Jesus, the Law, and a "New" Covenant 

Isaiah 1:18 "Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD..." So let us reason. :-) And how can anyone reason without using evidence and intellect? Otherwise the call for reason makes no sense. After all, God Almighty gave us a mind and the ability to think for a purpose. The Bible says: Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. 1 Thessalonians 5:21 ****** Jesus Christ himself said: "And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord OUR God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.” Mark 12:29-30. So, contrary to the teachings of most members of the clergy, Jesus (peace be upon him) did not want his followers to believe everything they were told on “blind faith,” but he wanted his followers to believe “with all thy mind.” He wanted us to THINK in order to protect his words from corruption. Let us comply with the teaching of God's elect messenger, Jesus Christ (pbuh), and see where the truth and our minds will lead us. ******* NOTE: The LORD in Isaiah is NOT for Jesus. :-)

Or actually read the Bible and consider honestly how messed up it is. Ex. Here’s the “hero” Moses: “Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man by lying with him. But all the young girls who have not known man by lying with him keep alive for yourselves.” ‭‭Numbers‬ ‭31:17-18‬ ‭ESV‬‬

Deacon Verter study it as ancient religious literature. That's what it is. It is a fascinating insight into the human condition.

My OpenMind I agree. Imagine if you found some ancient religious manuscripts as voluminous as the bible. You would be rich beyond rich. The bible is at once savage and barbaric, and priceless.

And your name is Deacon. :)

It is just so damn well written. I refer to the figurative devices often in my advanced comp classes. Is that why it is so believable to some people. Fantastic writing.

Dorie LaRue What? Well written? The bible is one of the worst written books of books ever inked. I read it as a window into our ancient past and for the little history gleaned from between its hyperbolic lines, but its always a chore. Dr. Suess is better and more moral!

The Quran is not perfectly preserved

I have a deep interest in religions and cults. They are fascinating.

@@alpacamaster5992 Sounds jealous.

@@alpacamaster5992 What about the Masoretic Text?

@@alpacamaster5992 Because that's relevant right now

Church Fathers would dispute this point.

So true, I can never remember if I've seen a video or not because of the repetition of this.

Thx for the second skip 👍🏼

LOL! Thanks for saving me almost 12 minutes!

Thx dude.

Every f%$÷* time 😂

Which view would that be?? He quotes the SAME book as fact and questionable... doesnt explain how one sentence is "we know" and another is "we arent sure". Only raises more questions for me.

@@zamiel3 What questions?

iel that is a good thing. Keep questioning. Christianity teaches not to question, and believe through faith...so please keep questioning!

@@bigpappajr7854 who told it not teaches to ask? Jesus ask questions

Unless the translators change things up, we’ve all seen the dangers of parablepsis ocassioned by homoeuteluton.

If we can get people to recognize and understand the actual, accurate history of the Bible and to view it without their god-glasses on, then less religiosity and more atheism is inevitable... and that’s ALWAYS a good thing.

you should get them all ;) it's worthwhile

This is a very interesting thought indeed. Having now taken notes to a bunch of Ehrman's lectures, I think that you are proably right in your claims about "Mr. Paul." :-) I believe that we also see this "influsion" of Jewish monotheism with Roman paganism in things like the development of the Christian ideas of Heaven and Hell.

@@rohmann000 I used to think of Paul as mixing Judaism with paganism, but I don't any more. I actually have come to understand him more in the context of Israel's expectations for its own redemption and the redemption of the nations who would find God through the example of Israel. Paul speeds up the process by saying that the nations have found Israel's messiah before Israel did. Which is extraordinary, with or without paganism!

I agree. Muslims have been saying basically the same thing for the last 1400 years.

I'll go further. It does not make any sense that Paul was a Jew, and especially not a Pharisee. Pharisees were the orthodox Jews of the time--the most observant, and they lived in Jerusalem. Paul was a pagan Greek from Tarsus, which is in current-day Turkey. If Paul were a pharisee why would he instruct Jews to not obey the laws and say that the laws were a curse? And why he write his letters in Greek--he would have written in Hebrew or at least Aramaic? But his original manuscripts were in Greek. Paul was nothing more than a "politician" who assumed the persona of whomever he needed to be to pander to whomever he was preaching--and he specifically admitted this in his writings. His creation of Christianity had nothing to do with how the messiah was described in the old testament. It was pagan from beginning to end--the resurrection, the dying for sin--that's all pagan. And as time went on, the church fathers just made it worse--cannibalistic rituals of eating the body and blood, the trinity, and the parallels between the "son" and the "sun" --all pagan. Constantine was happy to call himself a Christian as he barely had to change any of his beliefs.

@@MrTrashcan1 bravo 👏🏽 I have had the same basic understanding of Paul through my research over the last decade but you put it more eloquently. I also studied what the Muslims believe about Paul , and they give similar reasons why Paul seemed like an impostor. I’m glad today I took this education further and accepted Islam. It was the best decision of my life.

Insight Curiosity. Me too

He is a delusional FOOL.

@@flyingdog1498 lol that's the spirit! see people, this is why one should not skip the intros. You get this wacky kind of shit.

@William Lane Craig: Can you please mention some of problems in Quran? if you can find any? :)

Conservative Christian Commentary So that is best you can come up with? 1. is taking stories from other sources a problem ? 2. Were those gnostic gospels available at the time of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)? 3. Which story and gnostic gospels are you referring to be precise?

I learn Bart picks and chooses what part of the same book he wants to use as fact. Don't know how he does it with a straight face.

Subversion hahaha

@Matthew Pace where do you get this truth from? Please enlighten us all. Thanks

Why put any in danger at all, Matthew? Adam and Eve may be symbolic to you, but to most they are TWO people...

Also, wasn't ten commandments originally phrased as 'do not kill a HEBREW'?

@Mark Matthew Pace I guess you missed his intro where he said he is talking about historicity and textual criticism. Bart and I are both, agnostic. Because Faith doesn't work for many of us who were born after the Enlightenment, your arguments from faith sound like someone talking about Hobbits and Garden Gnomes. And because we see no proof of god, then we fall into the category of atheist. Kind of academic. And Bart has elucidated why he lost his faith. It had to do with suffering. Of which, Epicurus is widely quoted as saying- “Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” Peace brother-

I can totally imagine his weird whiny voice saying “Take heed to yourselves now, and be not made like unto some, heaping up your sins and saying that the covenant is both theirs (the Jews') and ours (the Christians'). It is ours.”

"That depends on what you mean by interpretation ". - JP

Facts...

Ron Chappel Ican help with that 😊. The arguments would be that #1) Jesus in the gospels seems to say things like “You’ve heard it was said” or “Moses said” and then contrasts that with ”but I say to you” as if superseding Moses and oral-traditions. He makes statements that seem to contradict certain things the Torah says. And clearly says his blood is for the purpose of ratifying a (New) Covenant. EX: Matthew 5:33-37 *Oath-taking was perfectly lawful, permissible and even required at times under the Law of Moses. But Jesus clearly says in contrast of this that it is not good nor any longer a thing we should do. This is a change in law. Mark 7:18-23 * The Torah says that a bunch of things that can go into your mouth can defile you (a number of animals and blood for example) but Jesus say nothing that enters your mouth can defile you. Mark even writes “Thus (we Christians realized) he was cleansing all foods” Luke 22:20 - *Jesus ratifies, or brings into legal force, his covenant. Basically all the words he had spoken in his ministry would be made official and new “law” upon his death. The law of Moses was ratified with the blood of an animal, a bull. Exodus 24:6-8 #2) Paul is UNDENIABLY in the belief that Jesus comes with a new law that is different from and supersedes the commands of Moses. His work as a whole supports this overwhelmingly. In 1 Corinthians 9:21 Paul, very interestingly, writes that he is not under the law of the Jews, but then he is QUICK to say that this doesn’t mean he’s lawless because he is under the law of Christ instead, indicating that Christ’s law is a separate law from Moses’ in Paul’s mind. Acts 15 makes mention of the Jerusalem council where the issue of whether Gentiles need to get circumcised and keep the law to be right with God is hotly brought up. They rule NO. Only that they should just be sexually pure (which Jesus himself commanded) and not eat blood, idol sacrifice meat, and animals that didn’t have their blood drained properly (which some commentators think to be rules for getting a long with Jewish-Christians when with them and not salvation issues 🤷🏾‍♂️) Hebrews and Galatians are the two books WHOLLY or largely written and DEDICATED to the explanation of this different law topic. Galatians spend 4-6 chapters trying to convince Christians that there is no need at all to follow Jewish law (in fact warning that it will cut them off from Christ). Hebrews labors to tell it’s audience that the New Covenant is better than the Old which is fading and can no longer grant eternal life in the Kingdom and that both laws cannot be kept in conjunction. Scripturally you have to believe Paul and the writer of Hebrews are straight up false prophets if you want to believe the New Testament can’t be teaching a change in law. Even in just the gospels some of Jesus teachings are different to or add on to Torah laws (the law permits defensive violence, Jesus preaches loving your enemy as law, turning the other cheek as law and living by the sword as wrong.) #3) The church fathers and early Christian writings also show us that this understanding of the law (of Moses) not being binding on Christians was not a concept made up later on in the Church...

@youngknowledgeseeker awesome answer and I agree with your point. It would be hard to say that the nt isn’t about fulfilling the old law with the new. As you said, a couple of books make that very clear just in themselves.

The 12 year old Jesus story is only in one account and there is nothing wrong with a non Jew sitting on the steps of the Temple. However, I also believe that early Christians either didn't care, made no distinction or twisted the narratives to make him appear as though he was a "Real Jew" . Note also that Paul, calling himself a Benjamite, was NOT a Jew and seems to have little knowledge of the history of the "lost tribes". Actually Paul has little knowledge of ANYTHING AT ALL.

I should also point out that the reference could easily be a reference to the Samaritan Temple at Mount Gerizim in Shiloh.

"The 12 year old Jesus story [...] could easily be a reference to the Samaritan Temple at Mount Gerizim in Shiloh." Riiiiight, that's why Luke 2:41-46 says "his parents went *to Jerusalem* every year at the feast of the Passover, and when he [Jesus] was 12 years old, they went up according to custom... they returned *to Jerusalem* [and] found him *at the Temple*" Uhhh.... how could that be the Samaritan Temple, again? C'mon dude. Don't delude yourself, or others. Duane, could you even provide one single source in the NT that names the Samaritan Temple?

abdallah AlAmeen what a debate that would be!

Hope he debates Dr. Carrier too, it'll be an epic..:)

Isaam Rafee, Your statement is FALSE. God acts in and through Jesus and so God enters into the experience of human suffering, accepting the worst that humans can do and actively transforming that suffering so that it can lead to new life. Thus Jesus shows the love of God to be self-sacrificial and unrestricted.

Isaam Rafee TRUE The crucifixion of Jesus under Pontius Pilate is well attested by a number of ancient sources. Bart Ehrman and almost all bona fide biblical scholars endorse this fact that Jesus died by crucifixion. FALSE Quran says Jesus was not crucified (Quran 4:157-158). Therefore, Muslims believe Jesus did NOT die on the cross but another man resembling Jesus was the person who was crucified. That is a LIE and FALSE. God is NOT playing some trick to fool people by replacing Jesus with somebody else. That's absurd and an injustice to the victim. It's deceitful and false and comes from the father of lies - Satan / Shayṭān.

AND all because a perfect god made an imperfect being...which even though was LITERALLY INCAPABLE of sinning...sinned...and what was this sin? well your sunday school teacher will say arrogant disobedience and/or trying to be gods...but if you read genesis it was actually...trying to love god more...that is literally what their motivation was. the bible has zero logic or rationale

What do you mean with your terms? What is God, what is sacrificing to God? What do you mean by creation? Answer those and I'll be clear enough to answer your question. I'm waiting.

@@bcjammer The word of god is not a word but God's Logic His wisdom His understanding an that through our eyes if we wish to see. Word >Greek Logos. Hebrew Wisdom. Jesus is the Wisdom of God in bodily form.

I sure do alot

I had so many questions unanswered which my church couldnt answer they tried but makes no sense when i go home n meditate on them i just ran into this man n i tell u alot has been answered

Your point? That, though he thought you were ignorant, that he was?

@Pol Fartin He's talking about subbing to his blog, which is $24.95 per year. (assuming the price has not changed, and that it still is active)

Charity is what ever you give , which is pure and you give with love.

Since the Christ often spoke in parable perhaps many of his followers did not understand he would be resurrected (from the tomb) on the third day, in the precise manner in which it happened ! .As far as the women , they were going to prepare the body obvious oblivious to the event that had taken place .

Plus he grew up Christian so he's familiar with the Bible even beyond academia. He really doesn't get overly cynical he's just saying what he's studied.

Yeah but he does not know the "God ( Alihyim ) of genesis one is not the same entitie(s) as the yhwh alihyim of gen 2:4 ,whom he mistakenly believes is the creator of all things ... oops so much for acadamia when a high school drop out can figure out the most important deception in the history of human kind ! Question , How does one get on the NYT best seller list without selling their soul ?

Some people due know the scriptures better then Bart and correct him all the time, if they are correct and it can be proven, i know a lot of mistakes Bart makes, like Jesus claiming divinity in the Gospel John, he's wrong and it can be proven and not a scholar on earth can say i am wrong. Like John 10:30, i an my father are one and Bart is saying this statement is claiming Jesus is God and that's not true. The Greek word there is hen and hen in Greek means one in purpose and not heis one in unity and this isn't rocket science and Bart knows this but his old Christian faith makes him say this, to please other Christians. Because Bart used to be Christian and is still holding on his Christian concept of Jesus being God and knows John 10:30 a one means in purpose and he will agree, if you correct him and then either try another verse or not say anything about that subject to you if you correct him, i have debated many Christians that due this every time and then change the subject and move to another verse or stop debating me altogether, because those tricks don't work with me and you can't lie and fool me, like they fool everyone else and it's only their faith that keeps them saying this and not facts. It's like saying well Jesus never claimed divinity or to be equal with God, but that's all we got, so let's run with it, even if it's a little white lie, just get converts and everyone will be saved, because this is what we believe. Just like the Bible not having mistakes this isn't what they are taught in school at universities, they are taught the different versions manuscripts and mistakes, it's only when they become preachers that everything changes and the Bible is mistake free, because they have to save everyone, so a little white lie like Paul said and tricked people to convert them is OK in Christianity, but any other religion it's Satan himself because they lie to people, but in Christianity to lie is OK, because we are saving everyone. But Bart does tell the truth but his still holding on with Jesus being God is just his old faith and not facts and the truth. This video he's spot on with true facts, except Jesus never was Crucified or killed and God saved Jesus from death, because the Hebrews wanted to Crucify him and after God saved Jesus, God took his life and he was raised to heaven. One - Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words One [ A-1,Numeral,G1520, heis ] the first cardinal numeral, masculine (feminine and neuter nominative forms are mia and hen, respectively), is used to signify (1) (b) metaphorically, "union" and "concord," e.g., John 10:30; John 11:52; John 17:11, John 17:21-John 17:22; Romans 12:4-Romans 12:5; Philippians 1:27; This can be done with every verse Christians claim Jesus is God, Bart"s faith must be talking when he said Jesus said he was God and not his Scholarships and knowledge of Greek and Biblical studying of the scriptures. Jesus never claims to be God only a servant and son of God and a prophet and messiah and never God --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- John 10:30 in his Young’s Concise Critical Bible Commentary: “The particle en [hen] being of the neuter gender, can hardly signify ‘one being, i.e. one God,’ but rather ‘one in will, purpose, counsel...” - p. 62, Baker Book House, 1977. Virtually all modern commentators on John 10:30 take the position that the oneness immediately in view here is a functional oneness, or oneness of will, purpose, and action. D.A. Carson, The Gospel according to John: Verses 28-29 affirm that both the Father and the Son are engaged in the perfect preservation of Jesus’ sheep. Small wonder, then, that Jesus can say, I and the Father are one. The word for ‘one’ is the neuter hen, not the masculine heis: Jesus and his Father are not one person, as the masculine would suggest, for then the distinction between Jesus and God already introduced in 1:1b would be obliterated, and John could not refer to Jesus praying to his Father, being commissioned by and obedient to his Father, and so on. Rather, Jesus and his Father are perfectly one in action, in what they do: what Jesus does, the Father does, and vice versa (cf. notes on 5:19ff.). 1 Gerald Borchert, The New American Commentary: John 1-11: The statement in 10:30 that “I and the Father are one” has been an important battleground of theology. The first matter to note is that the word “one” here is neuter (hen) and not masculine (heis), so the text is not arguing for a oneness of personalities or personae (to use the Latin concept) but rather something akin to a oneness of purpose and will. 2 None other than John Calvin made this same argument centuries ago in his Commentary on the Gospel according to John: The ancients made a wrong use of this passage to prove that Christ is (ὁμοούσιος) of the same essence with the Father. For Christ does not argue about the unity of substance, but about the agreement which he has with the Father, so that whatever is done by Christ will be confirmed by the power of his Father.

@@lakerstekkenn Have you ever read John chapter 1?

If mortal mam wasn't your God then you'd clearly see through this fool . You're a dog looking to be owned by some heirophant which is why you respect the unrighteous like Dr Bert.." Dr" of course meaning he's a nobody ... I've seen these snakes come and go. They're all witches confusing people. What's really amusing is how fooled you are by a charasmatic leader like this con job .

And that is why Rabbi should keep these things to themselves. Uttering sentences which gives the impression of deep meaning to stupid people is all they do all day anyway...

You are wrong ----read Mt. 24.20 - Jesus told His followers to still honor the Sabbath in AD 66-70 when Rome should attack Judea and they were to flee from the city of Jerusalem and not one Christian died in the siege

It's called getting old

@@shootingstar5359 just because you get old does not mean you get skinny, my 70yr old grandfather is sligtly overweight as he has allmost allways been

@@shootingstar5359 no it’s not. I know several 70-80+ year olds that are over weight.

I’ve seen loads and loads of Bart’s videos and debates, from all the way back when he was wayyy younger, all the way up to the present day, and I must say I don’t think he ever, ever appeared to be overweight. So. Yeah. Weird comment thread here.

I think that most people get fatter with age.

I think it's just as insightful to use the Kennedy assassination. Which has presumably documents galore, and movies from the event. People are still divided over who actually killed him and why. This is because the meanings we make are not uniquely tied to actions even when those actions are well known.

How would your account differ from a few who experienced it firsthand both inside and out.

I don't think you understand how much verbal recall people had back then, or the capabilities and complexity of the systems they used to memorise certain things (sacred texts)

@@lookatmepleasesir massive assumption to make. There is no evidence that verbal recall was better, how could there be? Nobody was doing verbal recall tests and measuring them. In fact, evidence points away from your assertion, that people are far more intelligent today than ever before. Look at IQ level increase. This doesn't directly correlate with verbal recall, but it does point to a general increase in human intellectual performance.

@krelfurnace well said, but I wouldn't dismiss the relationship between memory and iq. There is a single side causal relationship between the two; that is, people with high IQs generally have better longterm memory, while people with long term memory, may not have high IQs. I would also reassert that people are far more intelligent today, this is well documented over the last half century, although it is sadly going away now (search Flynn effect). It has to do with selection and nurturing. Children today have to be better at intellectual pursuits to survive in the modern world, so it is selected for in mating and nurtured in institutes of education. Also, sorry for the month long lapse, apparently youtube didn't want to notify me until now haha

How can people believe something, and not know what it is that they believe? NONSENSE!

Wait, what? How was he wicked again? OT laws aren't ungodly, just not the point of what God desired of his people.

''"when i stop valuing my life that's what i'll do"''... that was obviously meant as a joke :D

Christianity is basic reality and the Bible is being confirmed by archaeological discoveries every year now. Sorry pal! The Qur'an still seems to make some fundamental errors.

LOL! Indeed, virtually every year another one to five archaeological discoveries are backing up the biblical text, sometimes on a large scale as well. The number of supposed 'historical' criticisms of the biblical text today are a mere fraction of what they were some 50 years ago, because archaeology has debunked so many of them and established the biblical text so many times now that keeping up is a task in its own right.

what dream world are you on?

+Sosa Q Dream world? This is blatant reality. Had you done more research before consulting me, you would have known this fact for yourself. I'll go over the *facts* I mentioned in my previous comment, and explain why they are facts. 1. I noted that virtually every year, 1-5 minor to major archaeological discoveries are made to back up the biblical text. The last 3 years have been especially notable. I'll give you one select discovery from 2015, 2016 and 2017 backing up the biblical text and some articles on them. 2017: Mines in Israel, the Timna Valley discovered, dating to the reign of Solomon. observer.com/2017/01/scientists-just-discovered-a-major-part-of-king-solomons-3000-year-old-mines/ www.reasons.org/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/more-archaeological-evidence-for-the-bibles-historical-accuracy 2016: Biblical latrine literally found. www.reasons.org/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/more-archaeological-evidence-for-the-bibles-historical-accuracy 2015: Seal of biblical monarch, the king Hezekiah, found www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-sites-places/jerusalem/king-hezekiah-in-the-bible-royal-seal-of-hezekiah-comes-to-light/ 2. I noted that the number of historical attacks against the biblical text have been getting demolished by new data at a rapidly astonishing and fast rate. It's almost 12 PM right now, so I'll give you one quick example and perhaps more at another time. "Scholars, like Sanders and Fredriksen who have shown skills with scientific inquiry, have concluded that there could be no centurion in Capernaum (Mt. 8), perhaps to guard the border between Galilee and Perea, because no road let from this Jewish village northward or eastward. The recent discovery of a long stretch of perhaps the _via maris_ in Migdal, south of Capernaum, and a massive road near the monumental srairs to the Augusteum at Horvat Omrit, north and northeast of Capernaum, supply evidence that most likely a road existed near Capernaum. If a road led from Beth Shean to Panias, then the objections against a centurion being present in or near Capernaum (Mt. 8.5-13) disappear or are at least muted." -Charlesworth, James H. "The Historical Jesus in the Fourth Gospel: A Paradigm Shift?." Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus 8.1 (2010): 32. Charlesworth notes that some scholars in the past have criticized the historicity of Matthew 8:5-13, which states that a centurion was present in the city of Capernaum, as there were no roads from Capernaum north or east. Recent archaeological discoveries have in fact established the presence of such a road, rendering the attack against the historicity of the centurion in Capernaum, as recorded in Matthew 8:5-13, obsolete. I don't know exactly when this road was discovered, but I know this paper by Charlesworth was published just in 2010, making it fairly recent.

Thank God Barnabas was not in the New Testament because there wouldn’t be any Jews left!

Barnabas got a seriously bad wrap from Ehrman here. It would be worth picking up and actually reading rather than taking Ehrman at his word. It isn't far from Philo. He could have mentioned that allegory of the Torah was a long standing first century phenomenon.

BlackEpyon why do you call it mythology? Obviously i understand or overstand the word lol. But i just wanna hear or read your reasons 🤗 Ask 10 people the same question and get 10 different awnsers.................unless its math then in that case 9 out of the 10 need to go back to school lol.

@@lionno8201 It's a study of an ethos. An ology of myth.

If you like batshit crazy stuff out of a pipe dream, look up what gnostic Christians believe, part of which can be found in the recently discovered gospel of Judas. Scientology looks normal after that.

There is a different between righteous anger and human anger