Misquoting Jesus with Bart Ehrman

The Bible's world is crowded and unsystematic: ghosts, familiar spirits, demons that cause illness, and the dead who can be summoned. And at times, this world breaks through in ways modern readers don't always appreciate. When the disciples see Jesus walking on the water, their first thought is that he's a ghost. After the resurrection, Jesus has to reassure them he isn't one. King Saul has a medium call the prophet Samuel up from the dead, and it works.

So what happened to all those ghosts? Bart joins host Megan Lewis to explore the haunted world the Bible was written in, and how later Christians tidied it into a neater system of angels and demons, heaven and hell. Along the way: why demons were blamed for illness, why Jesus was accused of sorcery, and why believing in angels but not ghosts turns out to be a choice Christians made, not one the Bible made for them.

Most Christians grow up believing that everyone is born a sinner, that when Adam and Eve ate the fruit, humanity inherited a broken nature and a guilt we can't escape. It's one of the most influential ideas in Western Christianity. But it isn't in Genesis, Jesus never taught it, and it didn't take its familiar form until four centuries after him.

Bart joins host Megan Lewis to trace where original sin actually came from: what the Garden of Eden story says and doesn't say, what Paul meant when he wrote that sin came into the world through one man, and how Augustine turned that line into a doctrine about every human being from the moment of conception. Along the way, why Eastern Orthodox Christians never fully accepted it, and what changes when you realize this belief has a history.

Do manuscripts prove the Bible never changed? Some Christian apologists have argued that the Great Isaiah scroll (1QIsaa) is proof of an unchanging Bible, that it's "Word for Word" identical to the later Masoretic Text. Some have argued that P52 – a small fragment of John's gospel – shows that eyewitnesses quickly wrote down gospels. In a debate with Bart a decade back, Daniel Wallace even referenced a first century Gospel of Mark, that turned out to be a stolen manuscript that was eventually dated much later. For some modern Christians and apologists, manuscripts are "proof" of something... that the Bible is unchanging or perhaps inerrant. But can that claim hold up?

In this episode, Bart unpacks what manuscripts do and don't prove, and the challenges they raise for people who want to argue for an unchanging Bible.

The Book of Daniel is set in the sixth century BCE, during the Babylonian exile. It describes visions of empires rising and falling — and for a long stretch, the sequence tracks real history with remarkable precision. Kingdom after kingdom, exactly as it happened. Then, at a certain point, it stops being right. That break is one of the most important pieces of evidence. Bart joins host Megan Lewis to explain what Daniel gets right, where it goes wrong, and why the exact point of failure tells us when the book was really written. And Bart will talk about how this book and its ideas may have shaped Jesus' thinking.

The King James Bible is arguably the most influential book in the English language, and Bart thinks it's a literary masterpiece. He also thinks it's one of the worst Bibles you can study from.

In this episode of Misquoting Jesus, Bart and host Megan Lewis trace where the KJV came from, starting with William Tyndale, whose translation it largely reuses and who was burned at the stake for making it. They look at why its unicorns and cockatrices trip up modern readers, and why the words you think you understand, like "conversation," "strange," and "admiration," are more misleading than the ones you don't. They cover the theological choices its translators made, the late Greek manuscripts behind its New Testament, and a 1631 printing that told readers "thou shalt commit adultery." Bart also shares which modern translations he recommends instead.

In the listener Q&A: where the doctrine of original sin came from, whether early Christians evangelized door to door, and what Jesus meant about eunuchs in Matthew 19:12.

Around 170 CE, a Syrian Christian named Tatian noticed what a lot of readers have noticed since: the four Gospels don't always agree. So he fixed it. Tatian wove all four into a single, seamless account of Jesus' life. And for roughly two hundred years, in the Syriac-speaking churches of the East, that harmony was the Gospel. Then the church came for it. Bishops collected copies and destroyed them. Tatian was condemned as a heretic. Today not a single copy survives in its original language — we know the text only through a commentary, some translations, and a sixth-century Latin Bible that still carries its shape. Bart unpacks what Tatian actually did to the Gospels, why the church found it so threatening, and what it means that an entire branch of Christianity once read a Bible we can no longer read.

Most Christians are used to reading four Gospels. But why are there four? Why not one? Or twelve? The early Church thinker Irenaeus fought hard to keep Christians reading all four gospels, but it wasn't a foregone conclusion.

In this episode, Bart unpacks how a four gospel new testament came to be, and what could have been the alternative.

In a recent response to Wes Huff, Bart said the only eyewitness we know of who's converting people is Paul. A lot of people pointed out that Paul never met Jesus. Fair. But Paul is also the only person in the New Testament who tells us, in his own words, that he saw Jesus alive after his death. Everyone else reaches us secondhand. Bart unpacks what Paul actually claims to have seen, why Paul is the only person who claims to see a resurrected Jesus, and why the earliest firsthand evidence for the resurrection suggests visions.

For many religious people who deconvert, losing their faith leaves a giant hole in their lives. They can lose their community, their purpose in life, and their understanding of how the world works. What does life look like on the other side of deconversion, once the dust has settled? Today we're talking about how Bart lives without God. We also have our bonus segment at the end, which this week is listener's questions, where I'll be asking Bart - among other things - whether he uses early Christian art as a source for his research.

In the Old Testament, Satan is a minor figure at best, and one fully under the control of YHWH. He appears briefly in the New Testament, notably in the temptation of Jesus. How did Christianity take those minor references and end up with the lord of all evil?

Those familiar with Dr. Bart Ehrman's career trajectory will know that he attended Moody Bible Institute, where he received his early training in textual criticism - but what is a "bible institute", exactly, and why do people attend them?

Did you know that Jesus wasn't the only apocalyptic prophet traveling around Galilee during the 1st century CE? If the answer is "yes Megan, of course!", then you probably know something about John the Baptist. But what do we really know about him, and what impact did his teachings have on the historical Jesus?

Last year, Wes Huff was a relatively unknown Christian apologist. Then he went on The Joe Rogan Experience, one of the biggest podcasts in the world, and spent more than three hours talking with Joe Rogan about biblical manuscripts, the New Testament, the historical Jesus, and the case for Christianity. The interview exploded online. It now has more than 8 million views on YouTube alone, over 40,000 comments, and it essentially launched Wes into apologetics stardom overnight. Wes is smart, articulate, and clearly very knowledgeable when it comes to manuscripts and textual criticism. But as the interview goes on, there are several moments where manuscript evidence starts turning into much bigger claims about eyewitnesses, Gospel reliability, canon formation, and even evidence for the resurrection. Today, I'm joined by Bible scholar Bart Ehrman. We're going to watch some clips from the interview and ask an important question: where does solid scholarship end and apologetics begin? Welcome to the Misquoting Jesus Podcast with Bart Ehrman.

Did you know that Jesus didn't believe in the soul, heaven, or hell? As an apocalyptic Jew, these ideas would have been completely foreign to him. So where on earth did Christianity get the idea that a life well-lived would be rewarded with a place in paradise for your soul? Today, we're talking about where the idea of heaven came from.

Have you ever heard a Christian say something about the Bible and wondered exactly where they were getting their information from? Today we are talking about the most common claims Christians make about the Bible that are not actually based in reality.

Have you ever read something in the New Testament, maybe the Book of Revelation, and wondered why on earth it's included in the Bible? Why were these specific books included, and why are they considered inspired by God while the non-canonical writings are just the work of humans? Today we're talking about the formation of the New Testament, using listeners' questions.

Did you know that scribes made changes to all of the books of the New Testament? Some of them were accidental, but some of them were very deliberate. The gospel of John is no exception - but what was changed, and why?

Atheists often accuse people of religious faith of uncritically accepting a bunch of myths - but do atheists do the same? How closely do people actually examine their dearly-held views and beliefs, regardless of their religious persuasion?

In the gospels, Jesus' suffering is on a sliding scale - from sweating blood, to calmly accepting his fate. What did Jesus think about his own suffering, and is it even possible to answer that question from the evidence we have?

Ever wondered what the first Christian praise and worship service sounded like? Join us as Dr. Charles Cosgrove unveils the mystery of the Oxyrhynchus Hymn, the earliest known Christian hymn with musical notation!

The resurrection of Jesus is probably one of the most well known stories from the New Testament. But how do historians deal with this miraculous event? Should it be discounted in its entirety, or can it be investigated using the historical method? Today, we're talking about what historians can and can't say about the resurrection.

The Old Testament wasn't written in a cultural vacuum, but who and what influenced its writers. Today we're talking about the cultural background of the Old Testament and how the literature and societies of the surrounding cultures impacted its creation.

Love him or hate him, if you're listening to this podcast then you're probably familiar with some of Dr. Bart Ehrman's beliefs - but how familiar are you with the ideas he used to hold when he was an evangelical Christian?

The doctrine of the Trinity - that there's one single God who is father, son, and holy spirit - is central to modern Christianity. But is it even in the Bible?

The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls shook the field of biblical studies to its core. But did they actually change how we view the Old Testament? Today we're talking about the Dead Sea Scrolls, what they are, what they can tell us about the editorial history of the Old Testament, and whether they really show the perfect error-free transmission of the Hebrew Bible.

Hell – the fiery eternal torment known from many Baptist pulpits – is maybe the ultimate consequence for misbehaviour. But is it an afterlife that is present in the Bible? Today, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to to discuss what Jesus believed about life after death, where the idea of hell came from, and whether we can even find it in the Bible.

The Rapture, the ascent of Jesus' faithful flock to heaven at the end of the world is enthusiastically anticipated by many evangelical Christians. But is this expectation grounded in what the Bible actually says? Today, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to talk about the Rapture, what it is and whether it actually appears in the Bible.

Different Christian denominations have different beliefs about the Bible, and those who leave the faith have different ideas again. Today, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to talk about how his changing beliefs impacted his views on the Bible, and why he finally changed his mind about all of them.

The 10 Commandments are the most famous laws in the Bible, despite the fact that most people can't name more than a few. Today, I'm joined by Bart Ehrman to discuss why the 10 commandments are so famous, and why Christians still see them as important, even though most of the other 600 Old Testament laws are ignored.

Easter is fast approaching, and while children everywhere are looking forward to chocolate eggs, the minds of many Christians are turning to Jesus' resurrection. Today, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to answer audience questions about Jesus' crucifixion, and what happened after.

We've been talking a lot about the revolutionary message of altruism in Jesus' teachings recently - but how do we know what the historical Jesus actually taught? Today, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to discuss exactly how scholars reconstruct his message.

Jesus' most famous commandment might be to "love thy neighbour" - but what exactly does "love" mean, and how do you love your neighbour? Today, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to talk about the different meanings of love in the New Testament, and how that informs our understanding of Jesus' teachings.

Bart's newest book, Love Thy Stranger, will be released on March 24th - but really, how much can you say about Jesus' impact on the moral conscience of the west? As it turns out, quite a lot - and this week, we'll be getting into exactly what you can expect to read.

The difference between right and wrong and how to live a good life has been a matter of debate for millennia. In the ancient world, different schools of philosophers subscribed to different theories - but were these discussions something that Jesus would have been aware of? Today, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to discuss ethics in Jesus' time.

What did it mean to be a good person in the ancient world, and what did ancient cultures say about how we should treat one another? Today, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to discuss Jesus' teachings, the cultural norms of his time, and how early Christians changed his message.

The writer of Luke's gospel drew heavily on the gospel of Mark - but was very careful to remove any idea of atonement - the concept that Jesus died in the place of others. Today, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to discuss why he did that, and what purpose he thought Jesus' death served instead.

It's well-known Christian tradition that the apostles Peter and Paul were both crucified as a result of their Christian faith, but what does history have to say about those legends? Today, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to talk about the texts behind the tradition, and what we know about the execution of early Christian leaders.

Q is a hypothetical source for the gospels of Matthew and Luke - but did it exist, and if it did, why are there no fragments of it? Today, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to answer YOUR questions about Q.

The original manuscript of the gospel of Luke may have looked entirely different from the one you might be familiar with - to start with, it might have lacked the first two chapters entirely. Today, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to discuss what was added - or removed - and why.

The first followers of Jesus were Jewish, and followed Jewish law. After Jesus' death, gentiles started to convert to Christianity - along with additional Jewish members. Did these new converts need to follow Jewish law, and keep kosher? Today, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to discuss Matthew's take on keeping kosher as a Christian.

Sin and salvation are two incredibly important concepts for Christians - both ancient and modern. But exactly what is sin, and how does one attain forgiveness? Today, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to discuss what the apostle Paul says about the topic, and how that compares to modern Christians.

The book of Revelation predicts some incredibly unsettling events, full of suffering and blood. Are these predictions of our own future? Today Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to talk about what the New Testament's most violent book actually predicts, and whether we should be worried.

The Gospel of Matthew was copied and recopied for hundreds of years before the invention of the printing press - and each new copy introduced new changes to the text. What were those changes, and how do they impact the meaning of the text? Today on Misquoting Jesus, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to discuss how scribes changed the gospel of Matthew, and what those changes mean for us.

Ever wondered what Mary, the mother of Jesus, was really like—beyond the nativity scenes and stained glass? This week, Megan Lewis sits down with Dr. James Tabor to dig into the life of the "woman behind the Messiah," exploring surprising theories about Mary's origins, her possible royal and priestly lineage, and her true role in the earliest days of Christianity. Was she really just a humble villager—or something much more? Tune in for a lively conversation that blends historical detective work, ancient drama, and just a pinch of scholarly mischief to help you see Mary as you've never seen her before.

Mary's virginity is a central tenet in most (or all) Christian denominations - but when did the story develop? Today, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to talk about where the idea of a virgin birth might have come from, and when it was first introduced into the Christian canon.

Did you know that the "Christmas story" everyone knows, with the shepherds and wise men, is actually an amalgamation of the accounts in the gospels of Luke and Matthew? Today, Dr. Bart Ehrman answers my questions about the inconsistencies in these two narratives, and whether they can be reconciled.

We have hundreds of manuscripts of the Gospel of Mark, and no two are exactly the same. From spelling errors to deliberate, theologically-driven changes, each scribe put their own mark on the gospel. Today, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to discuss the hows and whys of these rewrites.

We often talk about copies of the gospels, how different manuscripts differ from one another, and the implications of these differences - but we rarely talk about the original gospel manuscripts. Today on Misquoting Jesus, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to discuss what an original text actually is, and why they matter.

The Catholic tradition considers the apostle Peter to be the first Pope and the founder of the church in Rome, but what does the historical record say? Today, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to discuss where this idea came from, whether Peter was ever in Rome, and what historians know about the founding of early churches.

Gnosticism is one of the most confusing and enigmatic early Christian groups, whose beliefs were considered secret knowledge meant only for a select few. Today, Dr. Bart Ehrman answers my questions about what Gnostics thought about Jesus - where he came from, what he was doing on earth, and whether or not he was divine.

Have you ever submitted a question to the Misquoting Jesus podcast? Ever heard the answer? Today, Bart and I are going to be doing an entire episode covering listeners questions on the topic of the apostle Paul - keep listening, and we might get to yours!

There are several resurrection stories in the New Testament - including, of course, Jesus himself, but what about the mass resurrection in the gospel of Matthew? Today, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to discuss why the righteous were raised from the dead when Jesus came for sinners, and what happened to them after their resurrection.

Marcion, founder of the 2nd century Christian group imaginatively called the Marcionites, had some beliefs that would be cause for stoning in the Life of Brian. This week, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to talk about what those beliefs were, Marcion's own personal gospel, and what other christians thought about it.

The gospel of John doesn't mention Jesus' birth from a virgin, doesn't show Jesus' baptism by John, and does absolutely nothing to keep his identity secret - not even don a pair of glasses. This week, Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me to explain why the gospel of John is so drastically different to the rest of the new testament gospels!

The Dead Sea Scrolls preserve the beliefs of the Essenes, an ancient Jewish sect that were, like Jesus and John the Baptist, expecting the end of the world. Dr. Bart Ehrman joins me today to talk about whether Jesus and John were actually Essenes.

As far back as we have literary reports -- beginning with the Epic of Gilgamesh, our earliest surviving narrative, written centuries before the oldest accounts of the Bible -- humans have feared death more than almost anything.

Many people fear the process of dying; others fear facing eternal torment; yet others fear the void, the idea of non-existence.

In this episode we talk about ancient reflections on death and about why some stalwart souls insisted that in fact there was nothing to fear.

We start learning about the Christian movement with the letters of Paul, around the year 60, about 30 years after Jesus' death. But what was happening during its very first year?

The book of Acts, written decades after Paul, describes key events, but can we rely on its account as historical? If not, what can we infer from our various sources?

What was actually happening in those years? Were thousands of people converting? Was the religion taking over the world? Was it declared illegal by the state? Or... ?

For our 52nd episode -- our one-year anniversary! -- we will be having a live Q&A with Bart. Questioners have submitted questions, some out of the many have been chosen, Megan will host the event, and questioners will ask their questions live, to hear Bart's responses! A special time of celebration as we (also) reflect on our Year One!

If Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet, then why isn't mainstream, modern Christianity an apocalyptic religion? Was the move away from apocalypticism deliberate, and are modern doomsday preachers actually closer to preaching Jesus' message than other churches?

Most scholars write books and articles for other scholars, using jargon and presupposing knowledge available only to experts trained in their discipline. But some scholars write books designed for popular audiences about their fields of expertise.

Can non-scholars write books like that? Should they try? Why do most scholars choose not to do so? Are there pitfalls in trying to communicate complex knowledge in simple terms? Is it possible to do so without "dumbing it down"? And why do so many academics look down on fellow-scholars who try to do so?

The New Testament writings were produced decades after Jesus' death, but long before that people were passing along stories about Jesus and devising poems and creeds about their new-found faith.

What do scholars know about these Christian traditions that were being passed along and preserved by word of mouth in the years before we had written texts. Scholars call them "oral traditions." How do we know such things existed, and can we be certain that they were passed along reliably before there were Christian writings?

One of the most intriguing non-canonical Gospels to be discovered in modern times is the Gospel of Peter. Unlike the New Testament Gospels, which were written anonymously (only later to be given the titles Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John), this Gospel actually claims to be written by an apostle, Jesus' own right-hand man, Peter.

The account we have is only fragmentary, an alternative version of Jesus' trial, death, and resurrection. And what an account it is, involving an actual record of Jesus emerging from his tomb at his resurrection, as tall as a mountain, followed, from the tomb by a walking-talking cross.

What is this fascinating account really all about, and why did someone write it, falsely claiming to be the disciple Peter?

Many Christians think that a non-Christian simply can't understand the New Testament fully, since they don't agree with it's major teachings. But could an argument be made for the opposite case, that those with a vested in interested in the New Testament as a book inspired by God cannot get beyond their theological assumptions to understand what the text is really saying?

It seems like an odd question, but can committed Christians really study their own Scriptures honestly?

In this episode we consider the issue from several angles, not by assuming that outsiders are necessarily "objective" (is *anyone* objective?) but by thinking through the complications of the matter.

The genius of Luke's Gospel is frequently overlooked by those who simply breeze through it or assume it is saying the same thing as Matthew and Mark. In fact, it is strikingly different. What especially matters are not so much the contradictions one finds, but the larger picture. Luke has radically edited Mark's account in places to create a new portrait of Jesus.

In this episode we see how he did it and what the end result is. Among other things, when you look carefully at the details of Luke's account, you find that, unlike the other Gospels, here Jesus does not suffer during his passion and his death does not bring an atonement for sins. These are not minor differences. Why would Luke change the story so significantly?

The Christian faith is rooted in the belief that Jesus died for the sins of the world and was then raised from the dead. But is this what Jesus himself preached during his public ministry? In the Gospels Jesus certainly predicts his coming death, on numerous occasions. But are those saying historical? How would scholars know? What is the evidence both ways? And if Jesus did not anticipate, let alone predict, his death, does that completely undermine the Christian faith?

Even though millions of people read the Bible, few know what experts who have devoted their lives to historical scholarship on it have to say or, even more important, why they say it. In this episode we talk about how scholarship on the New Testament has developed over the centuries, decades, and recent years, how critical scholarship actually works to make better *sense* of the NT and opens up important ways of interpreting the text, and whether and how this kind of academic approach to the NT can or should affect a person's faith commitments.

Christianity started out with a handful of followers in 30 CE - Jesus' remaining disciples and a few female supporters. But within 300 years there were some 2-3 million Christians in the world, including the emperor of Rome. How did *that* happen? How did an offshoot of Judaism come to take over the world, to the extent that it eventually became the religion of the West for centuries, down to the modern age? The answers are not actually what most people would suspect, and in this episode we lay them out.

The idea of the Trinity - that God the Father, Jesus the Son, and the Holy Spirit are different from each other and are all God, but there is only ONE God, is a central tenant of Christianity. But most Christians don't actually know what the doctrine really says, let alone where it came from (is it in the Bible?). In this episode we explain the factors that led to the formulation of the doctrine and see why it became so important to Christian thinking. But does it matter that the math doesn't work? (The three are one!) Or that it can doesn't make logical sense?

The conversion of Emperor Constantine to Christianity is often pointed to as a turning point in the history of the religion - but would Christianity have continued on its upward trajectory without this conversion? Was Constantine's conversion one of genuine religious conviction, or was it motivated by something else? Has his conversion been co-opted and over-emphasized by later Christian authors?

The New Testament is often studied in isolation, separated from other ancient writings.

How did this division come about, and what do we lose by looking at it as something different?

Dr. Robyn Walsh talks about what can be gained from placing the New Testament back into the canon of Classical Literature.

Many Jews and Christians today are uncomfortable with the views of slavery in the Bible; the practice is simply assumed, it is normally condoned, and it is never condemned. Even so, some Christian apologists argue that the Bible actively disapproves of slavery and was instrumental in opposing it in the modern era. But is that right?

In this episode I interview one of the premier experts on the question, Dr. Josh Bowen, who has written two books on the matter; in our discussion he explains what the Bible really says about slavery and how we can put it's statements, assumptions, and laws in its own context instead of thinking that it fits comfortably in ours.

To Order Josh Bowen's Book Click Here

Readers of the Bible are familiar with the stories of creation in Genesis 1-2, but far less familiar with similar tales from much earlier times in the world surrounding Israel.

In this special edition of the podcast Bart interviews Joseph Lam, an expert on the languages, religions, and cultures of the Ancient Near East (and Bart's colleague at UNC), who has just produced a Wondrium Course on the Creation Stories in the Ancient World. Among other things they talk about the reasons for thinking Genesis contains two very different creation stories (side by side) and how other older stories from Mesopotamia appear to have influenced the author(s) of Genesis.

Biblical scholars who approach the Bible from a historical perspective are often accused of working hard to deconvert the faithful. Is that true?

Do undergraduates widely abandon their faith once they learn the historical realities behind it? Are professors and authors generally interested in urging their students and readers to abandon their religion? And is there any positive result for faith that can come from understanding historical scholarship? Is it crucial to faith to understand the Bible, or just an unnecessary add-on?

By far the most mysterious, intriguing, and widely-interesting ancient "heresy" was Gnosticism. But what exactly is it and why does it matter? In this episode we consider the basic ideas that lay behind the Gnostic religions and explore just how radically different they are from the views that came to be regarded as orthodox.

How could these religions be considered Christian if they didn't think Jesus' death mattered? How could they consider the God of the Old Testament to be a lower level and inferior divinity, and this material universe to be a cosmic disaster? Did Gnostics have their own Scriptures? Did they use the books that later became the New Testament? If so, why didn't they just admit their views were wrong? We will address these and other issues in this exploration of the highly unusual world of Christian Gnosticism.

Lots of informed readers know that scribes changed their texts of the New Testament -- but do the changes really matter for anything?

In this episode we take the unusual approach of looking at textual changes in just one book of the New Testament, the Gospel of Luke, to see how slight (and not so slight) variations in the text can have an enormous impact on understanding the author's message -- involving such things as the virgin birth, the understanding of whether Jesus' death brought an atonement, whether he was fully human.

Should the administrators of universities, their alumni, or their boards of trustees have any say in what teachers teach -- for example, in classes about religion? Should they be able to control the classroom in any way?

What about the argument that university professors are brainwashing their students to follow their liberal agenda, while hiding behind "academic freedom"? Does the U.S. system of tenure allow professors to say whatever they want, safe in the knowledge that they can never be fired?

What IS tenure anyway, and why does it matter? These are some of the key issues we'll be addressing in this discussion of academic freedom and tenure.

One of the central tenets of many denominations of modern Christianity is that Jesus is God. The Nicene Creed describes him as "of one being with the Father"...but just how old is this idea?

If you asked Jesus' disciples if he was a human or God, would they have affirmed his divinity, or accused you of blasphemy? And if Jesus was divine, then was he considered to be God made flesh, a human who was turned into a divinity, a "super-human" with some divine features…or what?

Scholars have long argued that the Gospel of John -- named after Jesus' disciple John the Son of Zebedee -- was in fact written by someone else. Only later in Christian tradition was it ascribed to John. In that view, the author himself is not a "forger" -- that is, he did not claim to be a famous person knowing he was someone else. The book was *anonymous*: the author never names himself and so can't be blamed for later readers mistaking his identity. But in fact *is* there evidence that the author wanted his readers to think he was one of Jesus' closest disciples, and that he left hints for them in the book. If so -- and if he wasn't who he intimated he was -- isn't John a forgery?

Many people do not realize just how infrequently Paul mentions the sayings of Jesus himself. And scholars can't agree why he doesn't quote Jesus more. Did Paul not know what Jesus taught? How could he not know? Did he think it wasn't important? Wasn't relevant? Was misleading? Moreover, if we compare what Jesus taught with what Paul taught -- are we even dealing with the same religion. These are some of most important issues confronting a historical understanding of the New Testament and early Christianity.

It has long been said among historical scholars that Christianity is not the religion *of* Jesus but the religion *about* him. In this view, Jesus was a Jewish preacher who urged his fellow Jews to repent of their sins and turn back to God by observing what he demanded of them, so they could enter the coming Kingdom. But Christians did not think repentance and obedience could bring salvation at all. It was the death and resurrection of Jesus that mattered. Moreover, it is often said that Paul was the one who transformed Jesus' gospel about the coming Kingdom into a gospel of Jesus' death and resurrection. Is that true? Wouldn't that mean that Paul and Jesus had different religions? And if so, then isn't Paul, rather than Jesus, the Founder of Christianity?

The Gospel of John is one of the most puzzling books of the New Testament, especially when it comes to understanding its view of Jews and Judaism. On one hand, Jesus is clearly described as a Jew who understands and teaches the law of Moses and who keeps Jewish customs and festivals. On the other hand, the Gospel condemns Jews, makes them guilty for the execution of Jesus, and even declares that their "father" is not Abraham, let alone God, but the Devil. How can one book so fully embrace Judaism and yet condemn it. And importantly, is this kind of vitriolic opposition to Jews and Judaism appropriately called "anti-semitism"? The answer will surprise many listeners.

One of the claims consistently made by Christian apologists is that the apostles who declared that they themselves had seen Jesus after he had been raised from the dead MUST have been telling the truth -- since they all died for their belief. Someone may die for the truth, but who would die for a lie? And ALL of them? That seems completely implausible. Therefore the disciples really were witnesses to the resurrection. In this episode we consider this claim by examining its unquestioned assumption: is it actually *true* that the apostles were all martyred for their faith? How do we know? How *could* we know? In fact, what do we know about martyrdom within Christianity at all in the first two centuries? How often did it occur? And were Christians martyred for saying that Jesus was raised from the dead?

In this episode Bart discusses what we can know about early Christian martyrdom -- what sources of information we have and whether they are reliable, issues never even broached by the apologists who raise the issue in the first place.

Historical scholars for over a century have maintained that Jesus predicted that the end of history as we know it was to come in his own generation. Conservative Christians -- laypeople and scholars alike -- have insisted that this is a complete mis-portrayal of Jesus. And many people -- possibly most? -- believe that if Jesus really did preach this message, not only was he obviously wrong but also Christianity cannot possibly be true. A Jesus who was *demonstrably* mistaken about a central element of his preaching could not be a prophet of God, let alone the Savior of the world.

In this episode we consider the issue and its implication: did Jesus proclaim the imminent end of the world? If so, can Christian faith even be possible, let alone reasonable?

In this episode Bart interviews Ukrainian theologian Mikhail Abakumov, in exile in Poland and involved with humanitarian efforts dealing with other refugees, about how the book of Revelation is interpreted by conservative Ukrainian Christians, who believe that "the prophecies are now being fulfilled." That, of course, has long been the view of American evangelicals and fundamentalists, but standard Ukrainian understandings of what the "signs" are and where they are leading to (and America's role in the coming End) are radically different from what anyone would expect over here.

This is fascinating material, coming from someone deeply affected by the Russian invasion and intimately familiar with the religious response of the Ukrainian church.

The (considerable) vitriol directed against Bart by theologically conservative Christians is (easily) matched by what he gets from critics on the opposite end of the spectrum --"mythicists" who insist not only that the New Testament is filled with legendary material but that Jesus himself was, literally, a myth: he never existed.

In this episode Bart will explain why -- whatever else you might want to say about Jesus of Nazareth -- historians of all stripes do not doubt that at the least Jesus was a first-century Jewish teacher who was crucified by the Romans.

Are the mythicists -- intent on disproving Christianity -- simply shooting themselves in the foot by taking their skepticism too far?

The Gospel of Mark is completely underrated by most modern readers, who typically consider it a condensed version of Matthew or Luke -- a nuts-and-bolts no-nonsense account of what Jesus said and did with no literary flair. Oh boy are THEY ever wrong.

In this episode Bart explains why Mark is not only his favorite Gospel but also his favorite book of the Bible, a book with subtleties, nuances, and intricacies from start to end that most people simply never see and that make all the difference for understanding its message. This is a brilliant account of Jesus' life, one of the most intriguing books to come to us from early Christianity.

Most people think that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute. Others say she was Jesus' closest disciple (and the Gospels have covered it up).

Yet others go even further to suggest they had an intimate relationship -- or even were married! Is any of that possible?

If possible, is it true? In this episode we look at what we can actually know about Mary Magdalene and her relationship with Jesus.

A person's reasons for deconversion from Christianity to agnosticism or atheism is something that many christens speculate wildly about, misunderstand, or simply refuse to believe, but those reasons can be varied and complex.

In this episode, Bart talks to Megan about why he de-converted, how he found meaning after religion, and why he does what he does.

One of the few ways people today actually appeal to the Old Testament is to condemn same-sex sexual relations (while they ignore much of everything else it says).

Such people usually take it as obvious that the New Testament condemns them as well. But DOES the Bible condemn homosexuality? As it turns this a lively debate among biblical scholars, and the dominant view among critical scholars is not at all what you might expect. Their reasons for holding this view is even less widely known.

In this episode I interview biblical scholar Jeffrey Siker (PhD, Princeton Theological Seminary) long time professor of New Testament (who is also an ordained Presbyterian minister) who explains why in fact the Bible does NOT condemn homosexuality.

Revelation is the least read and most misunderstood book of the New Testament. Many readers wonder why it is in there at all.

In this episode we consider the debates about Revelation in the early Church, seeing why numerous church leaders found it offensive (for reasons modern readers would not expect) and why eventually it came to be included in the canon anyway.

In this episode we consider the portrayal of God in the book of Revelation. Is he a God of love who seeks what is best for those he created? Or at least for those who seek to obey him? Does the book of Revelation provide hope for those who are unjustly suffering now? Or is God instead portrayed as a God of wrath and vengeance who shows no mercy on his enemies? If so, is this the God of love and forgiveness preached by Jesus himself? Would Jesus recognize John of Patmos as one of his followers?

It is surprising that many scholars say that Revelation is not a violent book and was never meant to be. In their judgment, the controlling image of the narrative is Christ as the innocent "lamb who was slain," a non-violent Son of God who experienced violence inflicted by others.

The book then teaches that non-violence is the way to eternal glory, and those who practice violence on earth will, in the end, experience what they themselves promote. Is that a plausible reading of the book?

In this episode I argue that in fact it is precisely wrong, and that Revelation explicitly portrays a violent Christ who wreaks blood vengeance. Is that the Christ of the Gospels?

Does the Book of Revelation predict the end of the world? The book has been used repeatedly over the years and centuries to predict (and in some cases, re-predict) the end of the world. Yet here we still are. Maybe the problem is not that doomsday-readers of Revelation get this or that detail wrong (and so miscaluculate the date) but that book was never meant to be a blueprint for what would happen in our future. In this episode we look at how historians understand the book as a "revelation" meant for its own time, not as guidepost for what lies ahead of us now, 2000 years later.

One of the greatest archaeological discoveries of modern time was a cache of Christian books that seem very strange indeed to anyone accustomed to the books of the New Testament -- including the most famous non-canonical Gospel of all, the Gospel of Thomas.

In this interview I discuss with New Testament scholar the intriguing characteristics of this book that claims to present the truth of Jesus' "secret teachings" that alone can bring eternal life.

Christianity started out as a tiny sect of Jewish followers of Jesus, but within 400 years it was the dominant religion of the Roman world and a major political force. It had a rough start, however; Romans did not accept this new movement with open arms. But was Christianity an illegal religion? Did the followers of Jesus have to hide in the catacombs? Did the emperors consider it a threat to the social order? In this episode we talk about the early reception of Christianity, in particular the persecutions, in order to explode many of the myths one hears about the new faith in its early days.

You think Christianity is diverse today? Fundamentalists? Roman Catholics? Mormons? Methodists? Branch Davidians? Episcopalians? Russian Orthodox? And on and on?

In fact, the wide varieties of Christian today pale in comparison with what you could find in antiquity, with beliefs that virtually defy belief. How could people with views that seem so far beyond the pale (that there were many gods? That the Creator was evil? That Christ never died?) call themselves Christian and claim they were following the teachings of Jesus? That's what we discuss in today's podcast.

Most readers completely overlook Matthew's portrayal of Jesus as the Jewish Messiah who fulfills the Jewish Law AND insists that his followers do so as well. (What? Jesus' followers have to KEEP the Law of Moses?) But Matthew conveys the message loud and clear in some passages and with brilliant ingenuity in others, including some that are widely familiar but not widely understood. Think: the magi.

If there is one thing most people are certain of about the Bible, it is that it describes how after people die they will be rewarded with heaven or tormented in hell. But does it? As it turns out ... well, you'll be surprised by what the Bible actually says. And once your surprise fades, you'll probably want to know: where do the Christian ideas of the afterlife come from?

There are hundreds of Bible translations available – but why so many and why are they different? When a biblical scholar decides to do a translation, which manuscripts do they choose to use, how to they know what the ancient words meant, and do religious considerations get in the way of accurate translations. Are there places where no one can agree on what the original text says? Jennifer Knust is a prominent New Testament scholar who helped lead the committee that recently produced an updated edition of the New Revised Standard Version. Here she discusses with Bart the problems and pitfalls of biblical translation.