Who Chose the Books of the New Testament?

[@sactojlm]

What a discovery! Bart displays so much in depth knowledge and presents it a such a folksy, yet seious, manner. Sprinkle in that infectious, cackling laugh and the viewer is left wanting to hear and learn more and more. Megan is the perfect host, knowledgeable in her own right, but directing questions on topic to just draw out the best in Bart.

[@TheJoedonbakerfan]

I studied ancient history as an undergrad, and wrote an MA thesis on the New Testament canon. The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture blew my mind because I grew up in the church and had never seen a critical analysis before that.

[@termination9353]

The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.

[@Mr.NiceUK]

​@@termination9353cool story bro 😎

[@termination9353]

@@Mr.NiceUK Thanks.

[@eamonbreathnach4613]

​@@termination9353That's nonsense

[@SirLangsalot]

​@@eamonbreathnach4613agreed, complete rubbish.

[@MrDalisclock]

I appreciate Bart making me aware of the concept of gospel Harmony and encouraging me to read the gospels sure by side and compare them. It's bizarre to realize most people basically know the story of Jesus as a 5th gospel cobbled together from the 4 canonical ones

[@Achill101]

You could look up the Diatessaron by Tatian for an actual written 5th gospel, cobbled together from our canonical 4. The Diatessaron was long in use in the Syriac church.

[@picahudsoniaunflocked5426]

I don't know the interviewer but she's great (not just bc she reminds me of Kate Winslet). It's so delightful to hear Bart interviewed by someone as personable, clear, & intellectually nimble as Bart himself is. This was fantastic, thanks, & I'll look up more of Megan's work.

[@knightmarepilot4832]

@@JBL1222 Sounds quite interesting.. I should check it out.

[@davegrenier1160]

Bart appears to be smitten with her. I don't blame him.

[@zapkvr]

Yes because her appearnce is so important.

[@ZheDong]

@@zapkvr who said that?

[@Nocturnalux]

Isn’t she Dr Josh’s wife, and co-author of Digital Hamurabi?

[@chokin78]

Bart's laughter is just contagious, which along with his vast knowledge make for a great lecture. Kudos to Megan too for such a great job.

[@nedsantos1415]

I came upon Elain Pagels's "The Gnostic Gospels" when I was in my early twenties. That book led me out of the darkness that I had wandered in for so long.

[@michaeldebellis4202]

I was working on a client job building a software system in New York. Working insane hours. I took one night off and just wandered around. I ended up at a used bookstore in Greenwich village where they had Pagel’s book and I bought it for around a dollar. I had been reading lots of science fiction by P. K. Dick who at the end of his life was very influenced by Gnostic Christianity. Her book was fascinating and a nice diversion from Java and Oracle manuals and I’ve found the topic of the history of Jesus and early Christianity fascinating even though I’m an atheist.

[@CharlesPayet]

I still regret never knowing about Bart or his books when I was an undergrad and then dental student at UNC-CH in the ‘90s. I might have left Christianity much earlier. I didn’t know about him until after graduation & moving to Charlotte. At some point in the early 2000s, I got to hear him give a talk at a small church in Charlotte, but I still didn’t really understand who he was or the true scope of his work. I was already in the process of deconstruction though; reading Misquoting Jesus after that evening did speed it up. I’ve enjoyed many of his interviews, debates, podcasts, & lectures over the last 30 years.

[@Isaac5123]

I was a Christian for over 50 years. I would have left much sooner if I had come across certain people. There's nothing wrong with the teachings of Jesus once we decide what he actually said. Unfortunately the church and Rome needed a divine leader but as we know the feet of iron and clay will be destroyed.

[@paulmorris6177]

I left Christianity LONG before Bart ever came on the scene. What broke it for me was reading, "The Age of Reason" by Thomas Paine. THAT book, written over 200 years ago was WAY more influential on ME. Discovering Bart (he's my age) only confirmed by thoughts and beliefs but did it in a MUCH more modern context.

[@lminterests5590]

And how do you know Bart is correct?

[@muhammadmusa2671]

By far the best podcast about early Christianity. The vast knowledge Bart display is outstanding even with seven days lead time for preparation not many Professors can come close to this insights . Excellent Bart I love this show and Thank you so much.

[@nokhchi1079]

Not as early as would have thought. Early Christianity I would say is from the age of 30CE to 80CE

[@cooterhead_jones]

“ … even with seven days lead time for preparation …”, etc., only a few professors would be able express the ideas he expressed. First, I imagine that there are scores of professors who could have presented what Dr Ehrman presents with almost no notice at all save where and when to relate the history he does. Second, Dr Ehrman himself didn’t create what he created in seven days … curious number, that … , but one that took him scores of years with mastery of a haf dozen languages to create.

[@CK-dz8fo]

I have listened your online lectures again again and again. .. I have been learning a lot thinking a lot. Thank you so much.

[@fk319fk]

Megan, I think you are a fine interviewer! You ask very good questions, and then you let Bart answer them. You get good information out and keep the conversation moving.

[@earlismarks7108]

Ditto...

[@dimitridoes7936]

She is a good as Bart allows ... not suggesting he would obstruct, but he definitely directs ... and it works fine for both I think.

[@carlosrios3215]

With Bart you kind of have to. He knows so much that sometimes it can be overwhelming

[@enaidealukal4105]

Loving this podcast, new content from Dr. Ehrman is always a pleasure, such a great combination of scholarly competence + charisma/communication skills.

[@momijiyamanishi4548]

He's totally forgetting the writings of the early church fathers that cover everything up to about the year 400.

[@enaidealukal4105]

@@momijiyamanishi4548 um, no he is definitely not, he mentions them frequently when relevant

[@picahudsoniaunflocked5426]

Can we please get an episode with Dr E revisiting his dissertation? Would love him to react on his younger self's take, plus how he arrived at his subject, & how his relationship to that subject changed as his knowledge developed?

[@bartdehrman]

Hi Pica, that's a great idea! Thanks

[@fretnesbutke3233]

I 2nd that! Great idea!

[@equinoxproject2284]

@@fretnesbutke3233after a motion is seconded a vote is undertaken…🤚

[@EdwardMcPhail-em2bj]

It would be interesting for a looking back episode James tabor did a few and that was enlightening It would be great to see those two as well discuss their developments from then and now in either a debate or a two parter where they exchange who interviews whom

[@maesophia4126]

What’s really funny about the canon being decided at Nicaea myth is I actually had one of my undergraduate professors in my religious studies program insist during class that that was the case, even after I tried to correct him on the point! In fairness his specialty was in the Hebrew Bible iirc, not early Christianity, but I thought it was wild how far up that misconception had gone 😂

[@nosuchthing8]

It's a mistake by a fiction writer. But it's really a minor mistake. The Canon was decided later at another council.

[@nosuchthing8]

The 27-book New Testament was first formally canonized during the councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397) in North Africa. Pope Innocent I ratified the same canon in 405, but it is probable that a Council in Rome in 382 under Pope Damasus I gave the same list first. These councils also provided the canon of the Old Testament, which included the deuterocanonical books.[4]

[@bobSeigar]

​@@nosuchthing8 Er, it isn't a minor point, it's an entire 100+ years. Also, wrong council.

[@nosuchthing8]

@@bobSeigar what I posted is from the Wikipedia page. Go get them to change it if you have issues. Yeesh.

[@nosuchthing8]

@@bobSeigar The 27-book New Testament was first formally canonized during the councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397) in North Africa. Pope Innocent I ratified the same canon in 405, but it is probable that a Council in Rome in 382 under Pope Damasus I gave the same list first. These councils also provided the canon of the Old Testament, which included the deuterocanonical books.[4] And of course, these 72 books were all included in the Gutenberg bibles with no fuss. It was only later that Luther took scissors to the canon

[@vincentcross9148]

I absolutely love this pod cast-and Barts brain and knowledge.

[@coreyham3753]

Agree .. Bart is so informed about this whole area and able to clearly make his points.

[@jaywest320]

I listened Dr Erhman speak at the Philadelphia public library many years ago. And he autographed my copy of "Misquoting Jesus" I remember asking him about Erasmus and he seemed shocked that I asked. I enjoyed listening to him speak. Very informative.

[@FretnesButke]

Really cool! "In Praise of Folly" is one of my favorites! I recall two of his proofs that Dame Folly rules the world was War,..and Marriage.

[@chadgarber]

Loving the new stuff! Love ya Bart.

[@bartdehrman]

Thank you!

[@lafelong]

I started asking this question as a teenager in the mid/late 1970s. Nobody seemed to want to talk about it. The answer always came down to: "Certain men decided how everyone else should think."

[@J_Z913]

This is easily my #1 podcast now. I went ahead and got my questions in over on the website. Hopefully I can stump you on the Outsmart Bart segment! I'm also a member of the blog, which everyone who's financially able should join. Good content for a good cause over there.

[@bartdehrman]

Hey JZ it's Chris writing for Bart. That's great to hear. We've put a lot of work into it. But DOUBT you can Outsmart the Bart!! Haha

[@J_Z913]

@@bartdehrman Oh I doubt I can either, but it's at least worth a shot!

[@termination9353]

ask Bart this in the Outsmart Bart segment - The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.

[@ryant32u]

@@termination9353 you have sources for those claims?

[@termination9353]

@@ryant32u How about the Gospel narrative itself source to start with John 21:24 "This is the disciple[whom Jesus loved/ Lazarus] which testifieth of these things, AND WROTE THESE THINGS: and we[Apostles] know that his testimony is true."

[@jseaman256]

i'm a BIG fan of Bart Ehrman. I would love to meet him and pick his brain someday. I love coming at antiquity from a historical and critical method instead of a theologic method.

[@bartdehrman]

Thanks Jason!

[@earlismarks7108]

Yes Jason..history, brings method to the madness for me too, Thank goodess. 👌🏽

[@BalrogsHaveWings]

Agreed! I Love his lectures and explains (what we know) about the real history.

[@BalrogsHaveWings]

"Parablepsis occasioned by homeoteleuton" is always forever burned into my mind 😂

[@earlismarks7108]

@@BalrogsHaveWings lol...$ditto! 😂💣💥

[@abelincdlp]

Thank you for what you are doing. As a Christian I appreciate how you are clarifying what the scriptures are really saying. I don't know if you realize it but you are doing the work of the Entity you claim to not believe in. Keep up the good work. God bless

[@ThetennisDr]

Ditto

[@nasserm.nasser5087]

Read the quran before the curtain is closed. May God guide you

[@richardh8082]

@abelincdlp The truth shall set you free (from dogma)

[@PauldeSwardt]

Big fan of Bart and Megan but surprised no mention of Marcion of Sinope in discussions of the Canon as it is generally believed that it was in reaction to his writings that an Official canon was thought necessary!

[@todradmaker4297]

Marcion had such a minority view point that I don't think any of the proto-orthodox churches took him seriously.

[@tylerbenschoter2075]

I'm definitely looking forward to Bart's take on Epictetus. I love the stoics.

[@stevenbeeney]

So do I. I hope you appreciate the early Epicureans too, not the later ones. You know Stoics and Epicureans alike agreed "Moderation in all things, excess in none."

[@CapnSnackbeard]

"French Archeologists were digging up graves." The difference between an archeologist and a grave robber that an archeologist has a college degree in how to fence the objects they steal.

[@holdingpattern245]

My understanding is that there was an old Church father named Marcion whom the other Church fathers considered a heretic, and he made a sort of canon that was mostly similar to the one we know, except instead of four gospels there was only the Gospel of Marcion (made from other gospels) and only about half of the other New Testament books. So the canon we know was a response to Marcion's.

[@tesmith47]

The. Council of TRENT!!??!!! how did europe become center of middle eastern psychosis???

[@Achill101]

Yes, our canon was a response to Marcion and his much smaller canon. I was surprised that Ehrman never mentioned Marcion, or I missed that one time when he did. . . . Marcion is still considered a heretic today, because he claimed there were two gods: one god who created heaven and earth but who was also unmerciful, and another, superior god who sent his son Jesus to us, to show us salvation from this wretched world. The church rejected Marcion's new teaching, excommunicated him, and gave him back his money he had donated. . . . Marcion's canon was one gospel and many letters by Paul, but not Titus, Timothy, or Hebrew. The gospel was similar to Luke's gospel, according to church fathers who accused Marcion to have cut from Luke what he disliked. Within forty years, the church had its canon, includung the four gospels, all of Paul's letters, and other writings, which we are not sure about.

[@Lancer-c2b]

Just the theology is different. More jewes .even our old testament has the same teaching and using their theology it's a till there. Jewes teachings like many gods just jehova there god and not the god of all family's of jews. Translators just use the idea of god in place of many words. Rocky mountain. Is now god etc etc.

[@AceEthos]

Megan is perfect as The Interviewer and has a delightful soul and Mr. E is 👍🏻👌🏻 as always! Love this Podcast

[@peterharpley3390]

Fascinating discussion as ever - I would be intrigued to hear you both discuss Mary Magdalene - her Gospel and her rehabilitation in the last century and the effect the patriarchy of the Christian Church on her reputation and importance to the ministry of Jesus.

[@brucee8332]

I read The Shepherd of Hermas for a religion class at Pomona College in 1967.

[@mildredmartinez8843]

So much to learn from Prof. Erhman.

[@GrinchDec23]

Bart, you are moving forwards at the precise time, very happy.and glad that you have decided to kick ass lately, we missed you largely for some years...Now we can relax 1%, focus on more...and REVEAL much better, thanks for re-,invifogorating,

[@thehistoryprof6750]

Another informative video. Well done, thank you both.

[@dixieporter2960]

I really like his style, and he has taught me so much.😊

[@salt1956]

Excellent interview. Megan asked all the important questions. Bart answered in a way that all people can understand. Thank you.

[@RubyNeumann]

Thank you for yet another great discussion. Enjoying the podcast!!!!

[@gitarverkstedetwilden825]

This is great. I love the content and the format. I’m also very happy to hear that Bart’s sound quality has improved. But I still wish that Megan had a better microphone. Keep up the good work.

[@bartdehrman]

Hi it's Chris writing for Bart. We're working on the sound quality and will be drastically improved beginning in Ep 6 and beyond. Thanks!

[@prakashpetta6221]

WHY HAVE SO MANY AUTHORS HAVE WRITTEN GOSPELS, LETTERS, LEGENDARY SORIES ETC ABOUT JESUS' LIFE AND ACTIVITIES DURING THE FIRST CENTURY?DIDN'T SHOW THAT JESUS WAS REALLY EXISTED THAT TIME? PLEASE ANSWER THIS QUESTION?.

[@stevecuddles]

@@prakashpetta6221 Dr. Ehrman has spoken and written on this point many times: he calls Jesus one of the two best attested Palestinian jews to live in the first century and says that the historical evidence for his life (five independent sources: Paul, the synoptics, John, Josephus, Tactitus) is as strong as we could possibly expect.

[@ehrmanblog5554]

@@prakashpetta6221 You can read the thorough evidence for the existence of Jesus in Bart's book Did Jesus Exist? Spoiler--yes.

[@dnlring]

Given Matthew quoting near-verbatim most of Mark, is it possible that Matthew is a reconstruction of a lost document, with a later scribe using Mark to fill in the gaps? Or are there clear signs that what we have today is what Matthew was when written, and Matthew is merely an expanded copy of Mark?

[@dhoffheimerj]

Megan is a talented interviewer.

[@CarlyonProduction]

Perfectly directed discussion. Well paced, lots of grest insights. 🎉

[@preacherno]

The definition of canon was quite new. Back in seminary I was taught that canon was the straw, or tube, that papyrus was made of. Being a tube gave way to cannon (for shooting), while writing the oral tradition made it final. So, kinda new, this definition. I’d ask my professor if he were still alive.

[@termination9353]

The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.

[@boblackey1]

@Zhang ShiYing He needs many citations. I know of no one who teaches the above.

[@preacherno]

@@termination9353 I think you meant to cite John 21:25 but that’s just wishful thinking based on John stating that more had been written and could be written, if all was to be noted. Remember, when John write his texts as the last surviving apostle there where still more eye witnesses alive, so if we were to apply Occam’s Shaver we would rather think he’s pointing at oral tradition.

[@jamesbinns8528]

@@preacherno From the divergence of story-line from the Synoptic Gospels, I think it is fair to say that John did not rely on eyewitnesses. Furthermore, very few would have been alive by time the Gospel of John was written.

[@jimwiant]

The way Canon is used in this context is from Greek, meaning rod, used to measure. The word cannon comes from Latin meaning reed or tube. So, your professor was sort of right, but should have been using the Greek root and not the Latin. (I had to look this up)

[@LaneS89]

I would love to read the book; The effect of Canonical mistakes on the influence and relevance of Christianity over time.

[@command.cyborg]

Good show, as per usual! 👍

[@rhondaw]

Megan, I love this collaboration!

[@salt1956]

I wanted to ask Professor Ehrman, can you do a talk about the Church Fathers, please? Who were they? Were they all bishops? How were they chosen? Were there any theologians of the same period who are not called a Church Father? Did the Fathers have a part in choosing the NT canon? Thank you.

[@termination9353]

The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.

[@dynamic9016]

Very interesting information from Dr. Ehrman.

[@termination9353]

The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them. Friday 13th

[@CuriousCaine]

Fascinating discussion, as always. I've read several of Bart's books and watched a few of these videos. I am particularly fascinated by the notion of different passages (e.g. the story of the prostitute about to be stoned) not appearing until later versions of the new testament, as well as the many editing changes made along the way from the very beginning. Do you, Bart, or does anyone else reading this comment know of a publication that would document on a verse-by-verse basis the date of its authorship or inclusion? After having heard so much emphasis on "scriptural accuracy" in my church days, I'm wondering how much of the "faith" and its doctrines are actually tied to edits made centuries later, both pre-canon and post-canon. A similar fascination of mine is how American evangelicals are largely anti-Catholic (either publicly or privately), and yet the organization that became the Roman Catholic church was, to my knowledge, the exact vessel by which the faith was codified, heresy was defined, and the scriptures created/edited/preserved. Many evangelicals see Catholics as being in error, yet they accept their elided canon as the "true word of God." Ironic.

[@Theyellowbosss]

I always think the same that you have brilliantly pointed out.

[@ackbooh9032]

As a former European evangelical (from the Rhine region traditions), I can testify that these questions are not explored, and similar questions did certainly play a role in my deconversion

[@Achill101]

You can look at Wikipedia for Pericope Adulterae. It is included in relatively late manuscripts, from the 4th century, like the Codex Bezae. . . . The pericope could have been taken from the gospel of the Hebrews, according to Wikipedia. The latter gospel was deemed unorthodox and was actively censured in the 3th century - it could have been that the story was transferred to John (and in one manuscript even to Luke) to save it from being forgotten. . . . A view of the Catholic Church as evil is indeed incompatible with accepting the bible from them. On the other hand, the religious wars in Europe 1550-1650 saw a lot of cruelty on both sides, which explains the negative views of the "others". My own church, the Roman Catholic Church, was equally involved in demonization of the "others".

[@oldpossum57]

The labour involved in copying a « book » let alone 29 books should not be underestimated. Making parchment is really hard. Making inks is a technology. Cutting quill pens. Copying accurately. Copying legibly.

[@Achill101]

Good point

[@jmiller1918]

I have been enjoying these programs. One thing that puzzles me is the origin of the (apparently erroneous) idea that the Council of Nicaea did in fact formalize the Canon, and even that there was a "vote" involved, because I had that very view of it since the 1980's, long before Dan Brown's books. I had to have read it somewhere...and I know it was prior to 1988.

[@noahbody9747]

the council of Nicaea was to determine the nature of Jesus. There were 2 opposing doctrines. Arius believed Jesus was divine but was created by God, making him a lesser being. Athanasius believed Jesus always existed, making him equal to God. Athanasius was the one who came up with the doctrine of the Trinity. Constantine didn't care which doctrine was chosen as long there was only one doctrine. Obviously, Athanasius won the day and Arius was labeled a heretic. All of Arius' writings were destroyed. Church fathers did quote some of Arius writings just to state Arius was a heretic and his teachings were counter to the "orthodox" teachings of the church.

[@jmiller1918]

@@noahbody9747 Thanks for that, it does clarify the work done at the Council. I am still wondering where the original story about the Council being held to vote on the authenticity of the books of the New Testament came from. Dan Brown may have helped spread this story, but he did not invent it.

[@noahbody9747]

@@jmiller1918 There appears some quote in the Synodicon Vetus about selecting the books. The Synodicon Vetus appeared in a 9th century manuscript. It states "placing them by the side of the divine table in the house of God, they prayed, entreating the Lord that the divinely inspired books might be found upon the table, and the spurious ones underneath; and it so happened." Whoever wrote this was obviously wrong since the books were voted on at the council of Trent in 1545. Dan Brown didn't do a thorough research or he didn't care. Fictional writers will often do what is good for the story, not necessarily have accurate history. There is a story about Jerome in the intro to the book of Judith about the council of Nicaea selecting the book of Judith as canon (which of course never happened). This bit of history is dismissed. Hope this helps.

[@jmiller1918]

@@noahbody9747 Thanks for the additional information. I admire your scholarship! I read a fair amount on Gnosticism back in the mid-'80s, possibly I acquired the notion of Nicaea being the moment of decision for Canonical v. non-Canonical from someone there. It's an error that Dan Brown found somewhere too.

[@noahbody9747]

@@jmiller1918 I just did a google search. I find the early church history fascinating. But I don't believe in any of its' doctrines.

[@booklover3959]

Always interesting content on this channel. I only wish though that podcasters would coordinate their sound levels among all the speakers. To hear Bart I had to turn him up till Megan was blasting my eardrums to kingdom come. I say this in a friendly way as I love the podcast.

[@jhake67]

bart ehrman is the rock star of biblical historical scholarship

[@termination9353]

The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.

[@termination9353]

The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them.

[@MarkFrohman]

There is a creator. Beyond that, it is a matter of human opinion.

[@stantorren4400]

You’re assuming we need a creator to exist

[@fuadahmed7322]

​@@stantorren4400The creator is the Necessary Being. Life as we know could not have come from nothing. The big bang is merely a cause. The creator is the ultimate Cause.

[@stantorren4400]

@ If the universe needs a creator, why doesn’t the creator need a creator? Especially considering how infinitely more complex that creator is

[@stantorren4400]

@@fuadahmed7322 Also, a creator existing ≠ god existing. Saying something exists is that, saying this specific kind exists is a very different answer. For all we know, Korgull the exterminator is the creator

[@fuadahmed7322]

@@stantorren4400 That's a good question. For God to be created is impossible because it would lead to infinite regress and there would be no universe. How do you explain our complex universe and biological living organism without a Creator and Designer ?

[@dt5735]

Bart loves to laugh and giggle a lot. Here’s a question he will struggle to answer: Knowing all you know now Bart, 1600+ years after the Canon and studying the Bible for 50+ years, and all the other scholarly studies that have been done, what changes/additions/deletions would you make? Doesn’t man’s understanding and knowledge in 2022 of the events back then warrant another “church council” akin to Nicaea?

[@maynardmckillen9228]

Does it? To what end? Will more rigorous scholarship and recent discoveries dislodge the myriad and entrenched sects from their positions?

[@DM-zq8qy]

There ARE revisions. Constantly. How many “editions” of just the ENGLISH versions (the KJV, IV, NIV, ASV, NEV…) SO FAR?

[@catherinemunroe3960]

thank you bart so well explained.

[@juliapatricia6223]

Thank you Bart!

[@GrinchDec23]

Very glad that you are expounding lately..

[@QueensWino]

I turned on this video to listen to it in the background while working. Bart is brilliant as always...when I finally took a break from my labors to actually look at the video I was shocked by the electric orange hair! 😆

[@AndrewBawitlung]

Megan is so amazing. Well played Josh 🤣

[@larrysanderson4701]

I love listening to Dr. Ehrman. I am wonderng if anyone knows if his mountain home is close to Hayesville, North Carolina. My great great grandparents are buried at Hayesville. 6 of their 13 children came to central Texas (where I live today) from Hayesville in the late 1800's.

[@trilithon108]

Wonder why it's Mathew, Mark, Luke and John and not starting with the first written, as in Mark, Mathew etc?

[@shuttlemanjack]

Bart, your podcasts are a regular part of my "diet" while I'm here in Thailand. I love your works.

[@nosuchthing8]

The 27-book New Testament was first formally canonized during the councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397) in North Africa. Pope Innocent I ratified the same canon in 405, but it is probable that a Council in Rome in 382 under Pope Damasus I gave the same list first. These councils also provided the canon of the Old Testament, which included the deuterocanonical books.[4]

[@o.o.2255]

@nosuchthing8 That is 100% correct. It’s that simple. Protestants removed 7 books. Martin Luther wanted to remove 4 more NT books (James, Hebrews, Jude, and Revelations) because these books contradicted his new heretical teachings

[@Purwapada]

really enjoyable and interesting thanks!

[@zapkvr]

Amazing. Thanks 😊 everyone

[@achidrisabiri1884]

Exactly hitting the nail on the right place

[@dmwallacenz]

This delighted me. And only Megan could get away with saying "... if you're familiar with the Old Testament ..." to the world's most famous Biblical scholar.

[@TheSchranzschranz]

Love this series but would prefer if you both had the same volume level.

[@bartdehrman]

Hi it's Chris writing for Bart. We're working on the sound quality and will be drastically improved beginning in Ep 6 and beyond. Thanks!

[@TheSchranzschranz]

@@bartdehrman very delighted to hear that ❤

[@ulrichhartmann5488]

Martin Luther did not entirely reject the Old Testament apocrypha. He called them "useful and good to read", and they continued to be quoted in the Lutheran church. But he rejected four books of the New Testament on theological grounds and left them in his bible only as kind of an appendix. This is why the order of the books in the New Testament in Lutheran bibles even now differs from others.

[@Lancer-c2b]

Holy Bible in Greek was good and edifying. So yes it was good to read.

[@lorainabogado]

Well done 🎉

[@tesmith47]

The arguments of religon back in history reminds me of my arguments as a kid about if superman could beat the hulk. We made up all sorts of rules etc.

[@rhondah1587]

I find it amusing that a bunch of old men would get together and argue over what they wanted to decide their dogma would be to push on people based solely on their own biases and what they wanted it to be. If any of it was actually true, there would have been no questions to argue about. The idea that a god came down (from where in the cosmos they can't say) and spent a few years in a small area talking to people instead of writing anything down that couldn't possibly be questioned or misrepresented and spread it across the entire planet and providing some really valuable information like about germs and disease treatments, information about dinosaurs and how humans actually evolved and the vastness of the universe, it being fully of gazillion of galaxies and multi-gazillion solar systems in each galaxy and at least a diagram of a printing press. But what happened in reality is most likely a nutty, illiterate Jewish man who was convinced he was meant to tell people he knew the world was about to end.

[@termination9353]

The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.

[@rhondah1587]

@@termination9353 When such document can be produced and verified, then you can opine on it but as it stands now, you haven’t got any evidence that could be considered credible. In other words, I am not buying your bs.

[@termination9353]

@@rhondah1587 Here is the evidence from the Gospel itself John 21:24 "This is the disciple[whom Jesus loved/ Lazarus] which testifieth of these things, AND WROTE THESE THINGS: and we[Apostles] know that his testimony is true." John 11:5 Now Jesus LOVED Martha, and her sister, and LAZARUS John 11:3 Therefore his sisters sent unto him{Jesus], saying, Lord, behold, HE[Lazarus] WHOM THOU LOVEST is sick.. John11:36 Then said the Jews, Behold how he[Jesus] LOVED him[Lazarus]!

[@rhondah1587]

@@termination9353 LMAO You can't prove the bible by quoting it.

[@termination9353]

@@rhondah1587 I'm not proving the bible. I'm proving what the bible says contrary to the claims made by the church.

[@fareerforsuk6609]

Megan is perfect, soft yet though, imitating the divine character of mother Ayesha.

[@matthewpopp1054]

I’d liked to hear more about those anti-Paul letters and texts

[@Lancer-c2b]

Anti Paul was most of gnostic used Paul as their main text.so when gnostic ban Paul was called a heretic in some church fathers etc .like churches of other christ follower they adopted them in taking congecation by blending them in using their text with new theology or death.

[@br1qbat]

Love the podcast. Dr. Ehrman is a fountain of info. I would love to some day see him engage with Dr. Richard Carrier's work on the histricity of Jesus. I know Dr. Ehrman is quite solidly in the historical Jesus camp, but Dr. Carrier's peer reviewed work actually raises several intriguing points I'd like to see a response to. Please don't dismiss Carrier out of hand.

[@DarthGylcolious]

They have debated before, in fact the debate is on youtube. Dr. Ehrman wiped the floor with Carrrier in the debate.

[@jeffmacdonald9863]

@@DarthGylcolious I can't find it. He debated Price, but I don't know of a Carrier/Ehrman debate. There are a couple Carrier videos where he responds to Ehrman's arguments.

[@georgeshassoun2691]

Megan Dear ! You are great , your laughter so sweet , you're polite & presentable & professional ...I like you 😘 Where as for Bart, I like your honesty, ... your informations & studies are mind enlightening ....we thought that the Bible is Holly & the word of the Almighty God to humen ..... Thanks a lot anyway ....

[@brianozment9608]

I really enjoyed the interview you did with him and was amazed at all he knew and could talk about. That's awful news. Just one more instance out of many where life is not fair at all.

[@soonerarrow]

Meghan is ½ of Digital Hammerabi channel. She and Dr. Josh have a ton of great videos over there.. Glad to see her elsewhere!

[@FlyFoxAir]

Do you have this same subject but for the Old Testament?

[@vincentcross9148]

Please please do an episode on Jehovah’s Witnesses! They brain was so many people and have twisted the Bible to fit their doctrines. I would love to know what Bart thinks about them.

[@lynxacresb5331]

You mentioned a letter of Peter that hated Paul and called him a threat. Is there any legitimacy to that one? Or what are your thoughts on it?

[@Lancer-c2b]

During gnostic times before orthodoxy Paul was thought to be the only true apostle.

[@JamesRichardWiley]

It's so refreshing to listen to a matter of fact discussion of the creating of a godman instead of cringing before a preacher threatening his followers with "god's holy word".

[@SugoiEnglish1]

So emotional. Let's stick with the real facts: The NT 27 books all ut 3 were quoted by the earliest Christians. Hence, the later church did not confer any more authority then they already possessed. You don't like Jesus? That's on you.

[@richardredmond1463]

The New Testament books were those commonly recognised as authoritative, were most accepted by Christian leadership over a long period and which were doctrinally in harmony with the both the Old Testament and with each other. Not that there was never any contention about texts or disagreements but over time, it became apparent where the final lines should be drawn. The RC church still has its views in the apocrypha, but I think it's ok to be gracious and allow room for the conscience of others, even if you disagree.

[@jeffmacdonald9863]

Basically. There were a few books that were very contentious and either made it in, but were close to being excluded or came close to being left out but made it in, but the majority of texts were well agreed on long before the canon was formally settled.

[@Achill101]

​@@jeffmacdonald9863 - it is so far only a hypothesis, not a consensus, but David Trobisch published his thesis in 2000 that there was one major edition of writings around 155CE that became our New Testament. The edition was published in response to Marcion and his canon of 1 gospel and 10 letters by Paul, and was maybe edited by Polycarp. If you're interested in the development of the canon, you might want to have a look on Trobisch' arguments.

[@ellencooney5563]

Grace? A New Testament concept? Only helpful is supported by Power and Love 🕊

[@lostfan5054]

I have so many questions for Dr. Ehrman. I wish I had a chance to ask! I'm so confused by the book of Acts!

[@termination9353]

How do 2 blind men follow Jesus? How does a deaf man hear Jesus? Why do you all say Jesus 'resurrected' on Sunday morning when the Gospel says Jesus 'resurrected' on Friday from off the cross? What did Jesus write in the dust with his finger? What was Mary Magdalene's "special part that would not be taken from her"? Why does it say that the "disciple whom Jesus' loved outran Peter? Why did the people rumor that the disciple whom Jesus loved could never die? When the Pahrisees spoke of "less the second mistake be worse than the first" what 'mistake' are they talking about?

[@termination9353]

Book of Acts shows Paul is a fraud.

[@DM-zq8qy]

@@termination9353 @lostfan5054 The WHOLE mess is confusing and contradictory. Amazing anyone believes any of it. (Yet I did because my parents and reverends told me so!)

[@ellencooney5563]

@@termination9353 Jesus did not resurrect from the Cross but commended his Spirit to God and His mother Mary to John for love and care.

[@termination9353]

@@ellencooney5563 the Gospel straight up says Jesus resurrected from the cross "And came out of the graves after his[Jesus] RESURRECTION, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many" Mat 27:53 John was not at the cross, Gospel says Apostles were all in hiding "for fear of the Jews." - It was Mary Mag that took Jesus mother to live in Jesus's home....Jesus had a son via Mary Magdalene John 19:25-27 25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother[Mary], and his mother's sister[in-law], Mary the wife of Cleophas[mother Mary's brother], and Mary Magdalene. 26 When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by[Mary Magdalene], whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy [grand]son! [in Mary Mag's womb/pregnant.] 27 Then saith he to the disciple[Mary Mag], Behold thy mother[in-law/Jesus' mother Mary]! And from that hour that disciple[Mary Mag] took her[Jesus' mother] unto his[Jesus'] own home [The home of Jesus and his now pregnant wife Mary Magdalenein a midwifing arrangement.]

[@hightechsoldier4857]

I think for.some.specific topics it should be great to have visual support...for this video a table with all the bible compilations to give us a hint of what Bart is talking about

[@shock_n_Aweful]

To answer my question of "How did they decide what is Orthodoxy(correct thought) or Heterodoxy(wrong think)?" My professor said "Heterodoxy is your doxy and Orthodoxy is my doxy."

[@alsecen5674]

16:41 If the gospels are anonymous how can we say they were written by apostles? A related question: were the apostles - or even Jesus - literate?

[@moodyrick8503]

*Faith in Jesus;* = _"Faith in the words & writings of men, claiming to speak for Jesus."_

[@termikesmike]

Should be ur personal meeting with the Holy Spirit = u don't even need to read ....

[@moodyrick8503]

@@termikesmike There are hundreds of millions of people that claim to have "personal visions", of Allah, Krishna, Jehovah, Vishnu, the Virgin Mary, Buddha, ect, ect, ect, The countless times I asked, begged & pleaded for God to "reveal himself" to me was met with only *deafening silence.* _If God is real, he can't be bothered to even try to convince me he exists,_ so what more can I do ? *Not, my choice.*

[@termikesmike]

@@moodyrick8503 Luke never claimed to see God, or even meet Jesus …anyway I remember my ’state of Ecclesiastes’ and telling God “ So long, been good to know you “ but it’s time to put away the childish thinking, no more tooth fairies ,time for ‘ nothing but the truth ‘ ….so, what are you going to do for Eternity ? Why the heck is Ecclesiastes in the Bible !!!

[@moodyrick8503]

@@termikesmike And how exactly did you "confirm" that these men were actually _"speaking for God"._ *(Faith = just trust me ?)* And how does _"what Luke did not see",_ help me at all ? I know you are trying to be sincere, but you have not given me anything. _Childish thinking ?_ Believing in _"magical beings"_ & _"super natural events"_ are common to all religions. *I can't tell the difference.* *Their claims are fake, but yours are real.* Thanks for trying, anyway, Mike. _Have a great day._

[@jeffcarberry6270]

Which books and which version was not a discussion at the council because it was already decided before the council. I hope that part is obvious. 50 books cant be ordered if the book didn't already exist. How was this missed? Or was it intentional.

[@Gracchus66]

Great stuff! Just one thing : Megan's mic is WAY louder than Bart's. I have to keep on adjusting the volume as you go back and forth. Anyone else notice this?

[@robertjenssen1320]

Yes. It is odd because you can see sound absorbent material in her background. She needs a decent microphone and some audio equipment to help her set sound levels.

[@jollyandwaylo]

This seems to be a common problem on podcasts.

[@JobGalloway-se8mz]

The amazing thing I find that is so extraordinary is the Catholic Church has had all these books t new library. 3000 years

[@HebaruSan]

It would be so fascinating if we also knew the history of ancient Sumerian and Egyptian (etc.) religions in this depth!

[@anthonyjames4319]

If the criteria is it has to be written by an apostle or close companion of one then how did books get in that were anonymous like Hebrews? Or the disputed letters of Paul? Or the gospels?

[@shemashekarshalom539]

The Gospels were believed to have been written by the names associated with the titles (John Mark the companion of Peter, Luke the companion of Paul, Matthew the apostle, John the apostle) Hebrews was believed to have been written by Paul. The disputed letters of Paul weren’t disputed later on among churches and just accepted at face value as by Paul. Many in the church just accepted the traditions about authorship.

[@anthonyjames4319]

@@shemashekarshalom539 I know what is “believed” but that doesn’t make it true. The criteria to be included seems wrong to me since we don’t know who wrote most of the letters.

[@shemashekarshalom539]

@@anthonyjames4319 you asked “how did the books get in”. Of course what is “true” can be different from what is believed. I am an atheist (ex-Protestant-Christian). I was making a historical observation on the assumption your question was a historical question. Augustine did have different criteria than the “apostle or close companion to an apostle” but he is in the 4th century. Many of the earlier Christians had criteria similar to what Ehrman lays out. If you are Christian and you are trying to figure out what criteria of canonicity you should use to figure out what books should be considered canonical I can suggest some books for you that discuss canon from a Christian perspective.

[@anthonyjames4319]

@@shemashekarshalom539 I am an ex-Christian as well. Why did you become an atheist?

[@shemashekarshalom539]

@@anthonyjames4319 a thumbnail sketch is something like this: 1) The more I learned about the world the easier it became to understand and explain the Bible and Christianity through purely natural causes. If it’s easier to explain Christianity through nature than to explain nature through Christianity it becomes difficult to maintain belief. 2) I realized just how bad the evidence for Jesus is. Dale Allison Jr.’s book Resurrection: Apologetics, Polemics, and History shows vividly how the historical evidence isn’t enough to believe Jesus rose from the dead. Those were the two big things that made me leave Christianity. Now that I’ve stepped outside of Christianity there is a lot of things about Christianity that I find problems with that were hard for me to see. I don’t personally see general theism as a viable option at the moment.

[@williamcarter7977]

What I find puzzling is there is no Gospel Of Jesus! 😎😉

[@williamcarter7977]

I am curious as to when the Hebrew Scriptures were canonized.🤔

[@Achill101]

​@williamcarter7977 - we would need to distinguish which scriptures: the Hebrew Scriptures in Hebrew for the Jews, or the Hebrew Scriptures in their Greek translation, the Septuagint, for the Christians. . . . For Rabbinical Judaism, canonization happens around 100CE, certainly after 70CE. For Christians, the more urgent question was if the Old Testament was still holy scripture or should be disregarded: some later followers of Paul, like Marcion, advocated the latter, which led to a loud counter reaction by some. The latter kept the Septuagint.

[@williamcarter7977]

@@Achill101 It is my understanding that all of the canonical New Testament was written in Greek.

[@Achill101]

@@williamcarter7977 - your understanding is correct, I think. But you mentioned the Hebrew Scriptures.

[@carlosrios3215]

I found Dr. Bart when I was searching for more historical accuracy in the Bible. Crazy huh ?

[@hilarycraig5360]

Same lol.

[@kj1989-k]

Plz balance the audio!!!!!!!!!!!

[@bartdehrman]

Hi it's Chris writing for Bart. We're working on the sound quality and will be drastically improved beginning in Ep 6 and beyond. Thanks!

[@kj1989-k]

@@bartdehrman tysm :)

[@MSHOOD123]

Stop misquoting Yeshua, dear Bart. Just teasing. Praying for you to come back to Him 🙏🏻 Big love from Sarajevo 💕

[@falsesectslikeshiaarejudeo6543]

They will discuss the choosing of New Testament books. she studies Assyria, mesopotamia by iraq and syria, they speak akadian and sumeria area. Elain pagels wrote a book gnostic gospels. So people asked who decided what books go in, why not gospel of Peter. Canon meaning straight line or edge or a ruler or standardized collection books. His 1st phd seminar was with Bruce Metzer, speaking of how it happenned. the early followers of Jesus had the Tohrat, the Neviyim and psalms. People had different accounts of Jesus's life, so ppl had to decide what to follow. it took over 300 years to debate & standardize everything. 10 :00 - Many just follow Dan Brown the Da vinci code which says nicea decided what was the books... this is incorrect he says. Council of trent in 16th century... Scholars knew of other books... gospel claimed to be of James about Virgin Mary, Many were recent, gospel of peter in 1880s, soposedly Jesus 's ressurection. acclaimed gospel of thomas who is claimed to be Jesus's twins there is apocalypse of peter and paul and 3rd Corinthians, they are called apocrapha... some almost made it in. Catholic, e. orthodox and protestant have same new testaments ethiopic and armenian church has some additional books. 4th century greek manuscripts like siniticus, found in mt sinai monastery, it includes letter barnabas and sheperd of hermes. Megan asks were they left out due to reliability or theology. Erhman says we have debate records in 2nd and 3rd century, its more aggresive in 4th. 2 nd century Iraneous, 3rd century origin, and 4th century eucibius and tries an isnad. they said take a book of apostle or a close companion of an apostle... it has to be widely spread or catholic meaning universal... instead of locally favorite... church had circular view they said, if it agrees with us then it's written by an apostle. So gospel of Peter or Thomas got excluded... Megan asks did it change over time. by end 2nd century, the proto orthodox, 20 :00 - Orthodos now means what became dominant position, which was enforced in 4th century, so prot orthodox means the ones who had these views before that time. they agreed on 4 gospels, they debated on whether they should have letters of paul or pter or john. first time 27 was decided on was by athenacious biship,he would send letters around. in 39th festal letter, in 367 CE. he said these are our 27 books. gospel of peter discovered in 1880s in Egypt in a tomb. it was in ocmeme. Gospel of peter is claimed to be written by peter unlike the 4 gospels... It says it talks about Jesus leaving the tomb. guard watches 2 angels come and rock rolling... there was a 3 tall men and a floating corss that was asked from heaven did you preach to those asleep, and cross said yes. Serapian approved of it. But then he was told its heretical and then said ok... as this gospel can be used by people who say Jesus wasn't human. they chose 4 for a spectrum of belief and reconcile... Mark more humanizes Jesus and Jesus is figuratively used in Jon to show he is divine, when they are written by 2 people who may not agree... 30 :00 - So the canon also excludes other views, there were many christian who hate paul, writing claiming to be peter saing paul is an enemy... h/e ones affirming paul is included... Megan asks were some books more authoritative. Bart says some are quoted more, Mark is least quoted, mathew has 90% of Mark and includes longer accounts like sermon of mount. 2nd peters was debated over a longer time. didmus lived in time of Athanacious said 2nd peters is a forgery. 2nd and 3rd jon, james and jude... until 4th century rvelations wasn't accepted. mathew and jon were the most important later. MArk was source for mathew and luke and didn't know each other likely... Jesus isn't shown after alleged crucifiction, diciples dont even know he was sopposedly raised. before there weren't many libraries to know history. they think acts was accurate of early church. church were concerned if Jesus's life was accurately reported. gospel Jesus is a 5 yr boy and making clay... 40 :00 - eppictitus was s slave who became a philosopher. go to bart erhman website to send questions. luke said there were many accounts of Jesus, there was a source called Q. 2nd peters was last nt book written sopposedly. thomas written before peter... dideche is written before much of Peter... there were many gosnitcs... used orthodox books as well why did Martin luther exclude apocrapha... it was old testament apochrapha. - about 12 or 15 books, it's in greek translation of OT but not in hebrew. eearly christians used it but not yeahood. martin luther and protestants saw some books taught purgatory which is a catholic belief so they may have excluded them for that reason or others. Next week will be apocrapha, and forgery, writing books in names of other people, it was common in early christianity.

[@Steve7318]

There are differences between the Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox Canons of Scripture. The Protestants leave out certain books and the Orthodox Canon has some books in the Old Testament that are in neither. You can verify all of it via Wikipedia and various websites. They are not all the same. "The canon of the Catholic Church was affirmed by the Council of Rome (AD 382), the Synod of Hippo (AD 393), the Council of Carthage (AD 397)" - From WIkipedia. At this time the church was undivided and so there was no difference between Orthodox and Catholic. That split didn't come about for more than a thousand years after these councils set the canon.

[@75ameerarafath]

We Muslims really enjoying listening to Sir Bart Ehrman, for more true knowledge about Jesus pbuh,

[@01faisall]

Bro he doesn’t know anything about Jesus pbuh 💯💯💯 but he knows the bible n the Christianity. If he knows Jesus he will have been Muslim long time ago, he’s agnostic knows the bible is corrupt and he can’t be Christian because of contradictions,

[@manbearpig3507]

@@01faisall he often cites the problem of evil as the main reason he left Christianity

[@termination9353]

The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.

[@ericdumont610]

​@faisal nur all religious books are corrupted rubbish that was written by people with a agenda.

[@XeaRae]

Starts at 2:57

[@bananahead44]

Please work on improving the audio. It is hard to listen to when one speaker is much louder than the other. Great content!

[@bartdehrman]

Hi it's Chris writing for Bart. We're working on the sound quality and will be drastically improved beginning in Ep 6 and beyond. Thanks!

[@kuyab9122]

I'm quite surprised at how Bart did not mention Marcion who was crucially instrumental in forcing the early church fathers to clarify the church's position with regards to authoritative scripture.

[@origenjerome8031]

Has anyone ever thought about the fact that God Almighty never asked anyone to pick out scriptures and compile them into an encyclopedia called the New Testament?? So it was self-anointed human beings who filtered what we should read today based merely on their own personal opinion.

[@termination9353]

The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.

[@theeternalsbeliever1779]

How do you know that it's a "fact" that God never asked anyone to compile the writings that became the NT? Were you alive 1900 years ago? Call me crazy, but Paul's last letter to Timothy shows him telling Timothy to bring the writings that eventually became part of the NT with him when he left to visit Paul.

[@origenjerome8031]

@@theeternalsbeliever1779 Paul's letters to Timothy, were NOT written by Paul. They are anonymous letters. You don't know this? No Church Father has ever claimed that God spoke to them ordering them to pick out scriptures from the wild and bind them together as the New Testament. Do you know of anybody? The compilation of the New Testament took centuries, because Church Fathers were fighting each other which ones to pick. Had God told them so at the start, they would have done it in just a day.

[@termination9353]

@@theeternalsbeliever1779 Good catch. There is also other evidences to back up the Gospel as written earlier. The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them.

[@termination9353]

@@origenjerome8031 The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.