← Misquoting Jesus with Bart Ehrman
Loading summary
Transcript70 lines
- [00:00]
Bart Ehrman
Are you a parent looking for an independent, flexible and tuition free school in Oregon? Evergreen Virtual Academy offers a dynamic and tuition free public education with Oregon certified teachers for PK through 12th grade students. Your student gets a laptop, live class sessions and the ability to chart their own unique path. Plus in person events and social activities all year. When school has no walls, learning has no limits. Learn more and enroll now. Evergreen Virtual Academy evergreenvirtual.org if I start
- [00:31]
Megan Lewis
talking about the law, many of you are going to have certain ideas pop into your heads. A police force, trials, prison. But what if I'm talking about the law in a religious sense? Maybe you'd think of the Ten Commandments, failing women or practices of abstinence. Today, Dr. Bart Ehrman talks about the Jewish law as presented in the New Testament, exploring whether it's possible to even keep it and what agenda the New Testament authors had when they were writing about it. Welcome to Ms. Quoting Jesus with Bart Ehrman. The only show where a six time New York Times best selling author and world renowned Bible scholar uncovers the many fascinating little known facts about the New Testament, the historical Jesus and the rise of Christianity. I'm your host, Megan Lewis. Let's begin. So as I just said, today we're going to be talking about whether it's possible to keep the Jewish law and what New Testament authors tell us about it. Our bonus segment, so please stay tuned for that is going to be Outsmart Barth where an audience member tries to test the limits of Barth's biblical knowledge. We're also going to have more information on Hugo Mendez Introduction to the New Testament course. He's taught a couple of really great classes so far, including the New Testament History and Faith and From Scrolls to Scripture, how the New Testament Was Handed Down. His next lecture for those who are interested is tomorrow and he's going to be looking at the Gospel of Mark as an historical document. So we'll have a bit more information about that coming up. Before we get to all that though. But hello, how are you doing today?
- [02:10]
Bart Ehrman
Yep, I'm doing absolutely okay. We got, we got nailed with a winter storm this last weekend, but we got through it fine. So it's absolutely, absolutely fine. So the problem in my part of the world is that we don't mind snow, but ice is a bad deal around here and we get a lot of ice storms and we got some with it that knocks down the power lines because everything's above ground. So but we, we, we survived it. How are you doing?
- [02:33]
Megan Lewis
Similarly, I think we had the Same storm, actually. Our power was fine. I think most of our power lines are buried. And the children had a fantastic time. And our driveway is like a V shape, so it goes steep down and then steep up. So Josh and I spent a lot of time shoveling and gritting and salting it. And then it snowed again.
- [02:57]
Bart Ehrman
There it goes.
- [02:58]
Megan Lewis
So, yes, everyone had a great time. We got our respective workouts in, which is always exciting.
- [03:05]
Bart Ehrman
That's good. Yeah.
- [03:06]
Megan Lewis
Now we're going to be talking about the Jewish law, whether it's possible to, to keep it and what the New Testament authors have to say about it. I wanted to open by asking when you first started looking at how the New Testament presented Jewish law.
- [03:23]
Bart Ehrman
Well, you know, I suppose it was as soon as I started getting interested in the New Testament when I was young and became a more committed Christian. I wanted to read more about the New Testament. And I, and I, you know, at the time, I guess I had heard from others and picked up on my own that the Jewish, Jewish law was a big problem. And that as I think like a lot of other Christians, at least conservative evangelical Christians, maybe all Christians, I learned that the law of the Jews was given by God, but that it was impossible for anybody to keep. It's just way too detailed, way too many laws, and there's no way anybody can keep it. And that's why you need Christ, is because God knew nobody could keep it. And since they couldn't keep it, they couldn't keep, gain salvation. And so the fact that everybody failed to keep the law and had to fail to keep the law is the reason God sent Christ into the world. And so the Christian, the Christian faith was meant to resolve the problem that Jews had that they had to earn salvation and couldn't do it.
- [04:35]
Megan Lewis
So I had another question written down, but your answer has prompted a different one. Did the Jews of the time know that they had a problem keeping the law, or is this something that are people decided for them?
- [04:48]
Bart Ehrman
Yeah, well, kind of. Other people decided this for them, I think because they, you know, within the Jewish tradition, historically and still today, the law that God gave to Moses on Mount Sinai is seen as the greatest good that you could imagine and that it's a joy to keep. And I think the logic is precisely the opposite of what I learned when I was young. The logic of the law is not that God requires you to keep the law so that you can be saved. That's how I thought Jews thought about the law. They didn't. The law was not given. So that you could be saved. The law was given because you were saved. And the logic is that God chose the people of Israel and he saved them from their slavery in Egypt. And immediately afterwards, he gave them his law so that they would know how to worship him and how to behave toward one another. And, you know, a lot of people in the world wonder, you know, people are religious, want to know, you know, what's the best way to worship and serve God. And just about everybody wonders, you know, what. What should I do to behave? You know, what is, you know, what is the right way to live. And in the Jewish tradition, God has told you both things. I mean, the ruler of the universe has like, laid it out for you. I mean, how good can it be? The things you want to know are given to you. And so this was. It was. It was seen as a source of joy to keep it. And so that. So the idea that, you know, you had to keep it as this burden and nobody could do it and it brought guilt. That is a, that's a later formulation put on, on the Jewish law, not. Not one that emerges out of the law itself.
- [06:41]
Megan Lewis
Now, as I said in my introduction, when we talk about the law in our society, it gives a certain set of ideas. We've got police officers, punitive justice, lawyers, trials, all of that kind of thing. What does it mean? Because it's a very different meaning than when we talk about Jewish law in the historical context that we're discussing.
- [07:02]
Bart Ehrman
Well, it's a very important point that we have to put it in its own context because, you know, in our context, you know, you break a law and you go to jail kind of thing. And it's a very complicated judicial apparatus that we have today. The Jewish law needs to be put in its own context, which is not 21st century America. And scholars for a long time have recognized what the context is for the giving of the Jewish law because they've discovered a number of. Of ancient texts outside of Israel, but related to what's going on in Israel that reveal pretty clearly what this law was all about. So there are these. In your part of the world, in the ancient near east, there are a number of treaties that have emerged that we've discovered especially connected with the Hittites. Hittites were these people who were around and they were an advanced civilization. And there are a number of treaties that Hittites made with other nations that are. They're called suzerain treaties because the a Lord and overlord is a suzerain. And the idea is that the hittites would conquer another people and they'd make a treaty with them. And these, and we have a number of these treaties. And the way they work, work is they appear in several steps. The way the treaty is worded, it begins with the Hittites naming who they are and who the other persons are, the other nation is, and indicates something about the history of their relationship to one another. The Hittite guys had now conquered this other nation. And then they give stipulations for, for what they expect this other nation now to do. That they have, that they have an overlord. They, they indicate that there will be really benefits if they do this to them. This will be beneficial to them. If they don't do it, they're gonna, it's gonna, they're gonna incur curses. It's going to be bad news for them. And then there are things about where you store the covenant and disagreement and things like that. So if you look at the Hebrew Bible and you look at how God gives the law to Moses and Israel, it sounds almost exactly like a suzerainty treaty. When God starts giving the law, this is like in Exodus, chapter 19. They've come out of Egypt, they've escaped Egypt through the Red Sea and the Sea of Reeds, and God's now giving the law. He says, I brought you out of your slavery in Egypt and brought you to myself with eagle wings. And now this is what I'm going to stipulate you, you should do. And so it's like the sovereign telling the, the one who, who's now, you know, submissive to the Lord what they need to do. And then you have the list of you right off the bat. You get the Ten Commandments, but then you get everything else. And, and then, and throughout you get this thing, you know, you do this, you'll be blessed. If you don't, you'll be cursed. And, and so the idea is you've already submitted to the lordship of God and he's already saved you. And now these are the stipulations. And so that's that context. So it isn't like the modern judicial system in America at all. It's set up in an ancient way of understanding things.
- [10:24]
Megan Lewis
So I think that a lot of modern laws are designed to keep society functioning in a certain way, protect its members, protect certain institutions. What was the purpose of the Jewish law handed down by Yahweh?
- [10:37]
Bart Ehrman
Well, that was certainly one of them. I think if you look at all the laws in the Old Testament, so the law begins, as I said, with the Ten Commandments in Exodus, chapter 20. And you have laws then to the very end of the book of Exodus. And the entire book of Leviticus is filled with laws and numbers going up to Numbers chapter 10 and goes from Exodus 20 to Numbers 10. So it's a lot of chapters of laws. But if you look at the whole thing, you look at all the laws, there really. There are three functions for these law. One are laws about how to worship God. And worshiping God entails things like how you perform sacrifices to God and what special days you observe. Observing the Sabbath, for example, and observing festivals. And this is how you do it. And these are how you do the sacrifices and things. So you have these things about how to worship God. The second is you have how to relate in community to one another. And so if, you know, if. If you've got to have community law, then so you shouldn't steal from your neighbor, you shouldn't commit adultery, you shouldn't murder. But also there are. There are laws that are not just kind of telling you what to do and what not to do. There are also laws like if this happens, then this is the punishment. You know, if your ox gores your neighbor's ox and kills the neighbor's ox, then this is the penalty that you have to pay for your o misbehaving. You know, it's like. And so you have. So these laws about this, you know what happens, what's conditional upon certain actions. So you get. Those are all community laws. So you have laws about how to worship God, community laws. And then you have things that you might call purity laws about how the people of God are to remain pure before God, ritually pure. So in. This is something we don't really have in our context very much at all, but it made sense in the ancient world that, that in order to worship God, you've got to be pure. And there are things that make you impure, and there are things that are not sinful. They just are things that happen to you. If you touch a corpse, you are ritually impure. And there needs to be some way to purify yourself so that you're not in an impure state when you worship God. If a woman menstruates, that's impurity, and she needs to have a ritual to purifies it. If man has a sexual emission of semen, then that's a ritual impurity. And so you have things, things that make you richly impure. And you need to have laws to help you know how to become pure again. So you can worship God in a pure state. So that, that kind of thing. We don't really have so much, but, but those are the three kinds of things. And there's nothing particularly crazily difficult about any of them. They're just, you know, this is how this nation is going to be organized.
- [13:28]
Megan Lewis
Thank you. And if anyone broke any of those laws, would there be consequences? Is there some kind of prison system? What, what would have happened?
- [13:37]
Bart Ehrman
There's no prison system. The, there, there, there are absolutely punishments for some of the laws, especially these ones that are sort of conditional things that I've said, you know, if this happens, then that has to happen. And they range, there, there's a range of penalties. Some of them have the death penalty. You know, if you murder somebody, you, you know, that's, there's capital punishment and in places there's capital punishment for things that would not seem like things that should be capital punishment. I mean, if you strike your, if you hit your, your father in the face, you know, if you strike him, that's a, there's a death penalty for that. If you commit sorcery, there's a death penalty for that. There, so there are death penalties for things, but there's also, there are a lot of fines that go on too. You know, if, if, if your ox does this, this is the fine that you pay. If, if two people are fighting and one of them accidentally in the middle of the fight, wounds a pregnant woman who miscarries, this is the penalty that's paid. And so you have, you have, you know, fines. So a lot of fines and some death sentences.
- [14:50]
Megan Lewis
Thank you. We are going to take a very brief break, but we will be back shortly to talk about how the New Testament authority portray Jewish laws and why they say what they do. Jesus and Paul are the two most important figures in the history of Christianity. But did they even agree with one another? Join acclaimed scholar Bart Ehrman in his online course Paul and the Great Divide, where you'll dive deep into the complex relationship between Paul and Jesus, explore their differing views on crucial issues, and uncover the profound impact of their teachings on the early Christian faith. In this eight lesson course, you'll gain valuable insights into the historical context of Jesus and Paul's beliefs, their views on salvation, and their understanding of the Jewish law. Don't miss out on this unique opportunity to enrich your understanding of these influential figures. Visit Bart ehrman.com Paul to learn more or sign up today and remember to use discount code MJ podcast for a special offer. Once again, that's Bart ehrman.com Paul with a discount code mjpodcast so before the break, we talked a lot about exactly what the Jewish law is, kind of how it compares and contrasts to what we might understand as modern law. I wanted to start this segment by asking how the authors of the New Testament differed in their views on Jewish law, or do we see a relatively coherent depiction of it?
- [16:23]
Bart Ehrman
I'd say you have different views. A lot of the New Testament authors don't deal with it at all. They just think that Christ is the way of salvation and that the law was given to Jews to tell Jews how to function in their world, but that since many of the followers of Jesus are no longer Jews, that it's more or less irrelevant, relevant. Some authors see the law as. I think probably all the authors in some way or another see the laws of the Law of Moses as anticipating Jesus. Not in the sense that I learned when I was young that you know that you need Jesus precisely because you can't keep the law. But it predicts Jesus in many ways. But, but apart from the. Apart from people not dealing with it much, you do get different views and radically different views. I think that the view presented in the Gospel of Matthew, for example, is very different from the view that you find in the writings of Paul. So much so that I'm not sure they would have agreed. The basic story is that in Matthew's Gospel, Jesus insists that his followers have to keep the law. He didn't come to abolish it, he came to fulfill it. And his followers have to keep it better than the scribes and Pharisees do, better than the really religious folk among the Jews. You've got to keep the law, Paul says explicitly, especially about Gentiles. You don't have to keep the law. In fact, you shouldn't try to keep the law with regard to things like circumcision and keeping kosher. And you shouldn't try to do that, because if you do, that shows you don't understand that Christ is the way of salvation, not the law. And so I think this is probably the biggest contrast. A view represented by Matthew and a view represented by Paul.
- [18:23]
Megan Lewis
Do any of the other Gospel writers have any. Anything else to offer in trying to understand how Jesus viewed the Jewish law?
- [18:33]
Bart Ehrman
Well, you know, throughout. Throughout all the Gospels, Jesus, of course, quotes scripture in a positive way, but he. So the opposition. Let me put. Yeah, this is kind of an important point that just occurred to me. Part of the opposition to the law in the Gospels generally is an Opposition to a certain way of interpreting the law. When Jesus gets in conflicts, it's almost never about the law itself. It's about how Pharisees are interpreting the law. And so many people think that Jesus goes through the gospels and he's always breaking the law because it doesn't matter anymore. And it's not true. The most pointed case is Jesus breaking the Sabbath. People say, well, Jesus didn't care about the Sabbath. He's breaking it the whole time. And actually it's not true. If you look at what happens, Jesus will do something on the Sabbath and the Pharisees will object to it. You can't do that on the Sabbath. And Jesus will point out that actually what he's doing is helping people. And that's okay, according to the law. They have a different interpretation of what it means to keep the law. Specifically, what does it mean to keep the Sabbath law? And we don't see this today because we're not in the ancient Jewish context. But in the ancient Jewish context, there were all sorts of debates about what it means to keep the law. Like, what does it mean to keep the Sabbath. So the big problem with the law for most of the New. For the New Testament writers who deal with it, and for the Pharisees and for everybody else, I guess, is that the law is often very vague in places. It doesn't go down to a great level of specificity. So if it says, don't work on the Sabbath, okay, fair enough. Don't work on the Sabbath, great. But what's work? And it depends, you know, is shoveling your sidewalk because of the snow work on the Sabbath? So you can't do that on a Sunday? Well, on a Saturday? Well, some, some Jews would say, well, yes, you can't. Well, they weren't shoveling snow. But they say, but, you know, you, you. You can't do this on the Sabbath because that's work. And others say, well, actually, that's not work. And so they can. They have debates about it. Jesus gets in conflicts about the Sabbath not because he's actually breaking what the law says, but because he's violating what the Pharisees think the law says. How they interpret the law. Law. So there's no place in the. I don't think there's any place in the Gospels, in the Matthew, Mark and Luke, where Jesus actually, you know, violates what the law tells you to do. So the other gospels, not, you know, not as much as Matthew. I will point out that in the Gospel of John, where Jesus is talking to Jews, he often will say so, and so has said in your law. That's a rather strange thing for a Jew to say, but it's because by the time you get to the Gospel of John, Jesus is being portrayed as somebody who's over against Jews. And so, like, he can talk about your law, even though he himself is a Jew.
- [21:30]
Megan Lewis
If Jesus is coming into conflict with the Pharisees over their particular interpretation of the law, how does he seem to think people should be following it?
- [21:39]
Bart Ehrman
Well, okay, so this is the thing in Matthew, this is really a key thing in Matthew. So there's this man who comes up to Jesus, and this is in Mark as well. But Matthew has the story where this man comes up to Jesus and says, what must I do to have eternal life, Life. And Jesus says, keep the Commandments.
- [21:59]
Megan Lewis
What?
- [22:01]
Bart Ehrman
He doesn't say, believe in me, you know, don't believe. Don't accept my death and resurrection that are going to happen or anything. Think I'm the one who came down from heaven, you know, don't. It's nothing about me. It's keep the commandments. And so Jesus certainly thought in, in Matthew, and I think in the other gospels too, that you should, you should, you know, if you're Jewish especially, you should keep the law. But then in Matthew later, Jesus gets asked, well, you know, what really is the law all about? And Jesus says, the greatest commandment of the law is, you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and strength. So that's From Deuteronomy, chapter 6. And love God with everything. And he says, and there's a second law that's just as important. Second commandment, you shall love your neighbor as yourself. Leviticus 19:18. And then he says, on these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. So Jesus, I think this actually goes back to Jesus, this kind of concept. It's also found in his statement of the Golden Rule, that you should do to other people what you want them to do to you. And he says, for this is the law and the prophets. And so he thought that actually behaving in loving ways toward God and toward others is what the law is really about. And it's not so much about how much you should tithe or what sacrifices you should perform or, you know, or which way you observe the Sabbath. It's about taking care of human needs. And so he saw that as a fulfillment of the law. And he wasn't alone in that. There are other Jewish teachers who thought the same thing.
- [23:40]
Megan Lewis
So if Jesus is seemingly viewing the law as something that you should be keeping. It is possible to keep it.
- [23:48]
Bart Ehrman
Why?
- [23:48]
Megan Lewis
And, or maybe how do we get this idea that the Jewish law is amazingly hard to keep and it's just, it's not possible.
- [23:56]
Bart Ehrman
Well, I think a lot of is, is that Christian readers read the book of Leviticus and say, man, you got to be kidding me. Really? That's a law. And so like, you know, it's true of just like almost anything in the modern world. You read some other nations laws and you think really that's the law. What are you talking about? And there, you know, there's nothing particularly overly complicated about the Jewish law. It is nothing as complicated as American law. I was reading the other day that there are 1,091,000 federal regulations, just federal law. Forget like the state law and your city's laws and things. You're talking over a million laws. And you know, in the, in the, the old testament there's 613 of them. So 613 versus a million, take your pick. And you know, it's not there. It's not impossible to avoid murdering somebody. You know, you can, you can decide not to do that. And you know, if you're, if you happen to own an ox and it gores your neighbor, you know, you could probably keep that from happening if you want to. So virtually, just, virtually everything in there is keepable. I think what happens is that I don't know that it started with Paul, but in some sense it may have started with Paul. Paul is trying to, in Paul's letters, Paul's trying to understand why Christ came. And why especially why did Christ have to die and be raised from the dead? Paul saw that as a fulfillment of God's plan from the very beginning. And he, he thinks that it's necessary because everybody sins and everybody then needs to have an atoning sacrifice for their sins. And Christ provides that atoning sacrifice. So even though it's possible to keep the law to the letter, that doesn't mean you won't sin against God. So it's a little complicated for many Christians. But Paul, Paul's explicit himself in the book of Philippians. He says that talking about his past before he became a believer in Jesus, he says, with respect to the righteousness that's found in the law, I was found blameless. Explicitly says that he was blameless before the law. Well, how can you be blameless before the law? Well, because you keep it. But one of the things about the law is that if you mess up sometimes that's what the sacrifices are for. One of the things sacrifices are for. The law itself provides stipulations for people when they mess up. And so one of the mysteries with Paul is figuring out why Christ had to die if he already had stipulations to cover misdemeanors. But he does. But since he thinks that Christ is the answer, then Judaism cannot be the answer. Because if Judaism was the answer, then you wouldn't need Christ. And so Paul's kind of reasoning backwards where he realizes that Christ is God's chosen one who died, he must have died for the sins of the world. And if he died for the sins of the world, so God raised him from the dead, then you need Christ. If you need Christ, that's all you need. If that's all you need, you don't need to keep the law. At least, at least if you're not a Jewish. For Paul.
- [27:18]
Megan Lewis
So if Paul has kind of solved this problem for himself by making it impossible or unnecessary maybe to keep the Jewish law, how do we see this rhetoric being continued by other early Christian writers? And maybe what do they gain from it?
- [27:35]
Bart Ehrman
So what ends up happening is because Paul says that salvation comes through Christ, not through the law. This. Let me elaborate for a second, that it's not clear that he's telling Jews that they don't have to keep the law. He's telling Gentiles don't convert to Judaism because converting to Judaism isn't what matters. What matters is accepting Christ's death and resurrection. And he himself does say that when he's with Jews, he's a Jew, and when he's with Gentiles, he's a Gentile. Which means he broke the law when it was convenient for his mission, when it helped his mission to convert people, people. And so the law is not the major thing for him. But what ends up happening is so many more people convert who are Gentiles than Jews. And they see that the Jewish law can't bring salvation. They see that Jews have rejected their own Messiah. In their opinion, there begins this kind of anti Jewish element within Christianity. I don't think Paul himself is anti Jewish. I really don't think that at all. But I do think that later on then people started saying, well, look, you know, Jews got this law and you know, it's ridiculous, they can't. And so the law itself becomes an object of attack by Christians. And soon you hear Christians saying that it's a real burden to keep the law, and Jews hate having to do it, but they've got to do it. And if they would just see that Christ solves the problem. So in effect, this whole thing leads to a kind of anti Judaism within Christianity, where the Jewish faith is maligned and Jews who keep it are maligned, and it leads eventually to very nasty things. In the history of anti Judaism, are
- [29:13]
Megan Lewis
there any texts in the Old Testament that kind of help augment our views on this at all?
- [29:19]
Bart Ehrman
Throughout the Hebrew Bible, especially in the prophets, but also in the book of Deuteronomy, there are a number of passages that talk about how God gets angry when you violate his law and the kind of curses that come as a result of violating the law. And in the prophets, you have these kind of wholesale statements about how the people of Israel have broken the law. And so these prophets, the prophets of the Old Testament, are not predicting what's going to happen in hundreds of years when the Messiah comes. If you just read what the prophets say, Isaiah or Amos or any of them, when you read them, it's clear they're talking to their own situation. And they're trying to explain why Israel is experiencing so many problems, including military defeat, if God is supposed to protect them, them. And their explanation is because, you know, God gave you the law and you didn't keep it. And so Christians then end up picking that up and saying, see, Israel never keeps its law. Jews don't keep the law, Jews can't keep the law. And it kind of leads to this point of view. But at the same time, even like in Matthew himself, Matthew cites the law to show that Jesus fulfills the law. And so you have this uneasy tension within Christianity that on one hand you have people saying, you don't have to keep the law, but yet they keep the law as part of their scriptures. And, you know, so it's this kind of uneasy balance between, well, what is our relationship to the Old Testament? What's our relationship to the law? And as I was saying, I think, you know, Matthew and Paul have slight. They have different answers to that with respect to salvation itself, because Matthew thinks keeping the law is all part of following Jesus, and Paul does not.
- [31:03]
Megan Lewis
So one final question to kind of wrap things up a little bit when we're looking at the New Testament authors, what is it that makes Matthew and Paul take these different views and different approaches to the Jewish law?
- [31:17]
Bart Ehrman
Well, I, you know, I think that, I think that Matthew is probably writing for a, a Jewish audience, and he's mainly a Jewish audience, I suppose his community is probably mixed, Jew and gentile, but he's especially concerned about Jews who have become followers of Jesus who don't think the law is important, important anymore, possibly because they've read Paul or heard about Paul's views. Because Paul thinks that following the law has no bearing on salvation. It's following Christ that has bearing on salvation. So Matthew thinks that it is important for Jews, apparently, to keep the law. He says that Christ and Jesus himself says only in Matthew that I've not come to abolish the law, I've come to fulfill it. And he goes on to say that his followers have to keep the law better than the scribes and Pharisees. And so that's in the beginning of the Sermon on the Mount, chapter five. But then later in, later in chapter 23, Jesus tells his disciples that the Scribes and Pharisees pronounce on the law and that what they say is right and you should do what the Pharisees say. The problem with the Pharisees is they don't do what they say. They don't practice what they preach. That's an astounding statement in Matthew 23:2, that you should keep what the Pharisees tell you to do. And so it's not that Matthew thinks that's what will bring salvation. He agrees with Paul that the death and resurrection of Jesus are what brings salvation. But Jews are still bound to keep the law because it's the law God gave gave to the Jews. Paul has a much more relaxed view, and he absolutely does not say you have to keep the law, let alone the way the Pharisees had interpreted it. And so, you know, it's a hard question. If Matthew and Paul really had to work out a kind of consensus statement about the law, they'd probably get some things in common. But the idea of whether you have to keep it or not as a follower of Jesus is a tricky one. And in part, it's tricky because when Matthew, when Matthew says you have to keep the law better than the Scribes and Pharisees and such, he actually makes it harder to follow the law. The law says you're not supposed to murder. And Matthew doesn't contradict that by saying, yes, you should murder, Matthew makes it harder. He says, well, when it says don't murder, it actually means don't even get angry with somebody. When it says don't commit adultery, it means don't even lust after a woman in your heart. And so he's making it more difficult, not less difficult. And when I was a Christian, I thought that meant well. Of course, he's just showing it's impossible. How can you not get angry? How can you not commit lust? I mean, like it's. He's making it impossible so that you need Jesus. But that's not what Matthew says at all. Matthew assumes it's possible and that. That. And so. And so you have to do it. And Paul just thinks that isn't. Like, that isn't what matters at all. And if you think it matters, you're misunderstanding. So I think Paul would think Matthew's misunderstanding.
- [34:23]
Megan Lewis
Is Matthew anticipating that people would take this very literally, or is it an illustration of you should follow the spirit of the law, not just the letter of it?
- [34:35]
Bart Ehrman
Yeah, well, probably both. I mean, I think that, you know, we don't know what Matthew's thinking, obviously, because we can't get into his head. But he doesn't say, yeah, I'm just kidding. But so the thing about, like on the Sermon on the Mount, you have this passage called the antithesis where Jesus will quote one of the laws and then give his interpretation of it. And an antithesis is a contrary statement. So you've heard it said, you shall not commit murder. But I say to you. And so he's giving a kind of a contrary statement. It's not a contradictory statement, but it's like a, it's, it's standing over against the other thing. And so I say, do. You should not even get angry. And that is getting to the heart of the law. I mean, the reason you murder somebody is because you're really ticked off about something. Well, don't get ticked off about something and you won't murder. And so it's getting to the very heart of what the. The law is. So when the law says an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, Jesus says, turn the other cheek. Now people often say, well, okay, so, you know, he's reversing that law because. But no, he's actually not. An eye for an eye, a tooth for tooth means that the punishment should, should be appropriate to the crime. So in other words, if somebody knocks out your tooth, you don't lop off their head. And so it's a, it's a, it's. It's a law for mercy and justice. And Jesus then just takes it farther. Not only don't lop off his head, don't even take out his tooth, you know, just. And so he extends the law of mercy even further. And so I think that is trying to get to the very heart of the law. Because for Matthew, the very heart of the law is that you should love one another and treat them the way you want them to treat you. And if you do that, you will keep the law. And interestingly, and again, a little weirdly, Paul says something similar. Paul says that you should love your neighbor as yourself because that fulfills the law. Law. And you think, well, that's a weird thing for Paul to say because he's just been saying you don't have to keep the law. But now he says, love your neighbor. That fulfills the law. And so they all pretty much agree. Jesus, Matthew, Paul, they all pretty much agree that the core of the law is to love. And that becomes the distinctive Christian message.
- [36:58]
Megan Lewis
Then thank you so much Bart. We are out of time for the interview portion of today, but we are going to go to to talk about Hugo Mendez New Testament course. And then following that we have a round of Outsmart bart.
- [37:14]
Bart Ehrman
Welcome to our upcoming Highlights and Events segment where we catch up on Barth's courses, community updates and all the latest news from the Biblical Studies Academy and beyond.
- [37:30]
Megan Lewis
All right, so people who are familiar or have been here for a little while will know that we recently launched this thing called the Biblical Studies Academy and part of that is giving people access to university level lecture courses. We did Mark Goodacre. Well, we didn't. Mark Goodacre did a lecture course on the Synoptic Gospels last year. We currently have Dr. Hugo Mendez teaching An Introduction to the New Testament and he's done some really great lessons already. I gave some titles earlier, the New Testament History and Faith and From Scrolls to Scriptures how the New Testament Was Handed Down. Lecture four is being taught tomorrow. If you feel like signing up for a free 14 day trial of the BSA, you can do that and then watch Hugo's lecture live, catch up with what has already been taught and really see what's going on. And if this is something that you think will suit you. And as a bit of a teaser, I have the description for Wednesday's lecture which is about the Gospel of Mark as an historical document. So in the first century ce, a single writer decided to pen an engaging, fast paced narrative of Jesus life. This book, the Gospel that we now know as Mark, portrays a Jesus who is shockingly secretive, powerful, and even on some level, divine. But who wrote this text? When did this person write it? And where did they write it? In this first lecture on a specific New Testament text, we will become acquainted with the tools scholars use to answer these and other historical questions. And I have to say, the title and the content of this lecture lines up marvellously with our podcast discussion next week. So watch Mark's. Not Mark's. Watch Hugo's lecture. Sorry, too many names in my head. Watch Hugo's lecture, then come back next week and see how we match up. Hopefully we agree. I don't see much disagreement, honestly. You and Hugo have written an entire book on New Testament. So together.
- [39:29]
Bart Ehrman
So we, we have, but we, we do have some disagreements about the synoptic gospel, so. But I don't think we're going to disagree much on Mark because we, yeah, we're, we're side by side on that one.
- [39:40]
Megan Lewis
Well, if that does sound interesting for you, you can sign up for the free trial at bartiman.com forward/BSA. And now a round of Outsmart Bart, which has audience questions designed to test the limits of Bart's biblical knowledge. So if you have questions, you can also submit them@bartllman.com ask Bart and we will get to them as soon as we can. No promises, but we are. We're trying. We're getting through these as fast as possible.
- [40:11]
Bart Ehrman
Dr. Ehrman has written six New York Times best selling book books and holds a PhD from Princeton Theological Seminary. It's not often you'll see him made a fool, but it doesn't hurt to try. It's time for Outsmart Bart.
- [40:32]
Megan Lewis
All right, Bart, are you ready to test the limits of your biblical knowledge?
- [40:36]
Bart Ehrman
Probably not.
- [40:38]
Megan Lewis
Let's give it a go. Okay. First up, what is the only New Testament chapter where the name of Yahweh is acknowledged in most modern English Bibles?
- [40:51]
Bart Ehrman
The name Yahweh. The name Yahweh never appears in the New Testament. So I don't know if they mean acknowledged.
- [41:00]
Megan Lewis
It's not, it's not looking for the actual name, it's looking for a reference to it.
- [41:06]
Bart Ehrman
I watched blows Philippians chapter 2.
- [41:09]
Megan Lewis
The answer the questioner gives is Revelation 19 where it says Alleluia, which means praise Yah.
- [41:17]
Bart Ehrman
Well, Louis also occurs in one of Paul's writings. So I think maybe not Hallelujah. So, yeah, okay. I mean, yeah, in, in Philippians 2, Paul says that God gave Christ the name that is above every name, and that's often thought to be the name Lord. So Yahweh. So okay, I'll accept hallelujah, but hallelujah. Okay, fine,
- [41:52]
Megan Lewis
we're going with it. Second question. In the first edition of the King James Bible in 1611, this is a trick question. Where is the first place that the name Jesus appears?
- [42:09]
Bart Ehrman
Well, I don't know the answer to this, but my Guess is that it's going to be in the book of Joshua.
- [42:13]
Megan Lewis
It says nowhere. The letter J wasn't in common usage in the 1600s.
- [42:22]
Bart Ehrman
Are they saying that in the King James Bible they never use the word
- [42:25]
Megan Lewis
Jesus in the first edition?
- [42:31]
Bart Ehrman
I'll have to look that up. I don't believe it's true, but this person probably did check it out. What, how did they spell it with an I?
- [42:40]
Megan Lewis
I don't know. That that was not. I didn't do any research when I put these in, so I didn't change.
- [42:45]
Bart Ehrman
Well, you know, I've read the King James Bible a lot, but, you know, I'm not sure I read. Read it. Right. Hot off the presses. I'm about that old, but okay. Well, okay. So so far I'm doing well, right?
- [42:58]
Megan Lewis
Perfectly. Number three in Scripture, who fasted for the longest?
- [43:08]
Bart Ehrman
Well, Jesus fasted for 40 days. Elijah had a long fast. I'd say God, because God never eats.
- [43:21]
Megan Lewis
That is a great answer. It's not the answer I have, but that's a fantastic.
- [43:24]
Bart Ehrman
Well, that's okay. It's the right one.
- [43:27]
Megan Lewis
So the answer given is Anna, who is in Luke 2 verses 36 to 38. Her fasting can be measured in decades and not in days.
- [43:37]
Bart Ehrman
No, they're misreading the passage it talks about. Doesn't mean she didn't eat for decades. She, it talks about how she was worship. She was worshiping in the temple for decades after her virginity. But I, Yeah, okay. Well, look, all these listeners who are seeing me get stumped on this need to look all these things up and, and tell me, you know, am I really. Oh, for three. When it says she's. If it says she's fasting for a decade, it doesn't mean she's like not eating for decades. Okay, whatever.
- [44:19]
Megan Lewis
Thank you, audience, for your questions. We'll have more listeners questions appearing next week now. But before we finish for the week, could you just mind, could you just mind. Would you just mind summarizing what we talked about?
- [44:32]
Bart Ehrman
Well, we've been talking about the law of Moses in the view of early Christian authors in the New Testament. And we've talked about what the law is really all about and about how many Christians misunderstand what the Jewish law is all about. But then we wanted to see how did the New Testament authors deal with it. And we've, we've kind of scratched the surface because we've, we've dealt mainly with Matthew and Paul. But the law is an issue for early Christians because they didn't think that that eventually came to be that the law was for Jews and not for Christians. And that would lead to another interesting episode we could do on why they kept the law then in their Bibles if they didn't want to keep it. But basically it was about the law, understand the law in the New Testament Testament.
- [45:17]
Megan Lewis
Audience, thank you all so much for listening. I hope you enjoyed the show. If you did, please subscribe to the podcast to make sure you don't miss future episodes. Remember that you can use the code MJ podcast for a discount on all of Bart's courses over at www.barterman.com. misquoting Jesus is Going to be back Next Week Bart, what are we talking about next time?
- [45:37]
Bart Ehrman
Well, there's this phenomenon in a biblical scholarship, New Testament scholarship called Markan Priority. It's the it's the idea that Mark was prior to all the other gosp and was in fact used by Matthew and Luke. And so we're going to be talking, talking about why, why would anybody think that Mark was the first gospel?
- [45:56]
Megan Lewis
Thank you all and goodbye. This has been an episode of Misquoting Jesus with Bart Ehrman. We'll be back with a new episode next Tuesday, so please be sure to subscribe to our show for free on your favorite podcast listening app or on Bart Ehrman's YouTube channel so you don't miss out. From Bart Ehrman and myself, Megan Lewis, thank you for joining us.