But Could Peter Write Anything? 

Megan is one of the best interviewers there is. She’s so smart and insightful.

Thanks to both of you for another great podcast episode. I was shocked to learn you've never met face-to-face!

I borrowed the audiobook version of your book, Misquoting Jesus. I expected to hear pretty much what I’ve been hearing on these podcasts but was surprised how much more detail is in your book. You briefly touch on each topic with the podcasts but the book is definitely more of a deep dive, I’m loving it!!

Don't you guys ever think of sparing us viewers the long intros! It's a great way to get into the theme, really! Keep em coming!

bart... american.. married to a brit.. in england megan.. brit.. married to american.. in the u.s. the irony..

The 'explaination' given to me in Primary School was that God gave the apostles the gift of literacy...surprise!

"It's headed in a certain direction. God help us." -Bart Ehrman

The rock nickname could be because he was so dense, thick-headed, slow to get anything.

The Sea of Galilee is the second lowest lake in the World at 700 ft below sea level. Nazareth is over a thousand feet above sea level so the difference in elevation is almost 2000 ft, it must have been a steep descent

What's your name? Uh uh uh Uh Pea... Uh Uh Tear... Uh... Griffin Yeah, Peter Griffin

YES! Trade glasses!

Whoever wrote 1 Peter (in Greek) also wrote it for people who must have been able to read Greek. This, too, excludes anyone living along the shores of the Galilee. All of the New Testament gospels must have started out as oral traditions and were only set down as the "New religion" became more popular.

Fantastic interview. Thank you.

The real question is, could Peter get anything right?

The Gospels were written anonymously in Greek probably 40 years or more after Jesus. I have no idea whar Jesus said, we only have Gospels that may have elements of truth in them but could be embellished by the writers to suit their own beliefs and to make you believe the same. Jesus apparently read in the Temple, but Jesus was from a poor family, I think it highly improbable ne could read or write. Peter was a poor fisherman also so could he read and write, and yes just like the Gospels were in Greek.

As a student of the 'human condition' for more than 75 years, it's been my observation people believe what they want to believe, THEN TELL ALL KINDS OF STORIES TO PROVE, SUPPORT, EMBELLISH, ETC. THEIR CHERISHED BELIEFS. But, then again, I have found it true that 'God works in strange and mysterious ways.' Perhaps God was unhappy with the stories in TANACH and the direction it was taking its readers, and sent Jesus and his followers to change the narrative and give mankind a better direction to be marching to. We'll, with over 45,000 different Christian denominations today, Christianity certainly has been a 'game changer' for the past two thousand years!!!😇

Thanks. Always interesting content!

Did Bart say “ God help us “ at 2:07 😂😂

I don't think that Peter wrote 1st Peter or that a scribe wrote it for Peter , in fact , like Bart pointed out , it sounds just like Paul . I find this rather interesting also : 1 Peter 5:12 KJV 12)"By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I suppose, I have written briefly, exhorting, and testifying that this is the true grace of God wherein ye stand." I do believe that Peter was at least the mind behind 2nd Peter , it's a warning about Paul "the Enemy" , in fact , dysnoetas was mistranslated on purpose to tone it down . The word means nonsense , nonsensical , meaningless and/or destructive of good sense , not "hard to understand" and if you read chapter 2 , you'll see it's a warning about Paul and not an endorsement . Calvin knew the language and couldn't imagine that Peter would say such things against Paul , therefore decided it was a forgery and that's what people have thought ever since

It's ridiculous to think that the historical John the Baptist and his apostles had been anything less than a group of Galilean scribes who had interpreted Daniel 9:24 to be in fulfillment by 34 CE. It is even more ridiculous to think that the fictional portrayals created by some unknown Greek author (c. 84 CE) who had made the apostles out to have been the fishermen disciples of a travelling rabbi (in a time in which rabbis had yet to exist) can have any bearing upon the level of literacy possessed by historical individuals.

The author, Christopher Moore has a book called Lamb that’s a comedic retelling of The Gospels. It’s one of my personal favorite books. Jesus lovingly busts on Simon by calling him, “dumb as a rock” in Lamb and that has always stuck with me! 😂

Peter may not have been as firm as a rock, but he was as thick as one.

Let us know if you ever come to Rome! I’ll plan a dinner for all of your fans here!

Decades ago when I was active in business I would write letters to contacts in China, Russian and Estonia with no knowledge of any of those languages. These communications went on for years. I hired local people who knew the language. Yet, the only part I "wrote" was my signature. This might shock you two, but in their replys they would thank me for MY letter or refer to MY letter. Hiring writers for those who needed to communicate in a language they did not know how to write was normal in the ancient world. Perhaps this is acknowledge later in the video but I lost patience with the slow pace at 18 minutes. Thomas Aquinas is said to have had 3 scribes working for him writing his books. Yet no one says he did not write them or couldn't have written three simultaneously.

Jesus calling him The rock is similar to us Aussies calling a redhead Bluey. ( the child's cartoon Bluey is a blue cattle dog, some are blue and some are red. )

Your assertions about literacy are based on scholarly research. It differs from my experience, living with a west African tribe 50 years ago (i.e. pre TV, internet, etc.) in Burkina Faso. At that time linquists assessed that the literacy rate of the tribe was 5%. Contrary to what you said about multilingulism, everyone spoke at least 4 languages which were as different as German from French. Rote learning and memory skills were much stronger than with literate people, IMO. Stories of tribal lore and history were repeated by memory and generally well known, sometimes enacted for entertainment. "Scribes" wrote contracts, messages, etc. There had never been any sort of school in the African bush. Muslim madrases were far away, in a few towns in the Sahara like Timbucktu. Pre-literate societies were and aren't far more capable than can be imagined by a person in the post-industrial, information age. While there were many great challenges to life, one of the joys of such societies is the depth of human interaction, communication, curiosity and inquiry. Different from the business and speed of our modern world, generally.

Did you talk about when these two religions, believe systems, “officially” separated? Thank you this is a great program!

Come for the humourous banter, stay for the fascinating information. Thanks, Bart and Megan, and YAY!!! for next week! Looking forward to hearing more about Digital Hammurabi!

Texas is having wonderful weather.

No one will ever know for a fact, no matter how clever is one's deduction, if Peter could write or read. One who believes in Christianity should never care about this for it has nothing to do with ""The Way"". as an answer to life's problems. This is an objectifying of religion which is no different then the objectifying of a women. It is as meaningful as telling people that there is no evidence that the Buddha existed.

When I worked as a medical social worker in a large teaching hospital we worked with a lot of illiterate patients or parents of our young patients. I studied up on illiteracy to find ways to help these people navigate our system and participate in their care. We learned that the illiterate have a different world view and no real concept of the workings of the human body. Their ideas about cause and effect were heavily influenced by not ever having been able to read. I was just thinking that perhaps Christianity was given a leg up by the illiterate. These people were not stupid. They were just very different and ever so relieved to be validated when we could openly address their illiteracy. They taught me a lot. They were almost always very dependent on their religion to make sense of their world.

It seems quite possible that 1 Peter was forged by a Pauline Christian who, much like Luke did in Acts, sought to harmonize the thought of Peter with that of Paul. It suggests that Peter considered Paul a close friend, with whom he had no fundamental disagreement. It may have been written to offset the impression in Paul's Galatians that the two had irreconcilable differences, and I find it rather disingenuous in this respect, a sort of pseudo-harmonization/propaganda for the emerging orthodox cause. It may well have been included in the Canon because it was felt necessary to harmonize Paul with Peter and make it seem that the two saw completely eye-to-eye when the epistle was "written."

Peter was called The Rock because he was a thug. Evidence: his deft removal of that dude’s ear. 😜

Bart and his wife needs to hook up with Mother Owl and her husband Father Owl. It would be an interesting conversation.

is there a possibility that the disciples (if they were the authors) were given false backstories to make them seem more relatable?

If Peter dictatedhis stories of Jesus to someone, wouldn't that person have be fluent in Aramaic "and" Greek? What are the chances?

Peter may, like Paul, have used an amanuensis. Shock horror! He might even have taken his leadership role in the fledgling church seriously and educated himself.

I look forward to an episode on the writings of Jacob of Antioch

Aside from the question of literacy there is the issue of education & writing materials. From the work of scholars on this subject producing a text like 1st or 2nd Peter would have been very expensive. Today .62 m^2 of of quality calfskin parchment sells for $237 USD. Factor in binding, time spent carefully writing out all those copies, the cost of getting an extensive university education in calligraphy, classics, theology, greek, aramaic, and hebrew plus rent, food, and the opportunity cost of lost wages while studying and it comes to quite a tidy sum. I recommend getting a Lamborghini Aventador instead. I'll be a lot cheaper.

Thank you for sharing. It was very informative. Makes sense that Peter, and most of the other Apostles would not be able to write themselves. The only one that I could see as being able to read and write is Paul (Saul-the former tax collector). It seems reasonable to think that SOME reading/writing skills would be needed to record the taxes collected.

It's interesting how an occupation gets tagged to an individual of ancient times. We know today, that the rich and famous are often claiming to be just one of the people, like everyone else. There is power in associating yourself with the common people. Mick Jagger is just a singer, or Oprah Winfrey is just a journalist. Was Joseph just a Carpenter framing roofs, or making tables, or was he a builder/developer of dwellings, churches, or government buildings. Was Peter a Fisherman, casing nets and lines from a small boat since he was 10 years old, or did he own 20 boats, each with a crew of 6 and supplied all the seafood to the local markets. They may have been raised much wealthier than we are led to believe.

Further on the possibility that Peter was never in Rome: post-Gospel depictions of Peter show him as older (not necessarily definitive), but he appears to be an illiterate fisherman probably not fluent in Greek, let alone Latin, and comfortably ensconced as the head of the Church in Jerusalem. Why he' would off on the long journey to Rome? I suspect followers of Peter were jealous of the (aImost certainly true) stories of Paul's martyrdom - Paul was an inveterate traveller- and wanted to take some of the prestige for Peter.

As always a fantastic analysis. As today in places where people are illiterate, they engage scribes to write letters or other documents. So it is very much possible that Peter had a scribe or ghostwriter how you would call it today. So he gave his thoughts although not written directly by him.

I don't know about ancient Palestine, but in Brazil nicknames sometimes are exactly the opposite of the person. For fun, irony.

Love to watch interviews where no one talks over the other.

Yet another interesting topic, necessary to know about whether one follows faith or simply a person like me who is interested in "true" history of religions.

I read Schweitzer's Quest for the Historical Jesus in the early 1970s. I didn't have the background to fully understand it. But it was a good read to influence my thinking that assertions by non-critical religious writers don't contribute much to learning about the faith and theology. I probably wouldn't continue to watch this channel without that early influence on my journey of understanding.

Learned a tremendous amount with this series (never had any previous exposure to the NT), but they all seem to point to the blindingly obvious fact that they are simply fabricated narratives, with perhaps a pinch of actual "events" sprinkled in here and there. No offense, but I can't understand the depth of detail in which people try to "interpret" words that were written by imaginative writers, in a time of complete ignorance of science and general understanding of the actual workings of the world. We're not discussing historical narratives here, with a multitude of independent, verified sources to compare against, these are extremely weakly attested _two thousand_ year-old accounts by mostly completely unknown authors who almost certainly were *never* part of any of the events depicted.

If Peter could write Koine Greek, it would’ve probably been at the rudimentary level, which isn’t what we see when reading 1st & 2nd Peter.

I’m surprised Bart didn’t reference this verse - 1 Peter 5: 12 With the help of Silas, whom I regard as a faithful brother, I have written to you briefly . . . Wouldn’t that mean Silas did the actual writing?

Maybe revolutionaries are exceptional people, contrary to academics, who basically do copy paste.

About Babylon being Rome in 1 Peter 5 only afterwards the destruction of the Temple, I guess Bart refers to 2 Baruch with his reasoning, since 2 Baruch 67:7 is written after 70 AD. But it doesn't mean, that Christians and Jews could not have called Rome as Babylon before that simply because of other reasons before 70 AD also. Christianity was strongly typological religion in first century, and saw New Covenant antitypes of Old Testament types around themselves about various things because of various reasons in various times, and most of it was orally transmitted of course. Dating of certain ideas that seem obscure, is very hard to do for historians, since we don't have a time-machine, with which we could actually verify them.

Surely, none of the Gospels were written by the claimed authors. Surely it was chosen scribes, asked to produce the handed down stories.

How old were the original 12 apostles individually when they followed Jesus?

How often do we find the name Peter in the later Christian era, say the 2nd or 3rd century? Could there have been some random educated monk, or theologian, or scholar whose name happens also to be Peter?

Would it really be that much of a stretch to suggest that Peter had a scribe that wrote down what was dictated to him by Peter ??? Nah , you'd much rather discredit Peter.....

Is Peter/Cephas as a name related to the name Ebenezer (אבנעזר, 'Stone of Help'), do you think?

Speaking of quite old books in the field, I wonder, how are Ernest Renan's books on the origins of christianism and his Life of Jesus considered today? I just checked if the English Wikipedia had pages on that and it seems it doesn't, so...

Maybe he was teased as being a rock because he was dense, immovable and rigid.

What makes you think Simon bar Jonah couldn't write? One of the four things that a Jewish father is responsible for with respect his son (ie his son may demand of him) is Torah. He must see to it that his son learns Torah. In pursuit of this learning, the boy learns to read the scriptures so that he can participate in the services at the synagogue. Yes, Simon bar Jonah could read, and probably write. Besides, kings and princes who were wholely illiterate still published edicts, wrote laws, adjudicated lawsuits, etc. All of this done through the services of employees who read and wrote at their dictation. So, although he might or might not have been able to write, he could still be the author of the letters attributed to him. And in the end it doesn't matter.

Are you trying to tell me there was no duolingo on people's phones back then to learn ancient Greek?

Couldn't have Peter have hired someone write the book for him? If I hire someone to write down everything I am saying in spanish, I might not know how to write or speak spanish, but I could probably claim it as my own at least back in those times.

Maybe

Hmm interesting topic! ❤😊

"before all of that.. Bart how are you doing?" This question is asked at every start of a podcast and not a single time any one says that he or she is feeling not so well. In my 61+ years I can not claim to be able to say that every single day. How can I now think that the content is true when there is a given chance that on the opening sequence there is a chance that one of the involved is lying?

I swear, I have heard this topic discusses about 3-4 times already in other podcasts and interviews

Concluding that Peter wrote the books named after him is about as meaningful as concluding that a real entity called Screwtape was the recipient of The Screwtape Letters

Miami Baxter Drury.

Has Bart ever considered becoming a professor at a UK university? Since he likes the weather there so much.

I want to get round glasses now and join the ranks of Harry Potter and John Lennon.

More important question, could Paul remember anything Jesus had said?

I think it’s more than likely that Peter spoke and someone else he knew wrote . I don’t believe it is a complete forgery but it very well could be

Even if the Apostle Peter could not, himself, write, he could scrape together enough sesterces to hire a scribe 😂 !

I don't believe in god but the point that Peter couldn't write is a moot point he was able to speak and someone could have written it down it would still be seen as the writings of Peter

I like your show. I'm a born and raised Atheist who has read the Bible several times but find it confusing. I wanted to comment that medieval English people "wrote" letters to friends, family, colleagues where neither party could actually read or write but the village had a scribe, but they still referred to it as them writing a letter. So it may be that "composing a letter to have someone else scribe" is as cumbersome in Greek as English so he "wrote" his letters even though he was dictating them to a scribe ☺

Do you trust what the NT writers wrote about the war between the Jews and the Romans in 70 AD?

Is it possible that he learned reading and writing? We know that the Jesus movement had wealthy backers. They could have made arrangements? And discussions with Pharisees could be a motivation to do this?

If it's so well-known by scholars today that Peter was illiterate, then why wasn't Peter's authorship questioned by Christians in ancient times? If it's such a forgone conclusion that men like Peter could never produce a literary work, then how were his epistles even accepted by Christians and how did they make it into the New Testament canon? Rather than "did Peter write anything", the more interesting question is "why or how did ancient Christians accept Peter as a writer".

It's ridiculous to think that Peter had to have Mark write a gospel for him or that Mark took it upon himself to give us Peter's sayings and not write a gospel himself but then have written 2 letters himself. LMAO!

That an illiterate fisherman could not & did not write 1 & 2 Peter is axiomatic. What is not self evident is whether or not Peter really was a fisherman or illiterate. The idea comes solely from Mark, it has no independent attestation because the remaining three gospels are all dependent on Mark. No one writing before Mark knows or says anything about Peter being either a fisherman or illiterate. I think it is a creative literary trope crafted by Mark around the theme of, I will make you fisher of men. Sect leaders were literate people because they had to be, consulting scripture and solving disputes by letter. If Peter really was an illiterate fisherman his only claim to authority would be his status as a disciple and this is completely missing from the letters of Paul. He is only referred to and treated as an apostle by Paul. The very concept that anyone could have been a disciple of his version of Jesus is non existent in his epistles.

Hicksville, NY. I drive past the bank where the Gospel of Judas was stored for 16 years.

Bart sounds unusually learned in the absence of giants like Bill Craig and NT Wright 😅

Of course. As a businessman's son, trading in fish - or like Jesus, a carpenter's son - he could 'read' 'write' and do sums so far as needed - though much of this thought and action would be 'in the head' stuff. In fact, unlike Saul or Luke, most of what Simon needed was learned 'off by heart' and repeated by rote; carpenters, being a step above fishers, needed more in the way of mathematics, draftsmanship, and penwork. Scribes and scribbling had a guild of craft all their own, and even literate people used them .. especially as secretaries. And the distinguishing feature of the secretary was not the pen but the set-apart-ness of the job; confidentiality being the key rather than scribal scribble. Keep the Faith; tell the truth, shame the devil, and let the demons shriek. God bless. ;o)

Ha! Could Josephus have written the First Peter? What does comparative analysis tell us?

What!!!!!!! You never met!!!!!!

Gutenberg printing press 1455 a.d.

I do sometimes wonder… Is it possible that there are sayings sources for Peter or any of Jesus’ other disciples? If so, what are the odds that we have anything from them?

Megan described normal summer weather and common driving hazards.

how old were the apostles? sometimes they seem kind of kind of unadult. no details of their families?

Megan's ace

After watching the Witcher TV show I can imagine a Bard following Jesus and the gang around singing songs about them as well as a scribe or two who were willing to work for food. Then in a few hundred years sinister men who understood people powered movements of ill repute twirling their mustache and getting a bright idea leaving the world in 2024 "Shipwrecked at the stable door" with "the gospel of bondage."

i keep finding dead ghosts in my garden, does this mean my vegetables aren't organic now...if not I blame you lot...

If wonder if 2000+ years from now people will be wondering if Robin really wrote the chronicles of Batman and if Joker was real

Is Simon Peter one of the sons of Zebedee?

My grandmother was uneducated and could barely read or write. I have written letters for her in the first person many times. Oftentimes, as she dictated, I would put her words in proper grammar and perhaps phrase her plain speech and idioms in a higher level of vocabulary and syntax than how she actually spoke. Likewise, I have written letters for other family members in German because that family member did not speak German and wished to correspond to a family member in Germany who did not speak English. I don't see it a very far reach to think it possible that any literate person could write letters for Peter. It doesn't necessarily have to be a secretary or official scribe. I'm sure that there were other literate followers he had contact with to give him a hand and not necessarily for hire.

No he couldn't. He could not write. He knew how to fish and poach off Jesus. That's about it. X

So Bart says there was no synagogue in Capernaum at the time of Peter. (8.51) In fact, he says there were no synagogues anywhere, so some of my favourite events did not take place; the healing of the man with the withered arm, the healing of the woman bound over for 40 years by Satan, the casting out of the unclean spirit, the bread of life discourse, etc because Bart says there were no synagogues. And so the centurion whose sick daughter was healed by Jesus was not so deserving of Jesus attention after all because, according to Bart, he did not build a synagogue for the people in Capernaum. If Capernaum was such a small, poor, insignificant village, with such an ignorant population, why was there a Roman centurion posted there in the first place? Why doesn’t Megan call him out when he says there were no synagogues? Why doesn’t she say, hey, what about the man with the withered hand healed in the synagogue or the woman doubled by Satan for over for 40 years healed in the synagogue or when Jesus read out from Isaiah in the synagogue or wasn’t the synagogue in Capernaum built by the centurion whose daughter was healed? Why doesn’t she say, but Bart, I have read that the synagogue we can see today in Capernaum was built on the foundations / ruins of an earlier synagogue recently excavated by Virgilio Corbo and Stanislao Loffreda which dates back to 1st century CE. Bart must know this but he chooses not to say because it doesn’t fit his narrative. Bart is being economical with the truth because it fits his storyline. Megan just nods and smiles and feeds him another leading question and lets him carry on spinning his own narrative.

Bart said "the weather isn't going to get any better." Does that mean God is mad at the Republicans for being evil?

has the mythical Peter any connection to the rock born Mithras and the roman blood (drinking) cult?

Is there *any* evidence that *any* book in the Christian scripture has an Aramaic substrate or Urtext? Or is *everything* of Graeco-Roman origin?