I remember being taught the Bible isn’t a buffet. Where you pick and choose what you want out of it. Meanwhile scribes would pick and choose how to copy a manuscript.
that is one view @@snarky4lyfe144 but scant evidence for that hypnosis ... we adapt and change text to this day to suit ideology. there are bibles without male pronouns for example.
The thing that I find infuriating about the whole thing is that people are bent on believing the lies and they would say that the Bible has never changed.
Most believers dont read the bible and those that do read it dishonestly. I've heard people claim there are no contradictions! Lol Though the most frustrating one for me is those that claim bible god is 'love'. The worst character in the history of fiction is 'love'?!!? Sick minded stuff.
@@MrAuskiwi101 I agree - I see that offensive lie a lot in comments.I tell them to take a look at Ukraine or Gaza - or go to any hospital and see babies and kids seriously sick and dying.No evidence of any " love " from any " God ".
The man was born 2000 years too late to know what he is talking about. Any courses he conducts will be on infidelity. He is only in the business of making money from all the books he has written. He is poison to the truth. If it is as he says then why is he still in the business.
I enjoy Barts lectures and debates. I look forward to getting this. I am a truth seeker, and although I left Christianity, I always like to know the How and Why. The past can always teach us how to handle the future
@David-kz2im okay, I will do that. By the otherside, I assume you mean Christianity? Can you reference anything I should look at? Please know, Leaving Christianity wasn't because I watched 1 episode of Bart Erhman! Lol. I would hope my faith meant more to me than that. Raised to know Jesus. Not a religious upbringing at all. I have even had an experience with Jesus. So my crisis of faith did not come easy. However, God is truth, Right? But what did it for me, was the 1st and THEEEEE most important commandment. I thought, hmm, wouldn't that be the best deceit ever by the devil( when i believed in a demon called Satan). To have every Christian fooled into worshiping a Man, and violating the absolute most important command. Today, I absolutely believe in my Creator,and I respect all of his creation, and love him thru doing so. So Bart is not to blame, ot was actually when I asked, " Why dont the Kews believe?" I learned ALOT! It was a very hard thing to do, as you could imagine. So if you have any references outside of the Bible, I am always, as I said earlier, interested in knowing more. I would actually appreciate it . Thank you
Good questions by Derek. Good answers by Bart. Impressive. I don't usually listen to Bart, but this is worth paying attention to. Nothing he hasn't said before ... but still.
@@John-fi5ik you mean the self prophesied messia. Got killed for blasphemy and came back as a zombie just to go And wait somewhere in the void or wherever, to come back and reclaimed the kingdom that he didn't have to begin with. Sounds like it's going to make a big impact on the illiterates.
Will be tied up Nov. 11th on another commitment. Hope Dr. Ehrman makes the lectures available as "on demand" streams down the road--more than happy to pay for those!
@daniele.3361 Well, more accurately, on average he doesn't tell the full truth. I believe that he does/did include a statement in his past books that said that no major doctrine is damaged by these variants amongst the manuscripts, which means that a man can come away with the same theology from our current bible as could a man reading the oldest bible in existence.
Dr. Bart is a great start regarding these issues. I would add the fact we need to also look at the Aramaic language for deeper understanding. Example: How do we know Marcion was wrong thinking Jesus wasn't human? The Aramaic idiom "Son of Man" means "an ordinary human being." "Son of God" is an Aramaic idiom meaning "a meek peaceful person." Early Western scholars didn't know or understand Aramaic and made up their own ideas to compensate their ignorance. And they came up with dogmas and theologies to rationalize what they simply couldn't grasp. The Trinity as we're taught came about in and after 325A.D. Jesus and his followers never taught that.
Thank you Professor Ehrman for liberating millions from church suppression and ecumenical rules. Their rule book was distorted and rewritten myriad ways. Your courage to come forth over the years and endeavor to enlighten those trapped by theological threats and condemnations is to be applauded. THANK YOU!
DIRECT BART QUOTES: “The position I argue for in Misquoting Jesus does not actually stand at odds with Prof. Metzger’s position that the essential Christian beliefs are not affected by textual variants in the manuscript tradition of the New Testament.” “We can reconstruct the original text of the New Testament with reasonable, though not complete, accuracy. The vast majority of changes found in our early Christian manuscripts have nothing to do with theology or ideology. Far and away, the most common changes are simple slips of the pen, errors in copying.” “The more I studied the manuscript tradition of the New Testament, the more I realized just how radically significant it was that we have thousands of copies. The New Testament is far better attested than any other book from antiquity in terms of the number of surviving manuscripts.” “With the abundance of manuscripts that we have, scholars are able to reconstruct the original text with a high degree of accuracy, even if we can’t always be absolutely certain about every word.”
I love listening to Bart. I could never understand why p eople are wedded to the doctrine of the trinity. I was 10 when after a Sunday service I asked my Presbyterian minister to please explain the trinity for me. He said "it cannot be explained, it's a mystery and you've just got to believe it".
Same as my experience. But i came up with an answer. Father is spirit. Son is body. HS is soul. Like us. The soul is the union of the two so when you put jesus in your ❤ you get God's soul. Made sense and still does except now i know God is non coporeal and doesnt incarnate. So wacha go'n ta do.
just read or listen to any scholar explaining 'Shrimad Bhagavatam' the entire concept of trinity and divinity will become clear; just as islam is copy-paste from christanity; same is true with christanity---it is a copy paste of some Krishna, some Buddha and lots of vedic concepts and literature without any real-understanding of vedic concepts only superficial take.
@@pm4306 why would you make an ignorant claim like that? If it was copy/paste, the errors of the Bible would have been included. One looks stupid when they repeat the lies/baseless claims of fools that came before.
Because the doctrine of the Trinity is clearly found in the Old and New Testament. It isn't that hard to understand. You have a mind to think, a heart to feel, and a body. Your mind is not your heart is not your body is not your mind, yet your mind, heart, and body are you. Your Presbyterian minister should know better.
Der Kurs klingt spannend. Schade, dass er nicht allgemein zugänglich ist und nur auf englisch. Die Thematik ist brisant und aktuell, will man den christlichen Glauben ernst nehmen und nicht einfach nur vor sich hin frömmeln wie es Fromme tun. Danke euch beiden.
0:41 I see myself as one among that group of people whose lives have been absolutely FUCKED by religion. It is not an accident that I am interested in on these topics. We are the ones who have peered into the blinding light of truth and dared not look away having been struck with its magnificence, now injured. What I wonder though is, was it worth it?
There's an easy method of explaining Trinity by the so-called Pentecostal Christians here i.e., scientifically quoting matter (solid, liquid and gas) forms and fooling innocents. Who will care for original writer and copyists whether Greek or Aramaic. Blind belief and faith out questions is divine here.
Bart's opinions seem so hollow. If he where honest , wouldnt he have to tell you that due to the missing pieces of not having the original copys, that his guess is as good as anybody else's?
Could Bart please specify the one verse in the gospel that specifically claim the doctrine of the Trinity? I enjoy his scholarship and think it is so important. I don't believe in the inerrancy of Scripture. However, I do believe in the person of Jesus Christ and that He came from God to teach us a new Way to live. It has changed the entire course of my life. So it saddens me that so much delving into all the inconsistencies seems to have so completely destroyed Bart's faith, as it has for so many academics. I pray for him a lot that he will eventually find his way back to God somehow. Shalom.
He means 1 John 5 : 7-8 "7For there are three that beare record [in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.] 8[And there are three that beare witnesse in earth], the Spirit, and the Water, and the Blood, and these three agree in one." - King James Version (1611)
There was never an actual man named “Jesus”. He represents the attempts from intellectuals of the time to explain how the universe works. To explain that “God” is not the man of Old Testament but a force that creates and gives life to, at the direction of, those who inhabit it. Unfortunately it’s become a farce with poor translations and the “reimagining” of it.
There's more in the New Testament from Paul than there is from Jesus. And it still makes no sense to me why Jesus and God would only reveal themselves to one part of the world and in one window of time.
Well, no. While Matthew 28:19-20 mentions the three, it does not in any way describe them as having a triune nature. There's a difference, and Christian sects as early as Arius subordinated the son to the father and never believed in the concept of the trinity even with this passage at hand.
@@John-fi5ik That's what you believe, and it's what you believe when you see the three names. But If you'd never heard of Jesus, and you picked up the Bible and read the passage, the text in no way instructs you on the nature of the trinity. It just lists the father son and holy spirit. And some denominations do not believe in the trinity even to this day, subordinating the son and the spirit to the father.
@@VulcanLogic Here is the passage in Scripture - And now , FATHER, glorify ME together with YOURSELF, with the GLORY which I had with YOU before the world was . I have manifested your NAME to the men You have given ME out of the world . They were YOURS and YOU gave them to ME ! JOHN. 17 . 5 , 6 .
@@John-fi5ik That's still not a trinity. I don't even see the holy spirit in that verse, let alone how the three are one, co-equal, triune God. Why wouldn't it be plausible that Jesus existed separately in that verse? You're again reading something into the text that isn't there.
It seems that the only way that a person can retain their faith in any shape or form, is to tune into the living spirit of Christ and or God, directly. Without any intermediary book or religious group or hierarchy. One needs to know and experience their Spirit and Light and just take things from there.
Obviously anyone with half a brain realizes there’s no way we can know what the exact words were when we don’t have the autographs. And, given the importance we attach to epistemology if indeed the autographs were eye witness accounts, there’s an impasse. However much of evangelical academia belief we have something approaching a reasonable revelation. What isn’t mentioned enough is that the preponderance given to inerrancy are simply based on a theological belief that God inspired all scripture and oversaw its correct continuation. While I’ve stepped back from that belief myself, it’s unfortunate that much of Christianity fails to admit this dichotomy.
@daniele.3361 he may not be 100% all the time but as truth is subjective, well, I’m sure he is seen as inaccurate generally by many. Thank god for scholarship.
The irony with reading Dr Ehrman’s books (eg Lost Christianities) is that it got across that Jesus was a historical figure (I had thought he was a made-up character) & that there was something profound Jesus got across. The latter is based on the very different understanding and material from one of the 4 different early Christian groups who had a very different understanding of Jesus and his message. From this group, it seems like Jesus had a deep enlightenment experience & the realizations from it match what others who’ve had it say. Christianity would have been so radically different if this group’s understanding had been the one that was made into the official biblical canon.
[3:22]: Respectfully, Bart is incorrect regarding the Quran. There are 93,623 provable differences between the Hafs Quran & the other 29 versions. Furthermore, there are over 5,000 differences between the Hafs Quran & the Warsh Quran. This effectively highlights a more fundamental problem, in that it serves as irrefutable proof that the Quran has not been perfectly preserved.
Although I agree that the Quran is modified, even more than that, it's been collected/written years after the death of Mohamed, the difference between Hafs, Warsh, Qaloon, and other "Riwayat" is a matter of pronunciation that is easily justified by the difference of Arabic dialects, so I don't see it as a convincing argument.
I never hear much about The Didache . I remember encountering it in late 70's Catholicism. I rarely hear it referenced in early Christian podcasts or lectures.
It is amazing how people justify beliefs that are questionable at best. Fear of death is the driving factor of religious beliefs; especially the Abrahamic religions. There is no doubt in my mind that the Gospel of Thomas is the Q Source for the Canonical Gospels. And, unlike those gospels, the Gospel of Thomas actually claimed to be written by Thomas.
Hello Derek. I mentioned to you before that people like you and any other podcasts on this topic, (even if they BELIEVE in a god) should make it clear that a belief in a god is based on faith and not fact. I say this again after watching the latest videos on the new Speaker of the House. He's a hard-core believer that the bible must be taken literally. People have the right to believe what they want, but need to be reminded that their belief is not backed by evidence. Most people in Government office are Christians, so it would help to bring them down to reality. Let me know your thoughts. Thank you for what you do, but let's take it to the next level.
Members of Congress are also lawyers. Therein lies the major problem we face. Lawyers have zero interest in getting at the truth. Their function is to argue and dissemble.
i can't speak for other people but for Muslim we don't believe for the sake of believing. i was a Christian who believed in the Bible and Christianity til i found some loophole and contradictions in it. Islam provided me with evidence for the existence of God and i'm currently reading Ibn Sina's "Essence and Existence" and it is very compelling i have to say.
@rethabilefeni4694 Might I suggest that you speak to an ex Muslim and see why they left religion altogether? Many from both sides are realizing that it's All man-made, gods included.
@@EddieSchultz62 and??? my G, you could be an ex Imam and i would still believe in God and Isla, as an ex-Muslim, i do believe that you know ibn Sina, am i right?
@rethabilefeni4694 I'm not an ex Muslim, I just suggested you speak to one and ask them why they left Islam. As I mentioned earlier, I don't care what a person believes.They just need to understand that their belief is based on faith and not fact based evidence. Get it?
Did you know that the real reason that God was angry with Eve was because she had cheated on Adam and had an affair with another man. The bible doesn’t mention his name, but soon after, he became the father of the woman who became Cain’s wife. He was younger than Adam, of course, but he was a contemporary of Eve. It is possible that the affair resulted in the birth of Cain, which would have added to God’s anger. It would mean that Cain unknowingly married his own sister. The bible has many secrets. Stranger things have happened since then and are still happening.
I'd say Mark's Jesus is more like the first appearance of a super hero. They don't have much if any background. Their characterization is one dimensional. It's mostly a lot of "Wouldn't it be cool if...?" that got compiled into a loose narrative. The others are the later elaborations of the character. Suddenly Jesus has a home planet... I mean town, a home town. He talks a whole lot more. His villains get more fleshed out. Then John represents the 3rd generation of writers. The ones who grew up with the hero and all their subsequent backstory. So, with all the plot relevant details already made up and the characterization firmly nailed down, the areas the new writers have available to fill in are all the fantastical elements. Where before, Jesus could leap tall buildings in a single bound. Now he can chuck a planet at a titanic space monster. It's power creep brought on by the ever present desire to see your favorite super hero overcome ever increasing challenges.
@sos1691 Caesar's Messiah was possibly the single most interesting RU-vid video I have ever watched. I started off laughing at its absurdity. By the end I was like "well I'll be damned." LOL
The concept of the Trinity is probably the reason why God sent a final messenger who refreshed the concept of belief in one God (the initial message) - the reason why Mohammed pbuh received the message from Gabriel and actually taught the people what Jesus taught - Islam.
@@John-fi5ik hi John. That is not what the rule means. One cannot build or teach something that is only based on 1 verse. The Law states there must be at least 2 witnesses to collaborate something to be true in interpreting the scriptures. Exp. The name Lucifer is not Satan. Why? Because it is only mentioned once in one verse in one version of one Bible. Therefore Lucifer has nothing at all to do with Satan.
@@pastorwilliamhay1687 Compare 1 John 5.7. with Matthew 28 . 19 , 20 . There is your two witness rule . Two different Gospels but Only One Doctrine ! And yet Ehrman says only one verse Proves the Triunity of GOD .
@@pastorwilliamhay1687 The early Church Fathers allude to it CYPRIAN , TERTULLIAN , ORIGEN ATHANASIUS , AUGUSTINE, JEROME No wonder that ERASMUS included it when he did his translation !
Oh the Bible was never the underpinning of Christian faith. Rather the Bible has always been adapted to suit church ideology with the great majority of the text paid little heed too. Remember, there are various studies that show most Christians consider the resurrection of anology and Jesus a mythical character; with about a 1/4 not believing in God. The Bible has little to do with folks devotion to church ... In most of history church participation was mandated by the State.
@user 1.the Dead Sea Scrolls show that books like Daniel were put together by different authors and different sources and there is sometimes a gap of over 1000 years between the alledged historical composition and the DSS. Isaiah for example was written by at least two authors over a large period of time. This would mean Isaiah 53 or 42 was not written by Isaiah. The books of Moses were not written by Moses. 2. 94% of all manuscripts of the Nt are 800+years later than Jesus. No manuscripts of the first century is available and only small fragments of the second. Even at Paul's time there were already different gospels and conflicts even between Paul and the other 12. Historic documents are not the same as religious documents 3. not a single book was written by an eyewitness of Jesus. The gospel of "Luke" is not based on eyewitness testimonies. It doesn't name any eyewitness, the author is unknown too, the author contradicts Paul and the author copied and changed "Mark" which was no eyewitness testimony too. 4. The unknown authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke copied the gospel atrributed to a Mark which was written by an unknown author too. The unknown author of the gospel of John knew all previous books. We have no book of the 12. Moreover: according to Papias the Matthew Version he knew Was written in Hebrew/Aramaic which is not ours today. The Mark Version he knew was written not in order which is not ours todays too. Jewish Christian had only one gospel, didn't believe Jesus to be God, kept the law and didn't believe in salvation by faith. They also rejected Paul and followed James. And the canon you today follow is cherry picked by a community you follow. Jewish Christians had their own gospel. 5. The last point is useless and the bible(s) caused pain.
@@user-cw3ox2nn5tSorry but copy pasting blatant lies about your theology will not convince any atheist, it’s actually rather off-putting. Did you read any of that before transposing it here? Do you have any idea who Ehrman even is or how seriously he studies the NT? It’s almost an insult to post thee softball apologetics on a video of his, lol
@russel the specific faith of people today comes from texts of the bible. Otherwise everyone can believe what he wants. Yeah, I could focus on parts of the bible/New Testament which fit more to what I want to believe but that's cherry picking at the end of the day. If the Nt is unreliable I have my answer. And not believing in a God and considering Jesus a myth, how can that person be Christian or a believer?
Most biblical scholars will agree that there are many mistakes in the Bible. We just have to do the best with what we have. We are looking for perfection from man, which is almost impossible.
I'm not sure if you are a believer. If anyone says they believe and hold such an opinion, I ask then Why believe. I am just curious,how one could put their salvation into a belief inspired by a God that makes mistakes? Or knowingly worship the words of men. Truly I am just curious? Ty
@ChicasCoffee I'm not a believer, I'm a knower because of what I've seen. You can't unknow things you've seen. Jesus doesn't have to prove anything to anyone.
@EddieSchultz62 so seeing is not believing, that contradicts facts right there.. You know how Father works but don't believe in him? He has revealed himself as well as his messengers all throughout time. So you're saying if you saw an angel appear in your room and talk with you, since he didn't leave a video or physical evidence, he must not exist. BTW I believe he's very correct on how much they rewrote the Bible to benefit themselves, because if you control the people and their money, you have all the power. They were illiterate and uneducated back then and went off of feelings and not logic. They didn't know any better, then the catholic church got so powerful that greed, lust, power etc was too much to stop
they definitely 100% proven have been. Every ancient text has been modified. It's just natural. Unless we have the actual, original parchment, we will never know its accuracy. Even the writings of Plato, Socrates, Homer, Shakespeare have all been changed from the originals.
@@MohamedAhmed-eg3mh The Quran is the last message. The New Testament was written way after Isah (Jezus) and not even sure who wrote it.... Many MEN throughout many years wrote it.... It has been corrupted. Torah/Psalms/Quran/Injeel were straight messages from God.
I've read most of his books. I'll be rereading them again. So accessible! If you can't take the course I highly recommend the book. You can get used versions for $3.30. Probably a lot less cheaper than the course.
Wait a minute, Dr. Ehrman, there are in fact more than one version of both the Quran and the Torah. (I know Muslims deny this, but it is objectively true.) In fact, that's what makes me so unsurprised that there are more than one version of the "New Testament". However, I was NOT raised as a fundamentalist, so when I learned of these things in late high school, early college, they seemed perfectly normal and understandable.
Exactly. He is becoming more and more anti-Christian lately. I get he is no longer a believer, but he was always respectful of the texts and faith. That's been eroding,
he already have an episode explaining how the Quran never changed , u can see it for urself the ep is with marijn van putten titled : Uncovering The Truth About Quran Preservation With Dr. Marijn van Putten , it s good ep to watch
Your "more than one Quran" Are the recitations, it's just like british vs us English, the meaning is the same. Why would you ask? Because the tribes of Arabia had diff dialects
After knowing and hearing this information if someone still believes that the bible as the true word of God and still believes in the nonsense of the doctrine of trinity i think they willbe in deep trouble in the hereafter.
This would be considered a form of schizophrenia if someone claimed to be hearing voices tell them to build a boat and gather animals under a drunk influence but because you say his alcoholism wasn't an issue it seems convenient to use an idiom about the ongoing incest that was a thing back then. God chose Noah but God didn't see this coming? Or intervene? But instead, he needed Noah to gather animals so he could kill humans in return to express his anger? The more I listen to things regarding the more toxic behavior I see between God who can't do much without mortal help and he uses manipulation and physical abuse and doesn't even help those in need. This is not normal in real life and it shouldn't be taken literally.
People who have meditated deeply for decades, within a certain tradition that deals with death, they don't fear death anymore. there are historical examples such as the Cathars, a Gnostic group in France that was persecuted and slaughtered by the Roman Catholic church - their leaders when burned on the stake, did not cry or scream in pain. they died peacefully
@MythVisionPodcast - I’m confused I thought Bart Ehrman said “if we had the original it would basically look the same”? Am I mistaken? I mean this doesn’t take away from what he’s pointing out but it would suggest the Gospels have been preserved fairly well.
@yeshuadaking8705, Bart is very good at saying a bunch of nothing and making it sound good. After writing his book “misquoting Jesus” he acknowledged that Christian theology wasn’t hurt by the variants.
@@whiskeredtunakeep crying into the void. Bart is very good at explaining what he means which is why apologists can't point to specific things Bart had said that back them up because of they did point to specific paragraphs or time stamps then the lie of the apologist would be shown.
@@christyadams9235yeah Bart is very clear about this point. The Bible is clearly not true and is full of errors but that doesn't matter because the people who believe in it don't care.
Bart Ehrman: "We didn't have the originals we have copies of copies of copies! And Orthodox scribes made a lot of changes! For example, to Marcion's Luke. Also Bart Ehrman: "If we had the originals they would basically look the same."
@daniele.3361 Tell me what you know. I only know of him through a debate that i watched between him and Daniel Wallace about a year or two ago. I'm aware that he is an agnostic or something along that line.
Thank you gentleman working on all this so hard I appreciate this I'm a gay grandma and I've been working where I can work hey 🍺 Bart. I forgot the question I was going to ask I'll come back later I love you guys Thank you for your work 🙏😇🍺
WE ARE WORRIED ABOUT THE TRUE MESSAGE O ANCIENT TESTAMENTE AND NEW TESTAMENT CAN YOU RECOMEND WHAT TO RE READ ABOUT THIS BOOKS ????? ONLY FOR COMPARE OUR BELIEVE ????
I never understand why the concept of the trinity is unusual for atheists. And some Christians. Just look at a man. He has a son. And he also had a father. You can say that person is a son. You can also say he is the father. But it's the same person. Father. Son. And what unites them?
Psalm 14: The Fool Does Not Want God 1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good. 2 The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God. 3 They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
My favourite thing about Jerome is how he visited Bethlehem, discovered that it was a cult site for Tammuz and insisted that it had been taken over from Jesus's birthplace even though the opposite was blatantly true.😂
Hello, this is for Bart. You mentioned that the Torah wasn't changed by scribes. Well that isn't actual true. The miss translation of key names in the original ancient texts are numerus. i.e. ruah into spirit, Eliohim into capital G God. There are many more of these that started to appear in around 600 - 500 BCE. and a major arear of miss translation happen around 500 - 900 AD by the Mesorite people. Both of these times of miss translation where to bring about a monotheistic belief against the world wide knowledge and understanding of the Eliohim, the powerful ones. Eliohim is a plural form not a singular form. However when referring to a particular Eliohim it can be written as singular. This miss translation is how we have on purpose, by the early Christians. developed the belief in a one God system. These miss translations are thru out the entirety of the every day Bibles that are for the common man.
I very much respect most of Bart Ehrman's New testament scholarship and expertise. But I think his ideas about the Old testament, specifically the belief systems of the ancient Israelites, to be basically wrong. Oh well, you can't win at everything.
I would think that after all these years, Bart Ehrman would be set financially and wouldn't still be charging for his seminars, etc. However, I'm glad that James Tabor's are free. 😉
Can God separate Himself from Himself? Of course not. Nor can we. It's ludicrous to believe there hasn't been changes to the scriptures. They told us it was the inspired Book with no errors or changes. We had to learn the hard way that wasn't true.
I have nothing wrong with this theory based on some decent evidence, but Ehrmans initial claim/implication that academic freedom is a neutral institutional value based on his case simply isn’t true. His theory fits nicely with the academic orthodoxy on religious metaphysics and biblical history.
Robert Price..is canceled by vloggers because of his politicaly incorrect views ... Maybe it's better uf Price will have his own RU-vid channel. I don't agree with all Bob Price is saying,I'm.not a fan.but I respect all opinions even contrary to my beliefs.
It seems evident to me that when they canonized the scriptures, they made it essential that Jesus was the only way to avoid eternal damnation. It sounds so barbaric. But Constantine canonized the Christian scriptures because he wanted to convert the Roman empire to Christianity. They could not leave it as an optional conversion. They converted the empire at the edge of the sword. Repent and convert or die. Naturally they cited the authority of the Gospel, which they still do. The "Trinity" concept is what promoted Jesus from prophet to God. The put Jesus as God, and the only way people could come to Him would be through them, of course.
We have so many copies of the NT that we just flat out know where scribes made errors by comparison. Secondly complete copies are not necessary to find this out and we have partial copies much earlier then 300 years. Bart is deceptive by what he leaves out !!
my perennial questions are " who was with jc when he supposedly spent 40 days in the wilderness with the devil"" a scibe was there?.. also who can remember everything that was said on'the sermon on the mount" to multitudes." .. guessing it was a large number as the multitudes in John numbered 5000 ;men; that were fed with 2 fishes and 5 loaves...... not sure if jc had perfected his trick of turning water into wine at that time so maybe nothing to wash the fish sandwich down with.? 5000 + people without a microphane.. good going.. haha
Dr. Ehrman is great. One peculiarity that appears here again is that he likes to say "I personally think that. . .." I don't understand the "personally" qualifier.
It's a way of emphasizing that it is his opinion, rather than something he can back up with specific textual evidence. Speech (as opposed to writing) will often have those sorts of apparent redundancies. I hear people say it a lot ("Personally, I think...").
@@Arven8 , you're right, it's common in speech. But aside from whether writing should mimic the informality of common speech, given that Dr. Ehrman is a distinguished scholar on the subject, I doubt that his opinions aren't based on good evidence even if it isn't as strong as he would like or isn't the scholarly consensus. However that may be, "Personally" is surplusage. Why not just say "I think. . ."?
@@blairmcian Are you pulling my leg? This is a very common expression and intuitively understood by native English speakers - at least where I am (US). I'm a little baffled you're confused by why he's using it.
Interesting points. But i saw no evidence. He also admitted all known manuscripts for Luke included chpts 1 and 2. I havent read his books or watched extensively his teachings, but this excerpt alone doesnt really prove anything. Especially considering the title of this video.
