The Gospel of Matthew is Pure Brilliance! 

Instead of regular TV, I watch this stuff & online classes.❤❤❤

Watching Bart Erhman's public journey is a chance to watch history being formed. His effect on religious scholarship will be long remembered I suspect and hope.

Bart and Megan (and behind the scenes team), you are doing such a great job. As a longtime fan of you both I am just loving the show! I look forward to every Tuesday for a new episode!

I like the format of this show. Megan is a class act and interacts so well with Bart.

Megan is such a great interviewer… it is very useful to have her asking the questions we might wonder as we struggle to understand the depths of the material that Bart presents I had previously listened to this video, and yet found there was so much that I missed the first time around. I think this presentation illustrates what can be fascinating about the Bible … beyond its theological content

Jesus Christ Superstar. Bart and I are the same age. And I remember that show very well. As someone else has already said, Bart has opened the bible to me in ways no one ever has. As a Catholic up until the age of 19 all I ever heard was tiny snippets of the book quoted during the Mass. I was a student in a parochial school until the 8th grade and we never, ever discussed the bible in any way. The catechism is the only religious teaching I encountered outside of the Mass.

I like how the editor cut nothing they asked them to

I've got to tell you..I just love this podcast. I've listened to this one, in particular, at least 10 times maybe more. There's so much to unpack and I just love it. Thank you so much!

I am extremely thankful for this video. It answers numerous questions and misunderstandings I had about Matthew. The questions were trally outstanding and allowed Dr. Ehrman to explain Matthew so that even I could understand. Exceptionally well done.

I love this podcast! What a treasure! I have read Misquoting Jesus, How Jesus become God, and Lost Christianity. These books are fountain of knowledge.

I remember getting Jesus and Moses confused in Sunday school in first or second grade, but no one ever talks about this. I’m really glad they explored this here.

I wish we could produce a movie of the book of Mark, only including details apparent in that text. Then produce a movie based on the book of Matthew, again only including details found in that text. Then Luke, then John, never cross-interpreting or trying to create one cohesive story between all the gospels. I would even like to get all different casts and crew for each movie. I think people would be amazed to see how different each movie will be.

I have loved "Superstar" since it's debut in 1972. The "bromance" depicted between Judas and Jesus breaks my heart and led me to question Judas' role (biblically) which led me to your book "The Lost Gospel of Judas Iscariot". Favorite lyrics of Judas - "Did you mean to die like that? Was that mistake or did you know your messy death would be a record-breaker?"

I love the editor not taking out any of the comments to the editor :D

I love these podcasts. I learn so much about the bible that would've taken me decades of reading the same book in different translations and more books about the book. And also, I can't help but love Megan's friggin' glasses and style overall.

This stuff strengthens my faith.

To me, Mark reads like its thesis statement is "You need to rethink what the messiah and the kingdom of heaven mean, and Jesus is/was the one sent by god to tell us and show the way, even if no one really got it," while Matthew seems to almost be a response to questions about Jesus maybe just being a prophet or a return of Elijah or whatever, and its thesis is "Yes, Jesus was the son of god and messiah, proven here in every possible way, and was very clear about who he was when he was here, even if no one got it."

The audio is much better balanced in this episode. Thank you!!

Love Megan & Bart so much

Megas always got the coolest glasses!

You guys are so unbelievably good. You can both go to heaven.

I am amazed learning this from Professor and from Megan

The more that I watch Megan she's a very beautiful woman but she is very serious about what she does she is a studying right along with you and absorbing everything that you have to say and I I think she is great I think she's keeper around the world

The most interesting thing about the genealogy in Matthew is that Matthew imitates Exodus 6:20, and that Matthew 1:25, in the Greek, says Joseph knew Mary “no more” till after Jesus was born.

Bart's background: white bookshelves. Megan's background: DARKNESS. Evidence of creeping Manichaeism!

I love these 2 so much!!! What a perfect combo!

10:30 I've often wondered, If Matthew was a tax collector before coming to Jesus, he must have been used to dealing with money and keeping a balanced set of books (however they were referred to in those days). The Romans were basically _The Mafia_ but with a larger number of armed men to keep order; they weren't exactly known for being wishy washy about getting their piece of the pie, tax collectors had better able to balance their numbers. If they had Matthew why would Judas Iscariot have been the _Treasurer_ for the group of Apostles?

Very interesting. Great questions from Megan and and illuminating answers from Bart.

Fantastic stuff. I was a fundamentalist for 11 years, and have retained my interest in religions since... but this explanation is truly wonderful!

This is my favorite Bart Ehrman video I have seen (and I have seen a lot)!

This is brilliant. I've learned more from Bart in the past 2 days than I've learned in church my entire life😅

Thank you Bart❤ for the interesting show .. as a Christian

I remember regular TV. I still can't believe I spent so long putting up with such an overwhelming barrage of commercials.

An interesting fact suggests that the writer of Mathew was indeed a tax collector from Capurnaum. Luke describes the removal of tiles from the roof in order to lower the sick man to Jesus. Mathew says that they dug through the roof which was obviously not tiled. Archeologist have confirmed that no tiles were used in Capurnaum. The houses were stone walls roofed by rough timber and covered with straw and mud. John lamont. Tasmania

3*14 = 42. Auspicious!

Love the teal hair !!!

Deutero-Isaiah to Scribe: "Did I ever tell you about my operation?" 🙂 Thank you for another grand video . 🌍🕊

Bart is always a delight

I loved listening to Bart and Megan, we're fortunate having such meaningful information from perspectives pulled out and synchronised with OT and Gospels.

This show is absolutely fantastic !!!! A big thank you to both of you !!

Another wonderful podcast, thank you!

Love this podcast!

Thank you for this great content.

Forty-two generations from Abraham to Jesus? Deep Thought knew what it was talking about!

I was just about 14 years old when I first heard Jesus Christ Superstar, and it blew me away! I was on fire for God back in those days, not so much these days, though. But I still love the music, it was wonderful. 👏

Editor has a sense of humour

I kinda want Bart to do commentary for Jesus Christ Superstar. It would be fascinating and entertaining.

Here's a question I've never heard anybody address: why does Matthew sometimes double his characters? (Two blind men instead of one, two demoniacs instead of one, etc.) I've never been able to find any commentary on it.

Many thanks for your great content - from Germany 🙂

Great discussion on Matthew. Love the way Megan brings out the best in Bart. She knows the questions to ask! What I find amazing is that Bart discusses the gospels with such enthusiasm without believing a word they say! I mean everything Matthew writes is to try to convince the reader/listener that Jesus is divine.... ie... God! But Bart doesn't believe a word of that! Not a word. I would love if Bart met Matthew in the flesh... or whoever wrote the gospel... and to listen in to the conversation. It would go like this... "What a load of crap you wrote Matthew... but BEAUTIFULLY written BEAUTIFUL!!!"

I find it fascinating that in subtle ways the Gospels reflect the diverse beliefs of the early Christians. Gnostics, Jewish Christians, Marionites and Gentiles are all represented if you read between the lines. Though later orthodoxy labored to eradicate the traces of such ‘heresies’.

7:49 Acts 15:37

Fascinating series of videos with so many brilliant and penetrating questions from Megan. Thank you both.

So, if Matthew (anonymous) is making an extra effort to make sure all the "fulfillments of the old testament" are included, how do we know that he didn't have a M1 source, but instead was not totally happy with Mark's version because he left of some information about Jesus, and therefore decided to add it in. Not having a true source. But his only "source" was Matthew's belief that the information he added was true? Not unlike some who attribute things to Jesus today which have no basis in scripture at all.

The source "Q" is an interesting take on both Matthew and Luke using it according to scholars, and at the same time they say, both Matthew and Luke used the gospel of Mark as a source too. I'm curious though, does any scholar think Matthew could've used Mark and Luke, and/or Luke could've used both Mark and/or Matthew?

This is a great series of Podcasts. Thanks to you both.

I really enjoyed this one! Dr Ehrman has given us a really great podcast topic. Also kudos to Meghan as the host!

How does Matthew's genealogy make sense if Jesus had a virgin mother?🤔

Would Jesus himself (having come from the countryside) have understood the nature of the Pharisees so well that he would know of their hypocrisy, or was it Matthew who understood and wrote as if Jesus had such understanding?

I am obsessing this year with the gospels. I can't wrap my head around the 5Ws and how. The more of these you can make, the happier I will be. I have Dr. Ehrman's great courses lectures, some of his books, etc. I am trying to learn the Koine Greek as well. I will have you know that I greatly enjoy all I am reading, but I am currently unsatisfied with the answers from scholarship. The past 5 years I have been reading Dr. Ehrman's works, Dr. Tabor's, Luke Timothy Johnson, Gary Habermas, and many of the references in their works. I can tell you furthermore, that I feel like today I have no solid idea on who wrote these things, their edits and redactions, or anything. I can't decide if they originate from oral pericopes, hired writers, Christian communities actually linked to the traditional authors, or anything. I can't afford all of the books. I am land locked in Utah and I don't have access to any good theological libraries. I am going crazy out here for more

Episode begins in earnest at 4:12. Embedded time stamps would be a helpful addition.

My name is Matt but mom told me it came down to a toss up between Matthew and Bartholomew. "You were almost a Bart," she said. Not everyone can be so lucky. 😎 In next week's podcast on heresies in the early church can you speak to how they influenced the closure of the NT canon at the end of the third century? How did they influence the debate if at all? How much did the final NT direct the future course of the church? How much different would it be had other gospels been included? What would the theology look like without Revelation which I understand was hotly debated? Thanks.

Dr. Ehrman - - too few historians have noted the fact that, among the Pharisees, Jesus (see Charlesworth) was mainly opposed to the harsh, "letter of the law" Shammaites, who were dominant during Jesus' lifetime. The Hillelites (e.g., Gamaliel) had a very similar philosophy (e.g., of forgiveness) to that of Jesus.

Video starts at 4:08.

Thank you Dr. Ehrman!

Very very fascinating. Tq Megan. Tq Bart! Love you both!

It seems like Mark was a first draft, Matthew came along to convince Jews, then when the religion spread it caught on amongst non-Jews, so Luke was written to bring all of humanity in, and finally John was written decades later when Jesus was in full mythology mode and made into a God. Even the theology seems to evolve from Mark to Matthew to Luke to John. Each author seems very intentional in what they did, but they clearly had different purposes resulting from the time and place they were written. I don't understand how anyone can read the four books and think they were written with the same Jesus in mind.

Movie that awakened my heart to Christianity 2:33

I love these episodes.

"the star stopped somehow" and then chuckle...lol , We have heard of retrograde planets, correct professor? *smiles*. All kidding aside you and Tabor are among my favorite professors. Thank you so much for your work, not joking.

Thank you.

Is there any theory about why, when "Mathew" copied the story of the tax collector Levi in GosMark he changed the name to Mathew? The name probably signified something to his early readers, but what exactly?

Really appreciate bart. He makes very basic biblical scholarship( first year undergraduate level)available to all. Simple idea brilliantly executed. Comes over as a great scholar but this is very basic. Dont get me wrong, I appreciate his books and videos.

If Jupiter [the king 'star'], Mars [the 'star' for Palestine] and Venus [the 'star' for birth] all lined up in conjunction [which they did around 4BCE], such a celestial event would have been widely celebrated among astrologers. As for how such a conjunction of planets would guide people to a location, star worship often treats the celestial bodies as intelligences that can communicate to people via visions or omens. Planets and stars might be treated as corresponding to the intermediary authorities for the different levels of the heavens that Dr. Ehrman referenced regarding Middle Platonism. Much love!

I love this show. :-)

What is going on in Matthew 19:12 where Jesus is quoted as saying, "...there are those who become eunics for the sake of the kingdom of heaven."?

This series is fascinating, I'm loving every show. I'd love to hear more information regarding the topic: "each Gospel is an individual, unique book, and their pespectives are different from each other." But later in the show you say that Mathew is 93% Mark, copied word for word. So how is Mathew a unique , individual book?

As a Catholic, I really do appreciate these Podcasts.

Bertrand Russell in his History Of Western Philosophy says that the Beatitudes or Sermon On The Mound was plagiarized from a work called Testaments Of The Twelves Patriarchs, a Palestinian document. pieces of the Testaments of The Twelve Patriarchs have been found at Qumran, so the text is old enough to support as Matthew's source.

Agreed on the life of Brian

Very enjoyable, but it brought up some questions for me. Bart touched on the idea of Matthew's theme of fulfilled prophecy (as Messiah, or anointed king), and also on Mark's gospel as the "unknown Jesus." I would be interested in Bart's take on a theory I encountered a few years ago that the gospels, when put in their 'correct' order, describe a thematic progression. This theory has the gospels in the order Mark, Luke, Matthew, and John with Mark's theme being to portray Jesus as a man, Luke's portrayal of Jesus as a priest, Matthew as a king (King of the Jews) and John as deity. (I am aware that putting Luke before Matthew is controversial here.) The theory notes that Mark is the shortest and earliest work, that illuminated manuscripts often portray the author with a human bearing water (Aquarius) and represents the beginning of the year, or winter. Luke is of middle length, the author portrayed with a bull (Taurus), Luke's genealogy include's Levi (verse 29), the narrative describes Mary's relationship to Zacharias the murdered priest, and progresses from winter to spring. Matthew is the longest gospel, portrays Matthew accompanied by a lion (Leo), depicts the transfiguration on the mount (the highest point geographically), traces genealogy to King David (with all the fascinating gematria and generational counts around the number 14) , being summer . John is clearly the last gospel written, it is of middle length, depicts the author with a balance scale (Libra/Autumn), and is theologically distinct from the synoptics, and depicts Jesus as deity. This would require coordination between the authors and would explain why Luke and Acts are separate works. It would also tie in with other apparent astrological references in the gospels.

I like to think Bart blew his nose at the beginning in solidarity. Idk. Love these show more than almost anything.

Thanks for providing these videos.

I'm very glad you said the Gosple of Matthew is attributed to a guy called Matthew. And then went in to say the author is unknown. I would have liked you to clarify for the uneducated that Mark was actually the nephew of Paul's friend Barnabas. And that Paul only joined Christianity after his fabricated claimed encounter some time after 36AD.....so went we look at the dates we see Paul, Mark and Luke never actually meet Jesus or witnessed any biblical events..... This becomes a very important point into trying to decide how much trust you can put in each of their scriptures..... So if I may look at Paul who recruited Luke and Mark to help write scripture...we have Paul telling us in Galatians 1:11-16 that none of the information in any of his scriptures came from any eye witness accounts, any other person or source.... but then we get Paul the author of 1 Corinthians 11:24 quoting the Jesus guy he had never meet at the last supper which Paul did not attend.....so you might be inclined to suggest Paul might have been divinely inspired, trouble is Jesus original 12 real Apostles who might have been at a last supper and knew what Jesus did or did not say, did not fall to their knees in reverence if Paul being able to quote a dead guy he had bever meet at a meeting he never attended...no they actually Publically called Paul a Liar, they privately referred to Paul as the devil, (Matthew 25:41) and stopped Paul using the title Aoostle Paul gave himself, (2 Timothy 1:15 & 1 Corinthians 9:1-3). Just looking at Galatians 5:11-12 you can see there was no love lost between Paul and Jesus real Apostles so in retaliation, Paul stopped other followers of Jesus from writing or preaching anything Paul was not preaching, (Galatians 1:8-9 & 1:13). Which is the reason the Gospels are attributed to not written by....and the attributing only occurred postomatly. You find the Gospel of Matthew written by anonymous authors under the supervision of Luke or Mark.... how else would they all seem to validate each other with Paul and Luke making all the main claims and validated by the others..... For example Jesus resurrection, claimed to be witnessed by hundreds...... if you study the bible there are certainly lots of scriotures making the claim providing overwhelming evidence you might think....but take a closer look and half the verses are old Jewish Prophesies retold and made to look .ike evidence, so they don't count for proof. Next we have the main claims being made by Paul and Luke using every possible pseudonym to make it look like lots of claims, and then we have John and Matthew's scriptures also lending very much a supportive claim....if we ignore Paul stopping them from writing scripture, there us still a problem because the bible tells us John and Matthew were elsewhere when Jesus died....so out of witnessed by hundreds a forensic look at the facts shows not a single eye witness account of the most important claim in the Christian belief.....so mire than likely a fabrication hatched by Paul....who I believe was to trick the Jews into converting to a more manageable faith for the Romans but then became a victim if his own success.

Lol, I just had a licona flashback... 14 14 14.... Love these discussions

Love the hair Megan.

Obrigado pela aula!

Excellent question asking.

The parts of the Old Testament used to prove no spirits and after life are being misinterpreted. Those verses aren't touching the reality of spirits. They are only talking about this earth life.

Bart says that people in antiquity rarely had two names. But in Christian tradition we have Simon who gets given the nickname Peter, or Cephas, and Saul who gets called Paul. How about if Levi gets given a nickname of Matthew, God's gift, by Jesus and so when he writes his gospel, he inserts that in the story, so he would be Levi Matthew, like Simon Peter.

Mathew, Lewi, Luke and John. I like that.

I love "Jesus Christ Superstar"!!!!

The editor not doing as he was told today! xD

Grew up Jehovah's Witness. Their Bible encyclopedia says Matthew was written 41-44ce and Mark came later. I wonder if there is anyone else that thinks it's that early.

The movie adaptation of “Jesus Christ, Superstar” is almost universally recognized, and rightly so, as execrably awful. Andre Previn, who reluctantly scored it, certainly thought so. In his memoir “No Minor Chords” (which you should read), he recounts coming across an old musician friend of his on the set. “What are doing,” his friend asks, “working on this piece of [scatological epithet]?”

I enjoy listening to your programs. Bible Scripture says the law is abolished. You have the law in the Old Testament and then you have the first four books in the New Testament with Jesus talking to the Jews. But after the cross, rules change, AT LEAST that's what I'm seeing. In the first four books, Jesus was talking to the Jews & after the cross the two races have become one and there is neither Jew nor Greek, male or female.

very good, as usual, but could you go a little more (or a lot) in the genealogy problem with Joseph not being the biological father. How is this explained?

Bart: editor, take that out Both laugh Editor : dont tell me what to do!

I see an analogy of stubbornness and rebellion in Hosea 11, which seems antithetical to what we know of Jesus.

I am grateful I