Dr. Bart Ehrman's Top 3 Favorite New Testament Contradictions 

My favorite one is all the 4 accounts of Jesus's resurrection. They contradict each other in almost every detail.

Thank you, Bart, for sharing your vast knowledge with us. I own much of what you've written, and I've learned SO MUCH from you. And thank you, Derek, for your boundless energy and commitment to this channel.

derek, you ought to be proud of yourself bro, your entire story is incredible by itself, but the fact that you took what you enjoyed and got to the point of communication and coordination with scholarly greats like Dr. Price, Dr. Ehrman, Dr. Carrier, is incredible. Theres a lot to say about you, and it's impressive.

1:52- abiathar or abimelech? 4:07- jairus daughter 6:16 8:39- take staff or don't take staff?

1:50 1. Mark Chapter 2 Sabbath. Who was the high priest ? 4:05 2. Mark Chapter 5 Jesus raises girl from the dead. In mark the girl wasn’t dead. In Mathew the girl was already dead 8:35 3. Mark- Jesus sends the disciples out with no staff Mathew- Jesus says to take a staff

Not only Gospel Mark contradicts with Old testament on the high priest. But OT contradicts itself on the same high priest. Ahimelech was described as the son of Ahitub and father of Abiathar in 1 Samuel 22:20-23, but described as the son of Abiathar in 2 Samuel 8:17 There are tons of such contradictions in the bible. Yet the Christians believe that the bible is the words of God. Amazing belief!

Thank you Dr .Bart Ehrman's for bringing the truth to the publics attention. You are Honorable.

0:25 "The myth--the legend himself--is joining us today". I see what you did there. Great video, by the way! Dr Ehrman is always informative and entertaining. Great energy and huge intellect. We are lucky to have him.

My own favorite NT contradiction: Romans 9:18 says, God has mercy on those on whom he wants to have mercy, and “hardens” those he wants to harden. 1 Timothy 2:4 says he wants all men to be saved and come to knowledge of the truth, i.e., he doesn’t want to “harden” anybody… Yeah, that’s the kind of “big” contradiction that, as Dr Ehrman says, believers have an easy time satisfying themselves about.

If the Bible is the perfect word of God, with no contradictions or apparent contradictions, we wouldn’t need apologetics 😏

1. Why did the women go to the tomb? 2. Who/what did they encounter there? 3. How did the tomb become opened? 4. What did the women see in the tomb? 5. What were the women instructed to do? 6. What did they do upon leaving there? 7. Did Jesus appear to these same women? 8. Did Jesus meet the disciples in Galilee? 9. Did Jesus ascend bodily into Heaven? 10. What were Jesus’ last words on Earth?

"It happened twice!" technically works but it's so beautifully absurd. It could also be used to explain away many other contradictions...maybe the resurrection happened 4 times too? 😉

I have a Great Respect for Bart. I discovered him about 3 years ago. He confirmed EVERYTHING I was thinking about the Bible, etc.. Former Catholic.

"When someone's a fundamentalist the big ones don't bother you, it's the little ones" -- so true. When I was a rigid fundamentalist it was the numerical contradictions that really ate away at me, or the different robe color at the crucifixion. These are theologically inert contradictions, but eventually broke open the dam and plunged into me mythicism for a little while. It's practically a shorter list of things that are consistent in the NT than not.

"It happened twice" - the apologist who said that is a genius! God created the world twice, he sent the flood twice, Jesus was born twice, he died four times on the cross, etc. This is not just an unbeatable argument, it also helps understand why there are two gods and two Jesuses in the Bible. Brilliant!

I was in a cult for years and had my Bible beside me all the time, I also believed that this book has no mistakes but after watching one of our cult leader telling to the public we may not be the only spokesman of this book, my view changed completely about this book! My research started and your videos are so helpful to let me realize the real truth about this book. Thanks for this interview which gave me another super knowledge of the contradictions that I didn’t even noticed.

Thanks for all your work Derek, these interviews are always fascinating and helpful!

My personal favorite for the holidays is how did John the Baptist survive Herod's ordering the murders of all the tiny kids. He's only 6 months older, but they didn't flee the carnage.

Derek’s like the Led Zeppelin of religious mythology, delivering hit after hit.

Bart is Brilliant

I don't find these three "contradictions" to be contradictions. One has to check one's assumptions.

You know how we know about all the contradictions and bad stuff of religions? Because each faction(religion) reads each others stuff, performs extensive linguistic, comparative mythological, and archaeological studies of each others religions to disprove one another. They've been at each others throats for the beginning of religion. And so, thanks for the data Bart Ehrman!

But none of these points contradict the core points/messages.

Who was high priest? Mark 2 “in the days of Abiathar”, 1 Samuel 21 ‘high priest was Ahimelech’. Abiather succeeded Ahimelech shortly after this event and was better known as David’s high priest. So both statements are true, and the way Jesus put it makes more sense to describe when making a point about David. For example if I talked about someone first visiting Buckingham palace at the time of Charles, because he worked with King Carles for decades afterwards, even though Elisabeth was actually still Queen at the time.

Funny thing about Jesus is when He said to a multitude of people " unless you drink my blood and eat my flesh, you can have no part of being with me" something like that.... and many left at that time.... I guess Jesus really was not into fair weather type people... You know the kind that kick you to the curb if you say one wrong thing and never give you the benefit of the doubt to stick around and see what your truly about.... There are a lot of people that do this with the bible and with God in general and although I understand how that line of thinking works....... I just am a pretty simple person and Jesus hanging on that cross a bloody mess for me says all He has to say about how He feels about me personally.... This other stuff with people like Bart talking in depth about everything they don't know because they were not there.....They mean nothing to me because not one of them would be laying on a cross a bloody mess having huge nails pounded in their feet after being beat to death for my wicked mistakes.... I love you Jesus! I will always love you...... :)

In my mind, the most amazing contradiction is as follows. In Matthew 15-16, Jesus and the disciples have the Passover dinner, AFTER which Jesus goes to the garden, is betrayed, and next morning is tortured to death. In John chapter 19 however, it specifically says that Jesus was crucified the morning of the Day of Preparation, which is the morning BEFORE the Passover dinner. So, which was it? Was he crucified before the Passover dinner, or after the Passover dinner? Or maybe it was 2 different Jesus that were crucified and killed? We will never know.

There is no contradiction guys. Too bad, all the writers of the Bible are not here to answer all your questions, but you can always look for answer if you know how to look and unprejudiced. NITPICKING IS A BAD THING - you know the word, right. 1. Since Jesus mentions Abiathar as the “high priest” in Mark 2:26, but Ahimelech is mentioned as the “priest” in 1 Samuel 21:1, it is possible that they were different priests. On the other hand, in second Samuel 8:17, Ahimelech is the son of Abiathar, but in 1 Samuel 23:6, Abiathar is the son of Ahimelech. I did not find any evidence of a copyist error. Therefore, it is possible that both men shared each other’s names. In other words, both men had two names as appears to be the case in 2 Sam. 8:17 where Ahimelech is the son of Abiathar, but in 1 Sam. 23:6, Abiathar is the son of Ahimelech. This is supported by the fact that Moses’ father-in-law is called Reuel in Ex. 2:18, yet in Exodus 3:1, it is Jethro. Uzziah is the father of Jotham in Matt. 1:9. But in 1 Chronicles 3:12, his name is Azariah. Also, Jotham’s father was known as Azariah in 2 Kings 15:7 and Uzziah in 2 Kings 15:32 2. Here is how things may have taken place. When Jairus left his house, his daughter was at the point of death; so he may have thought that by the time he was with Jesus, she quite possibly had already died. Indeed, by the time he arrived, she had passed away, as confirmed by the messenger who brought the account of her death before Jesus came to the house. That Jairus should appeal to Christ on this occasion is very remarkable considering that Jewish leaders were often the people most averse to Jesus. It is also striking that he should fall down and worship Jesus, He behaved with profound respect toward Him, as to a great teacher, known healer, and prophet. That very act of Jairus coming to Jesus when his child was past all hope of recovery, when he had reason to believe she was actually dead, as she indeed now was, affirms that he really believed that if Christ would come to his house and lay his hand upon his daughter, she would certainly be restored to life again. Perhaps Jairus, being intimately familiar with the Torah, had in mind Elijah and Elisha, whom God had given the power of being able to resurrect the dead (1 Kings 17:17-24; 2 Kings 4:18-37), in both instances using physical contact with the recently deceased. Perhaps he had heard of Christ’s healing powers and dared hope they would be sufficient to the task. Luke 8:43-48 records that while Jairus was walking with Him, Jesus healed a woman with a blood issue. Jairus therefore was an eyewitness to the power of Christ even before they reached his house. In any event, the passages do not contradict each other, but just show the different focus each Gospel writer emphasized. Whether it was through just recording part of the event, or perhaps the phrases “even now dead” or “just died” meaning “imminently near death,” all three Gospel accounts bring out a slightly different emphasis. Their main point is unmistakable: Jesus had power to raise the dead as the son of God. 3. In these parallel passages, Jesus issues an urgent command to His 12 students-go and preach the immediacy of the kingdom of heaven to your Jewish brethren. Our English translations contain an apparent discrepancy in what Jesus told them to take with them-were they to take a staff or not? The issue can be cleared up studying the Greek words used for provide or take in the original manuscripts. The sense of Matthew’s provide (ktaomai) is “to get or acquire.” In this passage, Jesus seems to urge His disciples to go now, don’t take the time to find another staff, just take what you have and go. He promised that the disciples would be provided for, so they didn’t need to make elaborate preparation. Mark uses a word with a broader meaning (airo), which indicates “lift or take up.” In this passage, Mark seems to convey the idea that Jesus wanted the disciples to take what they already have and go. Those who already had a staff were to take it but were not to acquire another staff. In the same vein, they should wear the sandals they had on but weren’t to find an additional pair. They were to wear the tunic they already had on but weren’t to get another. Although using the same word for take as Mark, Luke’s passage conveys the same sense as Matthew’s. (Some scholars suggest that Luke probably gained his information mostly from Matthew’s book and didn’t have access to the book written by Mark.) Luke also conveys the idea that the disciples were to depart quickly and without taking lots of “things” with them. They needed to focus on preaching the kingdom of heaven and were to trust the Lord to provide for their needs.

Where does Jesus, in the bible say that we should read the New Testament?

is the second even a "contradiction" it's possible that both authors know the same story that she was dead and raised but one knows more than the other, the one who knew less didn't know how Jesus found the girl so he made up a simple sentence just to get jesus to the girl while the other author knew that how jesus found the girl in more detail

LOLOLOL SO Jairus’ daughter is the Biblical equivalent of Schroedinger’s cat, an alive/dead daughter. Read in Mark? She’s alive when the dad goes to Jesus. Read in Matthew? She was already dead.

Jeremiah 17:5-7 Cursed Man vs. Blessed Man 5 Thus saith the Lord; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord. 6 For he shall be like the heath in the desert, and shall not see when good cometh; but shall inhabit the parched places in the wilderness, in a salt land and not inhabited. 7 Blessed is the man that trusteth in the Lord, and whose hope the Lord is. Isaiah 26:3, 40:8 The Blessed Man and The Word of our God 3 Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on thee: because he trusteth in thee. 8 The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.

The conversation about the Lord of the Sabbath happens on in two different places on in the book of Luke

St Ehrman is engaging, erudite and passionate. He convinced me of the mythicist case. How? He was doing a question and answer and someone asked him about Jesus working with his dad as a carpenter. He took the time to reflect.. you could feel his mind whirring tto maintain the historicity... it just became absurd.

Maybe the original instructions were not to take a 2nd staff in case the first one broke similar to how Matthew's gospel says not to take a 2nd coat. One staff would be the bare minimum so when Mark's account said not to take a staff, it may have been implied (2nd staff) to his readers but expounded upon by Matthew for clarity.

It's amazing how much fun Dr. Ehrman's stories are

My favorite contradiction is the salvation message. The most basic teaching is so contradictory. Are Christians saved by faith alone? By faith and repentance? Faith and baptism? By works alone?

The Lord of the Sabbath part where Jesus heals on inside of a synagogue happens in the synagogue and inside of the Pharisees house

Take a staff or not. Well if this is the best set of three that one of the ‘top’ biblical critics can come up with then we can be very confident in the bible being accurate, certainly well above 95% and without being clearly copied from each other, way more harmonious than any set of eye witness testimonies. I’ve yet to come across a contradiction that hasn’t been reasonably easy to see how both statements are true. Many claimed contradictions are of the nature ‘he went to the concert with John’, ‘there were 5,000 people at the concert,’ ‘look a contradiction were there two of you or 5000!’. This one may be superficially more difficult even though trivial in nature. In a culture which aurally memorised things, stories and instructions would have been repeated, having been a teacher, repeating instructions is important. To me the basic sense is ‘go now, go as you are, don’t go and get extra stuff’ so if you don’t have a staff, just go. What if you have a staff with you, should you go home to leave it behind? No, just go and take your staff with you, so if Jesus said different things to different people in the hearing of different disciples but was still not contradicting his sense of ‘go as you are’. I can’t say this is what was meant or said but there isn’t a real contradictory sense in the passages. I remember doing a chemistry experiment with a class and one pupil pointed out a small difference between what was on the screen and what was on the printed sheets, The previous classes had no problem, the rest of her class had no problem and just followed perfectly what was obvious in the instructions. Well, if that’s all….

Bart has such a contagious laugh!!

That last contradiction and story is so crazy to me. Fundamentalism has melted some people’s brains. It’s okay. You can still believe in god and also believe that the Bible has some mistakes. I promise you won’t explode.

Mike Licona should take up promoting internet investment and romance scams. The dude is a complete tool.

Hey, I'm as enthusiastic as anyone about a good Biblical contradiction, but the whole Ahimelech/Abiathar business is not a contradiction. There were clearly multiple priests during Saul's reign - 1 Samuel 22:18 mentions "priests". The father/son team of Ahimelech and Abiathar were both among them. 1 Samuel 21:1 calls Ahimelech a priest; and 1 Samuel 23:9 calls Abiathar a priest. Now in Mark 2:26, Jesus describes the shewbread incident as occurring in "the days of Abiathar the High Priest". Obviously, the incident occurred in the days of Abiathar - 1 Samuel makes this abundantly clear. No contradiction, and no need for 30 pages of analysis to prove this.

"Do they not then reflect on the Quran? Had it been from anyone other than Allah, they would have certainly found in it many contradictions" Quran (4:82)

I'm so grateful for the wonderful synergy from having different guests! Also, in many ways this is a Process of Thinking About HOW to Think!!! There is so much Rich History and Great Stories in the Ancient Texts!! I think the great FLAW in Christianity is the Emphasis on Dogmatic Beliefs! DO NOT QUESTION or Dare Think for Yourself

I am a Christian, but this is really Fun!

Love Bart! Learn so much from historians.

Great video! Thanks!

Ehrman swings and misses with his first contradiction of the NT since the text says Jesus referring to in the time of the high priest Abiathar, and Ehrman himself in his talks of this refers frequently to King David despite the fact that at the time David wasn’t king yet, but Abiathar would have been present at that time and would likely be in training to become high priest and he was known for being more virtuous and devout than Ahimelech, so Ehrman would be wrong about his own critique of the texts since he stated David was king, unless you decide to grant charity to Ehrman’s statement yet then refuse to extend the same charity to Jesus’ statement.

It's usually surprising to me that people can believe the Bible is inerrant. I'm a Christian, I do not think the Bible contains no mistakes at all. And it does not matter if the Bible contains mistakes here and there. The thing is, most of the things we Christians believe do not rely in any way on whether or not these contradictions can be resolved or not. I have yet to see contradictions that even when granted, changes the doctrines of Christianity, like the death of Jesus on the cross for our sins, or the resurrection of Jesus. If a few details differ between the accounts in the Gospels then I think that's evidence for the fact that these are based on eyewitness testimony. Because contradictions are /exactly/ what we would expect if the Gospels are written by eyewitnesses. An example of this is how the Titanic sank. Eyewitness reports report two contradictory accounts that we're unable to reconcile; namely reports that the Titanic sank as a whole, and reports that the Titanic broke in two before sinking. Now how on earth would you use these eyewitness reports to argue that the Titanic never sank? Because that is the type of arguments atheists use when they find a contradiction in the Bible. It's absolutely ridiculous reasoning.

And 3: Matthew 2:15 verse read that then read Hosea 11:1 verse afterward

Ah, the wonders of ad hoc hypothesis. Like magic! :)

Last time I checked, the bible had these accounts about whether or not to take "extra" stuff: Matthew 10:5 “Do not get any gold or silver or copper to take with you in your belts- no bag for the journey or extra shirt or sandals or a staff, for the worker is worth his keep." Mark: 6:8 "These were his instructions: “Take nothing for the journey except a staff-no bread, no bag, no money in your belts. Wear sandals but not an extra shirt." Am I to believe a guy with a PhD can't discern between "a staff" and an "extra staff"? The passage is clear: "Pack light. God will take care of you." Its' clear the apostles went out with one staff, one pair of sandals and one shirt and no extra anything. Both verses are in agreement. No need to write a thesis.

Bart has whipsawed from strict/extremist fundamentalist to a confirmed non-believer. A great scholar who misses the forest for the trees.

3 top New Testament writer's contradictions: 1: Act's 1:20 verse read that verse then compare that to Psalms 69:25 verse.

One could argue the Hebrew Scriptures (OT) and the New Testament (NT) contradictions ad infinitum - tho’ several can (at least in the gospel sayings & narratives) be ‘clean’d up’ by positing errors in translation (say, in the case of the Gospels in the canonical NT) from an oral Aramaic tradition (from say 36 CE to c. 50 CE) to when it was eventually translated (orally) into Greek (c. 50-72 CE) then to when the gospel traditions were finally set down in writing following the death of most of the original Aramaic speaking followers of ‘Iesous’ during the 1st Fail’d Jewish War against Rome (66-72 CE)- the Jairus’ daughter pericopes (‘a man who was the chief scribe in their local synagogue’) in Mark & in Matthew do seem contradictory on the surface - but cf. the Aramaic phrase ‘Le maveto’ (‘at the point of death’ see Mark 5:23) might well have been badly translated into Greek (‘idi nekros’) perhaps whilst still in the oral stage as ‘already dead’ - Note that in Mark’s gospel it has a Greek speaking ‘ho Iesous’ pronouncing ‘she is not dead but sleeping’ (= ‘in a deep coma’ ? see Mark 5:39 and this phrase is repeated in Matthew 9:24) - One might posit that the confusion of ‘point of death’ and ‘already dead’ may also be Matthew’s desire to make the story ‘more miraculous’ or a storytelling device where a messenger relays ‘a false message which the messenger himself believes to be the truth’- only later to be found out in the story that the messenger was mistaken… There are far more glaring literary contradictions say between ‘Matthew’ (whoever he was…) and the other Greek canonical gospels (read Matthew’s glaringly fake 14 Toledoth ‘generational lists’ in chapter 1 (bas’d on the gemmatria DVD for David 4+6+4 = 14) as compar’d to ‘Luke’s genealogical Daviddic recension (whoever he was…) in his wholly contradictory birth narrative (see the Lukan list in chapter 3:23ff…) When examining these contradictory recensions between gospel narratives (over 100 can be nam’d) one always has to bear in mind the fact that these pericopes were transmitted orally at first in Aramaic then in Greek during preaching tours ‘to the lost sheep of the Elect of the House of Yisro’el scatter’d amongst the Gentiles (leGoyyim, ‘amongst the nations’) before they were finally set in writing after the original Apostoloi began to die off before during & after the War of 66 CE which according to Josephus wip’d out nearly 1 million Judaean Aramaic speakers … leaving virtually only Greek, Latin & Coptic speaking Jews in the greater Diaspora within the Roman Empire in the 1st century CE…

John's day of the crucifixion is in contradiction with the sinoptics.

Go check out the recent interview between Dr. Ehrman and Muhammad Hijab!

Love it, great chat as always

The long form stuff is great, but some more of these shorter to the point episodes showing the ridiculousness are really good for when you don’t have that length of time for the longer ones.

Hi Mr. Barth Erhman... Also when I was an evangelist , I did the same mistake... .. i said to the people the Bible doesn't contradict Itself .... And I were Wrong . Have a good day ....

Hi - not being pedantic but it was the other way round. Mark said to 'take a staff' and Matthew and Luke said dont take a staff according to my NIV bible. Mark 6.8 says 8 These were his instructions: “Take nothing for the journey except a staff-no bread, no bag, no money in your belts. Matthew 10.10 10 no bag for the journey or extra shirt or sandals or a staff, Luke 9.3 3 He told them: “Take nothing for the journey-no staff, no bag, no bread, no money, no extra shirt. Does seem a bit odd when its thought that Luke and Mark would have used Mark as a source. ??

Prophecies + contradictions = prophedictions

It must have been a quantum staff. Both there and not there at the same time.

I love Bart.

Is not contradiction because one is telling you account and the other is telling you a figurative. Act 2:4 And they were all filled with the holy spirit and began to speak with other tongues as the spirit gave them utterance. Paul explained what is speaks in tongue in 1 Corinthians 14:2 for no one understands him, however in the spirit he speaks mysteries.

This is the channel you need when your sinfulness no longer wants Jesus to be Truth.

Next please : Dr. Richard Carrier's Top 3 Dr. Bart D. Ehrman Contradictions

2: John 13:18 verse read that and then compare it the Hebrew verse of Psalms 41:9

I looked into this third example as I was curious to see if there truly was a contradiction on Matthew 10:10 and Mark 6:10 verses. There is two different words used there. The word used in Matthew is the word hypodēmata which supposedly can refer to shoes. The Mark text word used is sandalia which only refers to sandals.

We Are MythVision!

What I don't understand about the story of Jairus is why in Matthew it says that the crowd thought the girl was dead.

😅😅😅 That's why Paul said in 2 Cor 3:6 that the letter kill but the Spirit gives life. It means that the letter, or PhD Academics or the Bible can't interpret scripture as it's a Story of faith and not based on facts. 😅

Another great show Derek! Dr. Ehrman is always interesting.

what was Jesus wearing when he rose from the dead? where did all his wounds go except the ones in his hands and side? what were thewomen diong at thetomb three ds ater jesyus died? hewould have been decomposing and he had already been prepared for burial anyway. we even have the weight and the cost of the herbs and ointments used and the person who paid fro them.

I don't get why anyone still cares about the Biblical inerrancy issue. The only reason it was ever an issue was as something for Protestants to replace the divinely inspired authority of the Catholic Church with. Since no-one takes the divinely inspired authority of the Catholic Church seriously any more, there is no point in maintaining that the Bible is inerrant, which was obviously a silly idea in the first place.

Everyone seems to ignore that verse in the bible... that 2 Peter 1:20 "ABOVE ALL you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation of things..". Yet all we are getting is interpretations. Bible seems pointless on so many levels.

How old was Jesus when Mary made temple offerings, how old was Jesus when Mary Joseph and Jesus flee to Egypt?

Good thing we have these super wise men to correct Gods word.

I like Bart's contradiction in Mark 2 (the high priest was actually Ahimelech) but that's not even the biggest contradiction. Mark has the shewbred being shared with David and his companions "...gave also to them which were with him?" BUT.....in 1 Samuel 21:1 the High Priest asks, "Why art thou alone, and no man with thee?"

Here is a big contradiction. The three synoptic gospels say that Jesus' "Royal Entry" ended his career. John says it began it. It would be ridiculous for a Christian apologist to claim the Royal Entry occurred twice. John was wrong. A messianic claimant drawing such an allegedly large crowd would be crucified within a week. That event ended Jesus' career just as he knew it would.

Thousands of people around the world who do not want at all that there is One Creator, One Intelligent Mind that has the power to bring everything into existence.

What's wrong with some inaccuracies in testimonies ?. Does that mean the event didn't take place ? Or does it mean different people remember different things and different witnesses will give different accounts. People make mistakes. I would rather believe different testimonies with some inaccuracies than matching word for word testimonies.

When we compare the OT and NW about the sabbath, there's some kind of contradiction. In the OT, sabbath violations brings penalty of death. (Man made for sabbath) in the NT, sabbath is made for man. In the gospels, there are 1vs 2 blinds, 1 vs 2 donkeys, etc. Maybe one of the disciple was always drunk!

Bart didn’t cover the contradiction that I was hoping he would cover. I don’t remember the details so I wanted a refresher on it or at least a passage reference to look up. It is near the end of the gospels, one gospel says that the disciples stayed in Jerusalem and another gospel says that the disciples went to Galilee.

Just what I was looking for

Brilliant - Ehrman is so entertaining.

Okay, i'll add my favorite contradiction: who first met Jesus out of the tomb? And if you want to add some more, the book 101 Myths of the Bible (2000) by Gary Greenberg can quote chapter and verse. No haters, please.

Here's how the sick daughter story makes sense: One day Jesus is walking with Peter and Peter's friend and a man approaches and begs Jesus to come heal his sick daughter. By the time Jesus arrives he finds the daughter is dead. Jesus rlays hands on her and she rises. Another day Jesus is walking with Mathew and the same man approaches and begs Jesus to raise his dead daughter. Jesus arrives and finds her dead, again. He lays hands on her and she rises. A third day Jesus is walking alone and the same man approaches and begs Jesus to raise his dead daughter. Jesus arrives, finds the daughter dead, again. He lays hands on *her father* and the young woman rises.

how many high priests did jesus testify to on the night before his death? he's a phd can't seem to put two and two together

Bart looks much happier in this video than the last one that was posted lol.

Mark 5:1-3 & Matthew 8:28…. How many dudes were possessed? 🤔

Did biblical jesus show signs of psychopathology (individual or collective) ? If so, did he die in hell ?

Dr. Bart Eheman is hilarious, but very brilliant new testament scholar.

No theologians claim there are no contradictions in copied Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic texts. Inerrancy disclaimed only with the original documents. All of which have been destroyed. Yes, you may have tiny unnoticeable differences now but they are remarkably rare

Dr Ehrman is a giant of a scholar. May he eventually find peace

Ah Bart, and his sweet Rockefeller Foundation funding.

More great stuff from a great channel. Thank you

This was great!!

Matthew 10:10 and Mark 6:8-9 are NOT contradictory. Jesus is saying the same thing in both. He's telling his disciples not to take EXTRA things with them. They will be provided for by faith. That's why Matthew 10:10 says not to take TWO coats, or STAVES (the plural of staff). Mark 6:8 says to bring a STAFF (singular). This whole presentation is sad. People just don't want God to be real so they go out of their way to find "errors" in the Scriptures, which are really their own. If you're reading this, it's not too late for you. Seek Jesus for real, receive His free gift. Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened. Matthew 7:7‭-‬8

Listening to the first example I thought, 'Now who are you going to believe--Jesus or the Old Testament?