ALSO watch Tovia Singer to see how other scripture has been doctored.

[@munbruk]

Great interview

[@bevaconme]

if the women at the tomb told no one what they had been told, how do we know the scene took place at all?

[@Heroball299]

Exactly

[@thenowchurch6419]

They obviously told people. So?

[@CrazyLinguiniLegs]

Isn’t the theological reply that scripture is revelation? So, it was _revealed_ to whoever wrote it. I mean, nobody was there taking notes when Adam was created, right? Mind you, I’m not making this argument. I’m just pointing out that this is the argument a Christian would use to resolve the issue you raise.

[@thenowchurch6419]

@@CrazyLinguiniLegs That argument could be used but most Christian scholars rely on human interaction and oral transmission to explain accounts in the NT, especially. The O.T. like the mythic writings of early Genesis, Adam and Eve in the Garden, not so much.

[@CrazyLinguiniLegs]

@@thenowchurch6419 okay, but it says “they said nothing to anyone” not “they said nothing to anyone for the rest of their lives”.

[@yvettealley5946]

Dr Ehrman is a fantastic researcher.

[@luizr.5599]

Ehrman is the best.

[@clarkemorledge2398]

At 17:11 , regarding Ehrman's reading of Luke 3:22 as citing Psalm 2:7 originally, for supporting adoptionism, as opposed to what we have in most critical texts today: For a challenge to Ehrman's claim see Tommy Wasserman, "Misquoting Manuscripts? The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture Revisited", in Magnus Zetterholm and Samuel Byrskog, eds., The Making of Christianity: Conflicts, Contacts, and Constructions: Essays in Honor of Bengt Holmberg (Coniectanea Biblica: New Testament Series 47; Winona Lake, Eisenbrauns, 2012), pp. 334-337.

[@youtubeaccount3230]

Hebrew 5:5?

[@piotrczubryt1111]

Codification of various versions does not mean corruption. It was a right thing and necessary.

[@yohei72]

Ehrman doesn't offer judgments about whether particular changes are good or bad. He simply traces and notes them. The fact that you like certain changes is not a refutation of his work.

[@piotrczubryt1111]

@@yohei72 It is not matter of liking. When you have many versions of a widely used ancient text, codification is necessary. It is not a corruption, it is common sense. Beowulf has many versions. Another thing, when you write a novel for example, and you rewrite it several times, the final version is what counts.

[@yohei72]

@@piotrczubryt1111 I see no reason at all why codification is necessary. You can let them stand as different versions (and in fact that happens quite a bit throughout the Bible, where the same story or doctrine is stated two or three times with significant differences or direct contradictions). More importantly, to restate, I see no argument against Ehrman's points in what you say. He uses the word "corruption" in the sense that textual scholars do - a change in a text as it's transmitted. It doesn't mean a value judgment about whether the changes are good or bad. You're arguing a point he doesn't address. You may not be interested in the changes over time in how Christians viewed their faith and its story and how the texts reflect that and influence that, but many are, including Ehrman. You're free to ignore that history if you're only interested in the final version, but there's no reason anyone else should.

[@piotrczubryt1111]

@@yohei72 Codification IS necessary for the regular people, especially for the Protestants who base their faith on the Bible. And the creation, assemblng and selecting holy books was a collective effort that took centuries, many people were involved into painstaking copying by hand. Their motivation was religious and doctrine was important. Something else are the scholars who can be atheists, they can play with it like entomologist collecting beatles. They can search for the oldest versions, peeling one layer after another until nothing is left in their hands. Why do they bother if they do not care about the meaning?

[@uninspired3583]

​@piotrczubryt1111 it makes sense that codification is required to explain the cultures that exist today, but that has no baring on the truth value of the thing. Why should we assume that modern protestants have it right? What if the manuscript changed have moved us away from truth, and the resulting culture is entirely misguided?

[@doncamp1150]

“It ain't the parts of the Bible that I can't understand that bother me, it's the parts that I do understand.” Samuel Clemons. It ain't the parts of the Bible that have been corrupted that bother me., it's the parts that have not. Me.

[@neurobits]

Totally. This is the old christian trick. Distraction and abstract arguments.

[@doncamp1150]

@@neurobits It is no trick. If anything, Bart Ehrman is tricking, you. But it is an old one; he's done it before. It is a scholar's interest to look for the fleas on the dog. He first noted that there are a whole lot of variations in the NT text. *WOW* ! That was scary. But if you or I look closer at the text - and we can with a Greek text that has a critical apparatus - we see that the vast majority of these variations are inconsequential. They are variant spelling or changes in the tense of verb or the case of a noun. There are SEVERAL passages that are noteworthy, like these he mentions. But really, what's the big deal? We could eliminate them from the text entirely and not lose anything. Take for example the long ending of Mark's Gospel. There is nothing added in those verses that changes any doctrine of the Bible. SHOCK and AWE!!! That's right. AND even I can see that the ending does not fit the style of the preceding text. EVERYBODY who reads Greek can see that. It is not a forgery it is an addendum added by a later author to tie the last legitimate verse, verse 8, to what happened in the first few years of the church. So, Bart is counting fleas. No big deal. But then Bart fumbles the ball. and adds his spin on verse 8. I am afraid that all comes from Bart's skepticism and not the text. See biblicalmusing.blogspot.com/2022/09/with-e-cstasy-last-verse-in-mark-is.html The problem of Matthew 24, "not even the Son." Bart suggests that the text was altered by to get rid of the problem phrase οὐδὲ ὁ υἱός that says the Son does not know. (The phrase is in Mark 13:32.) But that is actually an indication that Jesus had put aside his divine prerogatives to rely totally on the Father and the Spirit in his earthly life. It is a phrase that should be allowed to stand. So, despite Bart's impressive knowledge of the biblical text, he is actually using that as a trick to cover up his personal spin. I am disappointed by that. I expect a professor to be honest and when he expresses his personal opinion to indicate that it is his opinion and to at least recognize the opinions of other qualified scholars.

[@chrisharding5206]

Whilst it’s very interesting to explore the differences in versions of the text the most compelling book I have read lately is by John Shelby Spong - Biblical Literalism (a Gentile Heresy) which asks the question WHY the gospels were written in the first place. His answer is that they were alternative readings for Jewish Christians whose customs was to read certain texts leading up to each of the seven festivals. These Jesus stories were written down to be an alternative to the traditional Old Testament stories used for each festival. So we also need to understand that the first century Jewish mind didn’t look at the texts the way a modern western literal minded person does. Westerners are looking for factual accuracy. First century Newish followers of The Way we’re looking for truths in stories. What’s also interesting is that the letters of Paul were written before the gospels and He pays no attention to ideas like the virgin birth or miracles etc.

[@amanpalestina9664]

It's good for Bart to SEPERATE clearly between The Textual Criticism & History WITH Theology

[@jrodhemi67]

I love when Dr. Ehrman finally gets to go in the weeds on specific subjects.

[@leedoss6905]

I can guarantee the original onion burger was made with long keeping strong onions not sweet onions. They're cheaper and don't rot as fast. Excellent for cooking.

[@amanpalestina9664]

[@vincentrockel1149]

It's interesting that the powers that created the orthodox point of view didn't try to rectify the problem of the differences and develop a consolidation of the varied accounts.

[@robinstevenson6690]

Interesting interview. However, I don't find Ehrman's dismissal of Josephus' account of the Essenes to be very compelling, and I strongly prefer Boccaccini's much more comprehensive approach to the issue.

[@StuartWoodwardJP]

Jacob is your monitor high up? When you look up it seems like you are avoiding eye contact with the viewer which gives a bit of a strange vibe.

[@SirDavosChannel]

Great show, thank you!

[@zizuwest1]

i'm truly curious...for Christians watching Does this evidence challenge your faith? Could it be that u base your beliefs on verses that were added?

[@gk10101]

even if every single assertion is true, it doesn't change the reality that the basic gospel is true as is evidenced by the lives being changed for over 2000 years so go with the doubting scholars who will ride the hegelian dialectic merry-go-round forever, or come to the end of yourself, take the words of Jesus as presented, and let God show you how real He is and how everything else....not so much

[@BillDavies-ej6ye]

And so say those 'moved' by other religious traditions. Do you agree that their personal experiences are supportive of their religion?

[@gk10101]

@@BillDavies-ej6ye yes all a person has is their own experience. but 99% of religious tradition, christianity included, is just that: tradition.

[@BillDavies-ej6ye]

@@gk10101 You can't have it both ways, personal experience or tradition. The accuracy of both generally rely on the unprovable claims of individual people, who can be mistaken or misleading.

[@gk10101]

@@BillDavies-ej6ye when you practice a tradition, you get your own personal experience of the tradition. not sure what you're getting at but putting no value on everything that is unprovable is to live in a very small box. Kant showed that reasoning has its limitations--the platonic dialectic doesn't always resolve itself. Gödel proved that unprovable truth exists. what can be proven is a very small slice of reality

[@gospeljoy5713]

Is a religion life changing does it bring joy hope and peace? Does it unify people? Are people from other religions drawn to it? The answer is yes for christianity. Do whole nations want it? Mizoram in India is at least 80 percent Presbyterian. Millions of Chinese are Christians. Iraqis travel 3 hours to meet together in secret.

[@멸문멸공-b4c]

Dear Bart, around (8:20) you said the Byzantine scriptures are longer than the Alexandrian scriptures. But isn’t it the case that the opposite is true?

[@AsadAli-co1wv]

Good work

[@StephanieSoressi]

To David in chat if you saw to come here: ​​@David The word "baal" means lord. otherwise translated God. And Molech offerings were holocausts, burnt offerings. It is where we get the word to "immolate". There was no god named Molech.

[@AlexandarShmex]

No, Moloch, or Remphan is a deity, you're spreading false information. Star of Remphan is on the flag of Israel.

[@StephanieSoressi]

@@AlexandarShmex This is why scholars say if you have not read scriptures in the original languages, you have not read scriptures. The above reference is a poor translation, because Acts writers just stuck what they thought was the name of an idol in, where in Amos, which they are quoting, it actually just says your god. Remphan is the Egyptian word for the planet Saturn, considered a deity. The Hebrew in Amos is Chiun, and there is no evidence it refers to Saturn. In Hebrew, Chium means the platform (of your god/idol). And many do claim the Star of David is also Saturn, and that David worshiped Saturn. Archaeology has proven David was a northern chieftain, not of the southern city of Jerusalem. In both Israel and Judea, molech offerings to YHWH/El, his wife Asherah, and son Baal, were common practice. The Binding of Isaac story was written in the effort to stop that practice. It is YOU that is spreading false information, and vehemently. Dogmatism always cradles poor scholarship. I hope I've explained why so many people get it so wrong, as did the early Greek Christians. For more go to sources, the Elicott Commentaries and the Myer's NT Commentaries, and Heath Dewrell's great book, "Child Sacrifice in Ancient Israel" -- his first chapter explains the false but traditional understanding and the archaeology that made scholars realize what it actually referred to. It is difficult to fully explain in a YT reply.

[@KadandEve]

@@StephanieSoressi lol no YOU are spreading misinformation by lying about the context, You don’t understand that the worship of Saturn is the worship of Satan, which is the cult of the black cube. Yahweh didn’t have a wife, Ashera is Ishtar/Innana who is the wife consort of Ba’al or Ba’al hammon, along with so many more contextual things that you simply do not know. you don’t understand that the Canaanite and Egyptian’s depiction of the Israelite God is the depiction you’re trying to use against God, What’s next you’re gonna tell us that need depiction of Yahweh was a donkey? You have to use the context of the culture, you can’t use surrounding cultures especially if the culture in question is hated by those surrounding it.

[@StephanieSoressi]

You don't understand the culture, let alone its context, nor do you understand the literature/scripture, or the languages. You are making errors typical errors of monolingual fundamentalists. Lord Hammon was only the god of Carthage, and not the same as the ancient Ugaritic god Baal. Asherah & Astarte/Ishtar were not equivalents, though an awful lot of fundamentalists, and a lot of former fundamentalists, think that they are. Egypt didn't throw shade on El/YHWH -- there was a temple to YHWH in Egypt, on Elephantine Island in the Nile. We have their letters going back & forth to priests at the Jerusalem temple. Like it or not, the Israelites & Judeans WERE Canaanites, and the entire Levant was part of Egypt's empire, except when it was part of Assyria's empire. Hebrew is one branch of the Arabic language family. Semitic literally means Arabic. But don't let the facts get in the way of your made-up interpretations! Ha-satan only means the accuser. The modern belief in a king of demons, a god of a fiery Hades didn't exist in ancient Israel or Judea. You obviously aren't open to the facts, and I'm not interested in the drivel you are spewing.

[@KadandEve]

@@StephanieSoressi so you’re just flat out lying because every scholar will tell you that the god of Carthage is the same as The Ba’al of Canaan. The Egyptians hated the Jewish god so much they made a donkey headed idol of him and used that as a form of disrespect because donkeys were looked down upon. so to deny that the Egyptians disrespected Yahweh is just flat out a lie born either from ignorance or malice. If the Israelites and Judeans were Canaanites, then Americans are Europeans, Brazilians are Portuguese, Canada is France, and so on and so forth when a group of people come out of a nation, form their own nation, have their own standards ways of living and title as a nation, then they are no longer the same nation. Especially if they go to war with said nation, Playing semantics is fruitless because you can’t, you simply are wrong. The entire Levant at one point may have been a part of the Egyptian empire, that wasn’t uncommon. The Babylonians did the same thing the, Assyrians did the same thing, the Ottoman Empire, The khazars, British, etc so your point makes no sense. Semitic does not mean Arabic that is the dumbest thing you could’ve said here, it’s simply means those who are the descendants of Shem, aka those in the Levantine region. The Fall of the Angels, the corruption of human, and the adversary being an actual being of some sort was always present, in what is commonly called the oldest written book of the Bible, Job, the adversary has a role and a being, this book was in ancient Israel, but I’m not going to talk to you about that because you obviously don’t believe scripture and you’re doing your best to make scripture seem as if it was just made up out of nowhere relatively recently.

[@destiaptah2197]

WOW... I did not know that.... BART SIMPSON is such a smart guy... who figured all out!

[@5nowyOwl]

People look at DR. AMMON HILLMAN YOU WILL NEVER BE THE SAME.😊

[@dok9024]

So Dr Bart is saying that Christians that believe in immortality of the soul is following pagan beliefs instead of Jewish beliefs.

[@terencenxumalo1159]

good work

[@jessepelaez874]

@history-Valley sorry for the late super chat on the authenticity of Revelation and if the Spirit fighter Christians influenced it, who deny the trinity. On topic but you have to explain it a bit. I feel like maybe that’s why it got ignored too, superb potcast as always tho

[@AnHebrewChild]

Did you mean to say Revelation?

[@jessepelaez874]

@@AnHebrewChild yea thx

[@PC-vg8vn]

Ehrman has said if he and his old professor of textual criticism, Bruce Metzger, got in a room together to decide on the original text of the New Testament, they would agree on that text with few disagreements. If that is the case, the NT is hardly 'corrupted'. Ehrman is good at giving a certain impression to those who know no better.

[@PhilSophia-ox7ep]

But you do know that Biblical Scholarship isn't just the two of them, right?

[@PC-vg8vn]

@@PhilSophia-ox7ep well obviously, but Ehrman is probably the most well known cynical scholar, and Metzger was probably the leading textual critic of his time. If they can agree on the 'original' text of the NT given the manuscript evidence we have, it means Ehrman knows full well that our current English NTs are pretty much reliable, despite the messaging he likes to give his fans.

[@PhilSophia-ox7ep]

@@PC-vg8vn No, that doesn't mean our English texts are pretty reliable. It means they are knowledgeable enough to know how distorted the current texts are and what the originals likely said. You can't be this slow.

[@PC-vg8vn]

@@PhilSophia-ox7ep Ehrman himself has said 'most textual variants are completely unimportant and insignificant and don’t matter for twit.' To use words such as 'corruption' is laughable. But that's click-bait for you.

[@PhilSophia-ox7ep]

@@PC-vg8vn "Most of your neighbours are fine people." Does that mean they're all good? Just because most textual variations are insignificant, that doesn't mean they all are. NONE of them discussed in this HOUR long video are insignificant. And you know who thinks there was "corruption"? The same source you use to suggest there's no problems because most of the changes are insignificant.

[@Montaguish]

The Hebrews/Jews believed the spirt (nashama) died with the body? That's absurd. They believed the spirit went to the unseen realm of the dead (Sheol) while the mortal remains went to the grave ( qehver ). Hence, Jacob's lament that he will morn for Joseph all the way to Sheol, when their spirts will be reunited, and the ghost of Samuel, an elohim coming up from Sheol, telling Saul that he and his sons will be with him the next day. Samuel was buried at Ramah, while the ashes of Saul and his sons were buried under the tamarisk tree in Jabesh. We could talk about Jonah and other examples but there's no need to belabor the point. Also, note that the manuscript groupings, the presumed addition of chapters to Mark etc. are all based on conjecture, nothing more. I'm not a fan of any of the Abrahamic religions, nor a rational materialist either, yet sloppy scholarship annoys me. Interesting discussion non the less.

[@EnergyCenterTV]

Paul Wallis and Mauro Biglino are doing great work too on translating the word Elohim which is plural for gods. They say the Bible is to about God but rather the sons of God aka the children of El or the Elohim. 🔥

[@rockyfitzp]

Actually the trinity can make mathematical sense, It is the monad as in monas which means "Unity". Unit as in "one" yet can be made from different parts. Pythagoras stated this and it continued to change through Plato and further Leibniz. I am not here referring to the exact philosophies of these people but to the idea that ancient religions can speak of ONE god but still be polytheistic. I believe Pythagoras while reportedly studying under the priests at Thebes Egypt developed Monadism to explain how they could refer to the Great God Amon as "The Only One" and still be polytheistic. Pythagoras' whole idea is to use numbers to explain the Universe. The whole take away I an trying say is "Unit" can be said to be one.

[@steve37341]

One exception about the scribe(s) making a mistake and leaving out the words "Son of God". That the scribes would not be tired is only an assumption. Because, according to some evidence, some scribes were slaves. And if a slave, then long hours of work might have made them more susceptible to making mistakes.

[@michaelsnyder3871]

Mark, of course, was not Mark, no more than Marcus Antonius was Mark Anthony. This implies a Latin citizen or a freeman. A freeman would, however, would have probably been Greek and some have pointed out how "Mark" was not as fluid or smooth as Matthew, Luke and John, written in Greek in Hellenic Asia/Judea. The Alexandrian tradition was that Marcus was Peter's scribe during his visit to Rome. Marcus wrote down what Peter remembered about Jesus and his teachings as Peter talked about them. The writings would not be in chronological order. Marcus came to Alexandria with his notes and arranged them into a "Gospel" which he finished sometime between 70-75 AD. It makes sense that the initial view of Jesus would be as an adopted Son of God. Matthew and Luke are influenced by Greek philosophy and literature and Jesus became a demi-god, the child of God and Mary, divine and human. In addition, these Gospels turned the concept of the Messiah, who would appear and re-establish the Solomonic Kingdom and punish the enemies of the Jews, then accepted by many Jews into a spiritual victory over death by a Messiah that instead conquered death and provided a way to reach Heaven and God. Then John turns Jesus into the Christ, "God manifest in flesh". No adoption, no demigod, straight existence as a god which resulted in the Holy Trinity to make the Christian belief fit the concept of a single, unitary God of the Jews.

[@craigbhill]

Mark was Peter's scribe? A guy who ate the anti-Pete pro-Pauline talking points for breakfast??

[@onenote6619]

Just to be clear here. The New Testament was an oral tradition, written down in various times and places by different people. Not one of the testaments claims to be first-hand and only one claims even to be second-hand. It was then translated and re-translated into a variety of languages. Then the church called a council, decided which bits would go into their version and which would go onto the cutting-room floor. Then it was translated a few more times into a variety of language, with some pretty significant changes along the way. So by any reasonable standard, 'corrupted' barely begins to cover it.

[@DiogenesNephew]

Absolutely right

[@travisdiveley1652]

Agreed. To ADD to that, "They" Craftily Placed *2 Timothy 3:16 - All scriptures are God Breathed* *KNOWING that REBELLION is an ACT of WITCHCRAFT, They HAVE-ARE CASTING A "WORD" SPELL UPON THE PEOPLE* BLINDLY BELIEVING THE LIE OF "The Bible is The INFALLIBLE WORD OF GOD". *Witches & Warlocks at WORK!*

[@harixav]

Sounds like the holy spirit who was inspiring all those authors of the bible was doing a very bad job.

[@kellyem33]

Amazing that a talented and coherent mind such as his can spend a whole life studying Christian texts and yet miss the gateway right in front of him.

[@garyluciani1082]

I'll bite. What is the gateway?

[@kellyem33]

@@garyluciani1082 prayer

[@yohei72]

The usual vague, hand-waving complaint, with no effort to engage with the factual details Ehrman discusses.

[@kellyem33]

@@yohei72 I don’t need to discuss the facts that he talks about. I enjoyed his scholarship very much.

[@yohei72]

@@kellyem33 What are you talking about? You do need to discuss the facts he talks about if you want to engage with his positions.

[@David-lq4tq]

Professing to be wise, they became fools.

[@danielsnyder2288]

Yes, Christians profess to be wise and show themselves fools.

[@coreyc490]

@David-lq4tq 🙄 pseudo-philosophical soundbite.

[@yohei72]

Plenty of Christians certainly do.

[@gospeljoy5713]

Does jesus live in your heart and have you been born again?

[@busterbiloxi3833]

Bart Ehrman = Berman!

[@watchman2866]

How has language changed over the past two thousand years? If the scriptures went to the Gentiles and have been for that duration, what would it look like to every generation? They didn't all learn Hebrew, Greek and Latin.

[@scienceexplains302]

*Mark original ending explained?* “Mark” wrote his gospel as a prequel to Paul’s, or at least the parts of it that Mark was aware of. That is not to say Mark agreed with Paul on all major issues. For example, the fact that “Mark” wrote a biography shows disagreement as to how important the details of Jesus’ life were. Please see Steve Mason on Mark. Mark 1:1 titles the book “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ…” “Gospel” was Paul’s word for Jesus’ announcement. When Mark ends at 16:8 it makes sense if he is assuming the readers know what comes next: Paul’s Resurrection claims where spirit Jesus reveals himself to people.

[@I_Fish_In_A_TIE]

He didn't mention the ancient Mark manuscripts had a blank page & nobody 100% knows if the original ending was lost did he? Very convenient.

[@coreyc490]

@@I_Fish_In_A_TIEI don’t recall ever hearing THAT crap. Also, IT’S NOT A SINGLE INSTANCE OF DIFFERENCE.

[@I_Fish_In_A_TIE]

@@coreyc490 You're not familiar with the blank page/possible lost ending?

[@coreyc490]

@@I_Fish_In_A_TIE I’m not. Feel free to enlighten with a citation. Meanwhile, I’d be curious as to how or why you think it would make a difference?

[@I_Fish_In_A_TIE]

@coreyc490 if it's not going to make a difference I'm not going to put forth the effort to find it

[@TheLookingOne]

Why do religious commentators who try to adhere to scientific principals use emotion-laden words? How can a text be considered to be 'corrected'? Wouldn't a scientist state that a text was altered or use another word that is not emotionally laden or not able to be demonstrated (for example, can criteria be established to determine 'correction' of a text?) What criteria can be used to establish that a text was 'corrupted'? What basis of 'pure' text can even be claimed, let alone proved? Are religious commentators playing to a religious audience? Do they make the same claims to scientific audiences?

[@gregoryrice9998]

Do you want to know more? Please read Codeword Barbelon and watch Tares Among the Wheat

[@ekklesiabible8188]

Evidently Ehrman does not believe it possible that the Holy Spirit reveals “word for word” scripture but instead he believes when the different Bible writers write the same wording it is being copied or plagiarized.

[@PhilSophia-ox7ep]

Yes, historians work on evidence and not belief in the supernatural

[@jetset808]

i'm listening to jars of clay while watching this. lol

[@MichaelMacrossan]

Hegisippus "the Nazarene" (c 110-180AD) , acording to wikipedia, may have been a Jewish convert to Christianity. It appears to me that he had what Ehrman describes as a Greek idea of "resurrection" if we can go by the words he attributes to James, the Lord's Brother: "Why ask ye me concerning Jesus the Son of man? He Himself sitteth in heaven, at the right hand of the Great Power, and shall come on the clouds of heaven." Nothing about a bodily resurrection; perfectly consistent with apotheosis; consistent with a spirit ascending to heaven. And as we know, Paul describes the risen spiritual body as different from flesh and bones. So I wonder what evidence we have for the earliest conceptions of the resurrection.

[@I_Fish_In_A_TIE]

Bodily or spiritual?

[@youtubeaccount3230]

@@I_Fish_In_A_TIEfrom Pauls letters we dont get a physical resurrection

[@I_Fish_In_A_TIE]

@@youtubeaccount3230 that's my point

[@I_Fish_In_A_TIE]

Jewish mysticism, the forerunner of kabbalah and gnostic and certain Essenes believed in metamorphosis/spiritual resurrection 2nd century B.C. It's crazy for Bart to say 1st Century Jews only knew of bodily resurrection. They had been Helenized for hundreds of years.

[@danbreeden8738]

Are the ebionites closer to the way the original christians were ?

[@rightousliving]

Very Interesting and comprehensive look at the problems with early manuscripts. However I don’t understand why it should be gnostics who believe that Jesus became the son of God at baptism. I would rather think that it’s more likely that early Christians believed that Jesus became the son of God at baptism and that this was actually a coronation where Jesus was anointed to be the king of the Jews in a similar way that David was anointed to be king of Israel by Samuel while Saul was still on the throne (In this case it wasn’t the prophet Samuel but John the Baptist who many saw as a prophet). Jesus was crucified because he was the king of the Jews. This explains the special treatment he got being given special audiences with Pilate and Herod and being taken from the cross early and buried in a cave instead of him being thrown into a mass grave.

[@scienceexplains302]

*Luke infancy different author?* Since it shows a contradictory start of “sonship,” and is written in a different style, are 1 and 2 by a different author?

[@pmaitrasm]

Likely. The early bishops, those of Jewish Egyptian Alexandrian extraction, had a reason to market Jesus to the rebellious Sicarii, so they had to somehow show that the god of NT is the same as the god of OT, perhaps as employees of the Roman Emperors, and they did so in a ham-handed fashion.

[@MathewThomasFET]

Is there any manuscript that denies the existence of Jesus, His death and resurrection ❓️I am certain that neither Erhman nor Berman will respond.

[@PhilSophia-ox7ep]

There are manuscripts that offered contradictory accounts of the resurrection, and then none that do not mention it at all. And why would mentioning it be sufficient evidence to believe it? We have plenty of texts that mention the resurrection of other figures and no texts of the time denying them.....do you believe they rose from the dead too?😊

[@MathewThomasFET]

@@PhilSophia-ox7ep So did the apostles invent lies and died for the lies they propagated ⁉️What inference would you draw using common logic❓What is the authenticity of the manuscript you mention❓Please share links.

[@PhilSophia-ox7ep]

@@MathewThomasFET Why do you cower from answering my questions and instead redirect by asking more of your own?

[@eddielopez2373]

In Mark, the Roman soldier recognizes Jesus as the son of God by virtue of the way he died, clearly a symbol of Paul’s influence on the author, rebuking Jesus’ disciples (I.e. the eyewitness Jewish leaders of the Jerusalem church) by presenting gentiles as preceding Jews in their recognition of Jesus’ divinity and the sacrificial nature of his death.

[@handy4874]

Isn't the first criteria assuming the scribes are not Gnostic scribes?

[@PhilSophia-ox7ep]

I think you need to pay attention.

[@aaroncrawford8123]

How is a "Standard" txt decided upon? 🤔

[@bevaconme]

say, is the host blue-screened or something?

[@meskes4059]

It’s a Zoom background.

[@bevaconme]

@@meskes4059 oh. thanks.

[@CihanBasak-k3n]

Dr. BARTH trying cover behind 😂 Effort was amazing😂

[@geraldamos292]

Even if wording wasn't changed it would still be Greek fiction..ehrman insists Jesus existed..sure he does, Jesus has made him and other scholars a fortune..

[@yohei72]

@@geraldamos292 You sound like a creationist or a climate change denier or any other crank who dismisses expert consensus with vague hand-waving and conspiracy theories. The idea that Ehrman, let alone lesser known scholars, has made a fortune off academic research and writing about Biblical manuscripts is comical. And regardless of whether or not they have, you have to come with much better arguments to dismiss the consensus of a wide group of scholars and historians.

[@yohei72]

I notice a pattern in Ehrman's naysayers of being unable to spell his very short and simple name correctly. It's an indication of the amount of care and attention you pay to details. That aside, I can't even make out what the hell you're saying. At least Ehrman makes sense.

[@tyronecox5976]

​@@yohei72 Climate change denier and Conspiracy theories, lol, you've some serious waking up to do, there's a list of conspiracy theories that doesn't stop growing, I've not yet found one what's failed.

[@kristishaver6545]

The Essenes must have been one of those groups

[@youtubeaccount3230]

Very clear they were the gospel authors, philo mentions a group similar to them but different name, we do not know what they call themselves

[@barnsweb52]

Face reality - read. "The Origins of Judaism"; "Why the Bible Began"; "The Valediction of Moses"; "Romans Proves Paul Lied."

[@Scott_works]

Does it make sense that these texts may have had a deep metaphysical context, such that those who were awake, or aware could catch the context and read into it, gaining enlightenment as to our celestial nature? And when they (Roman Catholics) took the text and make it "Orthodox" they changed it just enough to cut off the metaphysical context and leave only the natural, mortal, earthly context? I believe they did this so that the power would now rest in the hands of the clergy (they were aware of the inner context) but fell out of the hands of the common man, into an earthly context. Thus, people had to go through them to get the inside scoop as the natural context no longer "rang true"..

[@WayWalker3]

Only the innermost members of the Way would have understood the kinds of things you mention. He spoke publicly in parables so that he would spread confusion amongst his establishment enemies, but explained their actual meaning to the few. If you pay close attention to Jesus' feeding of the multitudes, you will see certain numbers, of people (counted, peculiarly, without women and children), numbers of loaves and fishes etc. By using such numbers, he knew that the inherent information would bypass the minds of his adversaries, but stand out to those who knew of the Way, and its esoteric teachings. For those with eyes to see etc.

[@quetzelmichaels1637]

Where can I find a textbook on the crucifixion story as imagery and prophecy. Two appearances, within the same generation - the sacrifice and the resurrection. What did the Son see the Father do? ...for what he does, his son will do also. (Joh 5:19 NABO) YHWH judged the heavens and the Gods. God rises in the divine council, gives judgment in the midst of the gods. The gods neither know nor understand, wandering about in darkness, and (the foundations of all the words) shake. (Psa 82:1-5 NABO) the earth trembles, the heavens shake (Joe 2:10 NABO) I will shake the heavens and the earth (Hag 2:6 NABO) I will make the heavens tremble and the earth shall be shaken (Isa 13:13 NABO) the powers of the heavens will be shaken (Luk 21:26 NABO) "I will once more shake not only earth but heaven." That phrase, "once more," points to (the) removal of shaken, created things, so that what is unshaken may remain. (Heb 12:26-27 NABO) Christ judges the world. I came into this world for judgment (Joh 9:39 NABO) (Are they) unjust, humanly speaking, to inflict his wrath? Of course not! For how else (are they) to judge the world? (Rom 3:5-6 NABO) YHWH is greater than I. YHWH became the snake. Christ becomes a worm. The gods will be measured against the sacrifice of Christ. YHWH is without measure. Earth is YHWH’s Everlasting Lake of Fire, his furnace of roaring flames where, in his furious wrath, he will gather you up, put you in, and smelt you. If your name is not found in the book of life, he will refine you, remove your dross, and purify you until the Devil, the False Prophet, and the Beast (false beliefs) are cleansed from you. The gates of the Abyss/ Hades will not prevail against it, (Mat 16:18) Gods, pffft. The Son of David destroys all power, rule, and authority, 1Cor 15:25. In him, you have someone who can relate to you through his sacrifice. In David, the Cornerstone of Adam’s (the Christ), work of salvation, you have someone you can relate to through his salvation. In his name this man stands before you healed. He is 'the stone rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone.' (Act 4:10-11 NABO) YHWH and Christ/ Satan and Adam/ Jacob and Esau/ Behemoth and Leviathan/ David and the Son of David/ Peter and Jesus... are the same two individuals. David, your king, rides the Donkey and the Bride of David rides the foal of the Donkey. Adam, the Christ, rides a horse - of many colors, or aspects, or perspectives. White - The wine press I have trodden alone (Isa 63:3 NABO) Red - Do not think that I have come to bring peace (Mat 10:34 NABO) Black - Scales of judgment Pale Green - Christ rising up from the Abyss - his name is Death and all of Hades is at his heel - to ‘strike at’ the heel or the head means to protect, guard, or watch over.

[@scienceexplains302]

*Luke infancy narrative ends before ch3?* The infancy narrative seems to end at 2:32. After that, Joseph and Mary are baffled by Jesus doing and saying god stuff. Why would they be baffled if they knew God created Jesus specially? On the other hand, 3:1 does clearly imply the beginning of a narrative.

[@mtoshamtosha]

of all the things to care about in the universe, surely this is not one of them?

[@gregbradshaw3410]

As a non-scholar, it seems when there is a disagreement in scripture, between John, Luke, Mathew and Mark, Mathew and John should be taken as the prime authority considering Mark and Luke are essentially secondhand stories vs. Mathew and John who knew Jesus before the crucifixion. If you were to speak to someone today about, say a car accident, would you take the word of a witness at the scene, or someone who said they spoke to a witness at the scene. I do not want to take away from the importance of the gospels of Mark and Luke, it is just saying that when Luke was writing his letter that became his gospel, he was relating what he had learned from the surviving apostles. Luke was very well educated and was able to read and write in perfect Greek for the time, but he at best met the apostles, and possible Mary the mother of Jesus. As to the Gnostics, this was the first schism of the church, and it was over weather Jesus was simply a man, or was he God and Man. Saint Nicholas and Arius literally got into a physical fight over this. The council were considering excommunicating Saint Nicholas over this, and as the story goes; They were all visited by Mary who corrected them that her son was God. The next day Arius was excommunicated along with his followers becoming the Gnostics.

[@PhilSophia-ox7ep]

lol scholars don't believe the gospels were composed by Matt, Mark, Luke and John

[@gk10101]

scribes changing stuff...not a good look, you scribes. should have left it as is. let the debates rage.

[@joshuaATbarnes]

Is Jacob Berman Nick Cage's little brother?

[@vincentrockel1149]

Western religions seem to be based on magical thinking. whereas the eastern religions are more of a mythical style. Myths are designed to provide an allegorical narrative of the unexplainable. Magical thinking seems designed to convince the follower as to the legitimacy of the godhead.

[@mikesoussan]

Saying that Jesus was divine or not is saying practically nothing ... what is divinity anyhow? If Jesus existed and Gabriel (an Elohim of the Malakh category) had anything to do with his conception, then he was definitely a hybrid ... meaning that he was genetically homo sapiens from his mother side and Elohim from his father side ... The Elohim (wrongly translated in english as GOD) were, human-like beings who appear to originate from outside of planet Earth ... ....

[@rohanmanuka]

Virgin means not married. Fulfills prophecy, but not religious nonsense. Become a Messiah, a spirit anointed child of God. Yes, you will need to change, abandon your idolatry. It's not easy, but it's easy.

[@cindiloowhoo1166]

Hello ~ As per usual, I followed a couple yellow brick roads down into some fascinating wabbit holes as I was looking up something I did need to know at the time. Okaaay ~ I admit I know a bit more about some things than others, and sometimes land in a tidepool whirl. However, I do not, cannot, believe in "abstract atheism." I do not believe in the God you do not believe in. In Aristotelian philosophy, there must be a first or prime mover. There are laws of nature and physics, regardless of whom or what you do or do not think put them there. From whence came the components for said Big Bang, in which I believe is your current theory? E=mC2 ---> Matter cannot be (naturally) created nor destroyed. ( I will double check with Mr Whoo, who works with Particle Nuclear Physics, Accelerators, Atom Smashers, Quarks, Neutrinos, and all kinds of cool stuff). If The Big Bang Ball o Fire just "Arrived in the Cosmos," Why not a Superior Being. Said Bang and/or Being are both certainly Superior Forces than us currently puny mortals. I have not yet decided if we humanoids are pro- or regressing. I have many of your books and enjoyed them. Ancient History, Ancient Artifact Adventure Stories, Gnostics, Gospels of whomever, what ifs do keep me awake at night (in a nice way, nicer if I could remember it all.) Not accusing you of anything nor criticizing, just want to understand where your exit off The Highway was... There was nothing, there will be nothing, or a zillion other beliefs, religions, philosophies on this planet of a few billion souls ~~~ Some Force had to flick that first marble, else I get a rather unpleasant headache..... Chabad Orthodox Judaism interests me, Rabbi Manis Friedman - Crown Heights New York, has a YT, I perceived you may also be interested, or already informed. You're lucky - I can only type so much with severely arthritic shoulders (go figure...)

[@TheLookingOne]

Mathew's genealogy seems to indicate that Yeshu was born out of wedlock

[@Brucec-x6r]

We are dreaming ,and making it all up.nothing exist

[@gospeljoy5713]

You hope. Because if you are wrong then you have a major problem.

[@barnsweb52]

The gospels err - Mark, Luke and John testify against Matthew.

[@newyorkskier]

Very interesting point you make about Luke going to great pains to show that Jesus belongs to David's genetic line through Joseph, but then Joseph is not Jesus's father because Mary was a virgin. So what is it? Mary was not a virgin and Joseph is the biologic al father of Jesus or Mary was a virgin at the time of Jesuus's birth, hence Jesus did not belong to David's genetic line. Luke made a big mistake here. He should have linked Mary to Jesus and not Joseph if he wanted to keep his story straight

[@neclark08]

...I'm curious about the way Dr. Ehrman states his current 'spiritual identification':-- both here- & in other forums as: "...I am Not a christian." ...rather than: "...I am No Longer a christian." ...which would seem to more accurately describe his present orientation.

[@DiogenesNephew]

How is it "more accurate" when both are 100% true?

[@quetzelmichaels1637]

David is the Morning Star, not Jesus. The application is based on one word. Jesus isn't the king of Babylon, the ruler of this world, wherever man may dwell, who becomes much greater than before. On the other hand, David's people set out from Babylon seeking a promised land. David has an everlasting covenant with the Lord working for his salvation and every desire. David is your king who will be raised up for you. David rides the donkey and the bride of David rides the foal of the donkey. Blessed is the kingdom of our Father David that is to come! (Mar 11:10 NABO) Christ rides a horse - of many colors, or aspects, or perspectives. White - The wine press I have trodden alone (Isa 63:3 NABO) Red - Do not think that I have come to bring peace (Mat 10:34 NABO) Black - Scales of judgment Pale Green - Christ rising up from the Abyss - his name is Death and all of Hades is at his heel - to ‘strike at’ and ‘grasp at’ the heel or the head means to protect, guard, watch over and admire.

[@barnsweb52]

2 Timothy 4:19 - Everyone abandoned Paul in his own lifetime - he stood abjectly defeated, just as the findings of one of the most famous DSS scholars said - there are writings in the DSS that are from early Christians who rejected Paul. ROME put Paul in the Bible - not the disciples of Jesus. Bart has an agenda, read a little wider folks.

[@almazchati4178]

Jews are descendents of Pharaoh and Sara. Abraham had beautiful Sarah, he sold her to the Pharaoh. His real wife was Hagar. He was possibly financing his travels this way. As he was approaching Egypt, the news of beautiful Sarah outpace them and reach Pharaoh ahead of time. He was a good marketeer. Jews have nothing to do with him, other than being the former master of their mother, Sarah.

[@choward5430]

There's a day coming when, "people will seek death and will not find it. They will long to die, but death will flee from them." Then you'll know about "textural corruption."

[@drzaius844]

Why is god well pleased with a physical manifestation of himself? Doesn’t that strike Christians as odd? It sounds a little like “you are good enough, you are smart enough” to me, if you are trying to claim that Jesus is god. It sounds like Jesus is not god in this passage, and I have to think that’s why Christians don’t quote Mark.

[@kerwinbrown4180]

How is these disagreements orthodox corruptions?

[@PhilSophia-ox7ep]

Did you pay attention?

[@kerwinbrown4180]

@@PhilSophia-ox7ep No, since it sounds like nonsense. I am not considered orthodox but I know even the so called orthodox debate these things.

[@PhilSophia-ox7ep]

@@kerwinbrown4180 Dum dum, do you know what orthodox means in this context? No, apparently you don't.

[@kerwinbrown4180]

@@PhilSophia-ox7ep You are vague. Orthodox view means traditional but traditionally these points are argued over. That is at least in part why so many versions of the Bible exist. This controversy is even seen in the original manuscripts that have been discovered.

[@PhilSophia-ox7ep]

@@kerwinbrown4180 What became the orthodox view (which gave birth to eastern orthodox, catholicism and Protestantism) was involved in corrupting the text and ridding it of elements that weren't consistent with dogma. No, this isn't debated today. Many of these points are not debated. Do you debate whether Jesus was divine? Because that's been doctored by the proto-orthodoxy. Do you debate whether he was born of a virgin? Do you debate that he was Christ from birth or only when he was 30 years old?

[@sha0071972]

11:43 Changing the text is dishonest and he knows it, they are mostly unintentional spelling mistakes and slip of the pen...such is the story of Dr. Bart Ehrman. If you want an honest answer look up Daniel Baird Wallace.

[@InfoArtistJK]

Deceptive. The wisdom and concepts are not corrupted, and of course, that's what is important, and Bart knows that. Peace

[@yohei72]

Ehrman is a textual scholar. His job is to trace the fine details of textual history. What is deceptive or wrong about his claims in that area? Even that aside, you're wrong - the ideas in these texts have been changed, as Ehrman and other scholars have meticulously documented. You're simply whining because you don't like that fact, but you've given no counterargument.

[@InfoArtistJK]

@yohei72 Actually, you are mistaken. But keep your panties on. It's okay to be wrong even though you were told otherwise as a child.😢 If only you were as smart as you think you are. Sorry that you're not. BTW- I will not be reading your inane attempt at a response. No more pearls before swine. Peace😊

[@AHyperMedia]

non-scripture corruption: Mithros rock born god and ritualistic blood & flesh cannibalism! -not?

[@gospeljoy5713]

Forget about the bible the truth is that many muslims are seeing jesus in their dreams and leaving islam for christianity. Christianity is not about a bible but a living relationship with the triune God. Ukraine just had a national day of prayer on june 22. Many Iranians are fleeing to Armenia and becoming Christians. KZbin is a conduit to connect believers in various countries.

[@yohei72]

Who cares? None of this has anything to do with what Ehrman is talking about.

[@youtubeaccount3230]

Many Iranians are fleeing to have a better life money wise majority are not practising Christians 😂 and stop the crap no one seeing Jesus in a dream, that is your way of not being able to intellectually prove your religion

[@EdwardM-t8p]

And your claims are based on...?

[@ianfinnity2732]

Um, won’t AI be helpful here ?

[@kaarlimakela3413]

So the original claim was special pleading that only YHWH is real. Then there's son of more special pleading of three in one or one in three. Then there's the mostest specialest pleading ever told. Either Jesus or Allah, depending upon if your playing opponent is a Vulcan. Like Spock.