Can You Have Christian Ethics Without Christianity? A Response to Bart Ehrman

During this Easter season, New Testament During this Easter season, New Testament scholar and atheist Bart Ehrman has been scholar and atheist Bart Ehrman has been scholar and atheist Bart Ehrman has been making headlines again. He just released making headlines again. He just released making headlines again. He just released his latest book, "Love Thy Stranger: How his latest book, "Love Thy Stranger: How his latest book, "Love Thy Stranger: How the Teachings of Jesus Transformed the the Teachings of Jesus Transformed the the Teachings of Jesus Transformed the Moral Conscience of the West." Moral Conscience of the West." Moral Conscience of the West." Last week, New York Times columnist Ross Last week, New York Times columnist Ross Last week, New York Times columnist Ross Douthat interviewed Ehrman on his Douthat interviewed Ehrman on his Douthat interviewed Ehrman on his podcast and he asked him about his book podcast and he asked him about his book podcast and he asked him about his book and why he didn't believe in God. and why he didn't believe in God. and why he didn't believe in God. So, I'm going to give you a little bit So, I'm going to give you a little bit So, I'm going to give you a little bit of backstory here. of backstory here. of backstory here. Ehrman grew up in an Episcopalian home Ehrman grew up in an Episcopalian home Ehrman grew up in an Episcopalian home and had a born-again experience when he and had a born-again experience when he and had a born-again experience when he was in high school. And from there, he was in high school. And from there, he was in high school. And from there, he studied the scriptures intensely, studied the scriptures intensely, studied the scriptures intensely, attending Moody Bible College and attending Moody Bible College and attending Moody Bible College and Wheaton College before he did some Wheaton College before he did some Wheaton College before he did some master's degrees and a PhD at Princeton master's degrees and a PhD at Princeton master's degrees and a PhD at Princeton Theological Seminary. Theological Seminary. Theological Seminary. Along the way, he moved into mainline Along the way, he moved into mainline Along the way, he moved into mainline Protestantism. So, he started from with Protestantism. So, he started from with Protestantism. So, he started from with Evangelicalism, kind of more Evangelicalism, kind of more Evangelicalism, kind of more fundamentalist, moved into mainline fundamentalist, moved into mainline fundamentalist, moved into mainline Protestantism, and then slowly stopped Protestantism, and then slowly stopped Protestantism, and then slowly stopped believing in the virgin birth, Jesus' believing in the virgin birth, Jesus' believing in the virgin birth, Jesus' miracles, and the physical resurrection. miracles, and the physical resurrection. miracles, and the physical resurrection. Around 30 years ago, Ehrman Around 30 years ago, Ehrman Around 30 years ago, Ehrman deconstructed completely. And these deconstructed completely. And these deconstructed completely. And these days, he writes and teaches on why the days, he writes and teaches on why the days, he writes and teaches on why the New Testament is riddled with errors, New Testament is riddled with errors, New Testament is riddled with errors, why God cannot exist, and why, despite why God cannot exist, and why, despite why God cannot exist, and why, despite all that, Jesus had some pretty good all that, Jesus had some pretty good all that, Jesus had some pretty good teachings.

teachings. teachings. I'm Sara Zijlstra and I am here to talk I'm Sara Zijlstra and I am here to talk I'm Sara Zijlstra and I am here to talk with Mike Kruger about that. Mike is with Mike Kruger about that. Mike is with Mike Kruger about that. Mike is also a New Testament scholar who teaches also a New Testament scholar who teaches also a New Testament scholar who teaches at Reformed Theological Seminary. His at Reformed Theological Seminary. His at Reformed Theological Seminary. His research has focused on the transmission research has focused on the transmission research has focused on the transmission of the New Testament text and the of the New Testament text and the of the New Testament text and the development of the New Testament canon. development of the New Testament canon. development of the New Testament canon. And one reason he does that is because And one reason he does that is because And one reason he does that is because long ago, he was sitting in a freshman long ago, he was sitting in a freshman long ago, he was sitting in a freshman class at the University of North class at the University of North class at the University of North Carolina and Bart Ehrman was his Carolina and Bart Ehrman was his Carolina and Bart Ehrman was his professor. professor. professor. Mike, can you tell us that story? Mike, can you tell us that story? Mike, can you tell us that story? Yeah, thanks, Sara. Great to be with Yeah, thanks, Sara. Great to be with Yeah, thanks, Sara. Great to be with you. Excited for this conversation. you. Excited for this conversation. you. Excited for this conversation. Yeah, that story was a very formative Yeah, that story was a very formative Yeah, that story was a very formative story for me growing up and I mention it story for me growing up and I mention it story for me growing up and I mention it in my book "Surviving Religion 101." Um, in my book "Surviving Religion 101." Um, in my book "Surviving Religion 101." Um, it's actually not a story I'm sure that it's actually not a story I'm sure that it's actually not a story I'm sure that was unique to me. was unique to me. was unique to me. Uh, hundreds and hundreds of students Uh, hundreds and hundreds of students Uh, hundreds and hundreds of students have taken Bart's classes over the have taken Bart's classes over the have taken Bart's classes over the years. years. years. Um, but maybe it's unique to me in the Um, but maybe it's unique to me in the Um, but maybe it's unique to me in the sense that not all of them have gone on sense that not all of them have gone on sense that not all of them have gone on to become biblical scholars themselves to become biblical scholars themselves to become biblical scholars themselves in the exact same field of course that in the exact same field of course that in the exact same field of course that Bart Ehrman teaches in. So yeah, years Bart Ehrman teaches in. So yeah, years Bart Ehrman teaches in. So yeah, years ago I showed up at the University of ago I showed up at the University of ago I showed up at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill as a North Carolina in Chapel Hill as a North Carolina in Chapel Hill as a freshman and freshman and freshman and my background is I grew up in a my background is I grew up in a my background is I grew up in a Christian home and was a committed Christian home and was a committed Christian home and was a committed believer and wanted to do my best to believer and wanted to do my best to believer and wanted to do my best to live out a Christian life at UNC and live out a Christian life at UNC and live out a Christian life at UNC and I thought I was pretty ready as I could I thought I was pretty ready as I could I thought I was pretty ready as I could major such things. I'd grown up in a major such things. I'd grown up in a major such things. I'd grown up in a youth group that seemed solid and people youth group that seemed solid and people youth group that seemed solid and people gave me good advice about how to survive gave me good advice about how to survive gave me good advice about how to survive in college and then in college and then in college and then my freshman year I needed to fill a my freshman year I needed to fill a my freshman year I needed to fill a religion credit because in the days of religion credit because in the days of religion credit because in the days of back then in Chapel Hill you had to have back then in Chapel Hill you had to have back then in Chapel Hill you had to have a certain amount of religion credits to a certain amount of religion credits to a certain amount of religion credits to get your your liberal arts degree. And get your your liberal arts degree. And get your your liberal arts degree. And so I I scrolled through the catalog and so I I scrolled through the catalog and so I I scrolled through the catalog and yes it was a catalog back then not not yes it was a catalog back then not not yes it was a catalog back then not not online and I there was a class called online and I there was a class called online and I there was a class called Introduction to the New Testament. And I

Introduction to the New Testament. And I Introduction to the New Testament. And I didn't even mention the professor's didn't even mention the professor's didn't even mention the professor's name. I was like, "Well, this sounds name. I was like, "Well, this sounds name. I was like, "Well, this sounds good so I'll take this." And the very good so I'll take this." And the very good so I'll take this." And the very first day of class it was it started off first day of class it was it started off first day of class it was it started off very fast. Um I could tell right out of very fast. Um I could tell right out of very fast. Um I could tell right out of the gate that this professor lectured the gate that this professor lectured the gate that this professor lectured with an eye to the evangelicals. Said he with an eye to the evangelicals. Said he with an eye to the evangelicals. Said he was once an evangelical. Said, "I used was once an evangelical. Said, "I used was once an evangelical. Said, "I used to believe what you believe. Used to be to believe what you believe. Used to be to believe what you believe. Used to be sitting right where you are and I used sitting right where you are and I used sitting right where you are and I used to be a fundamentalist Christian and to be a fundamentalist Christian and to be a fundamentalist Christian and then I went on to get my my master's and then I went on to get my my master's and then I went on to get my my master's and my PhD and I realized the Bible's full my PhD and I realized the Bible's full my PhD and I realized the Bible's full of mistakes and errors and of mistakes and errors and of mistakes and errors and contradictions and problems and contradictions and problems and contradictions and problems and fabrications and hasn't been transmitted fabrications and hasn't been transmitted fabrications and hasn't been transmitted reliably reliably by scribes. reliably reliably by scribes. reliably reliably by scribes. And this whole class is going to be And this whole class is going to be And this whole class is going to be about basically that collection of about basically that collection of about basically that collection of writings we call the New Testament and writings we call the New Testament and writings we call the New Testament and and why he's reached the conclusions and why he's reached the conclusions and why he's reached the conclusions he's reached." And I sat there thinking, he's reached." And I sat there thinking, he's reached." And I sat there thinking, "Wow, what have I got myself into?" "Wow, what have I got myself into?" "Wow, what have I got myself into?" And as you noted I didn't know at the And as you noted I didn't know at the And as you noted I didn't know at the time who he was but this was of course time who he was but this was of course time who he was but this was of course Bart Ehrman. Bart Ehrman. Bart Ehrman. And now he's written over 30 books, many And now he's written over 30 books, many And now he's written over 30 books, many New York Times bestsellers and at the New York Times bestsellers and at the New York Times bestsellers and at the time he was a brand new professor. I'm time he was a brand new professor. I'm time he was a brand new professor. I'm guessing he was 30? guessing he was 30? guessing he was 30? 32? I don't remember the exact age. But 32? I don't remember the exact age. But 32? I don't remember the exact age. But yeah, it was one of those crisis moments yeah, it was one of those crisis moments yeah, it was one of those crisis moments where I thought to myself, "Wow, maybe where I thought to myself, "Wow, maybe where I thought to myself, "Wow, maybe everything I've ever believed is a lie."

everything I've ever believed is a lie." everything I've ever believed is a lie." And it set me on an academic journey And it set me on an academic journey And it set me on an academic journey that that that at the end of it all I ended up where at the end of it all I ended up where at the end of it all I ended up where now I'm a professor and a New Testament now I'm a professor and a New Testament now I'm a professor and a New Testament scholar myself and I deal with the scholar myself and I deal with the scholar myself and I deal with the precise same topics I learned in that precise same topics I learned in that precise same topics I learned in that class. class. class. It's so interesting that he was he then It's so interesting that he was he then It's so interesting that he was he then became an evangelist for atheism. became an evangelist for atheism. became an evangelist for atheism. Um so he wasn't just content to let you Um so he wasn't just content to let you Um so he wasn't just content to let you make your own decisions, but he was his make your own decisions, but he was his make your own decisions, but he was his desire was to convince you that the desire was to convince you that the desire was to convince you that the Bible was wrong. Yeah, this is one of Bible was wrong. Yeah, this is one of Bible was wrong. Yeah, this is one of the peculiar things about Bart's journey the peculiar things about Bart's journey the peculiar things about Bart's journey is it sometimes if someone deconstructs is it sometimes if someone deconstructs is it sometimes if someone deconstructs from their faith, they kind of do it from their faith, they kind of do it from their faith, they kind of do it quietly and go about their business and quietly and go about their business and quietly and go about their business and and live their life. I think what made and live their life. I think what made and live their life. I think what made his situation unique was that he was a his situation unique was that he was a his situation unique was that he was a professor of New Testament. So when you professor of New Testament. So when you professor of New Testament. So when you deconstruct as a professor of New deconstruct as a professor of New deconstruct as a professor of New Testament, now you're talking about the Testament, now you're talking about the Testament, now you're talking about the New Testament, you can't help but talk New Testament, you can't help but talk New Testament, you can't help but talk about the very things that you about the very things that you about the very things that you deconstructed from all the time. And so deconstructed from all the time. And so deconstructed from all the time. And so many have characterized him as still you many have characterized him as still you many have characterized him as still you know, evangelical, but now maybe in the know, evangelical, but now maybe in the know, evangelical, but now maybe in the opposite direction. Yeah. opposite direction. Yeah. opposite direction. Yeah. Okay, so what's really interesting is Okay, so what's really interesting is Okay, so what's really interesting is that he just released a new book that that he just released a new book that that he just released a new book that says um what makes Jesus moral teachings says um what makes Jesus moral teachings says um what makes Jesus moral teachings so revolutionary is what the book is so revolutionary is what the book is so revolutionary is what the book is about, right? Namely and and about, right? Namely and and about, right? Namely and and namely what makes them revolutionary is namely what makes them revolutionary is namely what makes them revolutionary is that he was calling people not just to that he was calling people not just to that he was calling people not just to love their friends and family, but to love their friends and family, but to love their friends and family, but to love also strangers and enemies. So, my love also strangers and enemies. So, my love also strangers and enemies. So, my question for you to start off with us question for you to start off with us question for you to start off with us here is how revolutionary was this in here is how revolutionary was this in here is how revolutionary was this in the ancient world?

the ancient world? the ancient world? Yeah, well the short answer is very. Um Yeah, well the short answer is very. Um Yeah, well the short answer is very. Um when I saw the title of Bart's book, I I when I saw the title of Bart's book, I I when I saw the title of Bart's book, I I caught wind of this, you know, months caught wind of this, you know, months caught wind of this, you know, months ago when it was being promoted and uh ago when it was being promoted and uh ago when it was being promoted and uh got sent a copy and um got sent a copy and um got sent a copy and um I saw the title and thought, "Wow, this I saw the title and thought, "Wow, this I saw the title and thought, "Wow, this is fascinating." because it sounds like is fascinating." because it sounds like is fascinating." because it sounds like a genuinely positive take on early a genuinely positive take on early a genuinely positive take on early Christian ethics or at least one Christian ethics or at least one Christian ethics or at least one early Christian ethic. We'll come back early Christian ethic. We'll come back early Christian ethic. We'll come back to that in a minute, I'm sure. Um which to that in a minute, I'm sure. Um which to that in a minute, I'm sure. Um which is this revolutionary teaching of Jesus is this revolutionary teaching of Jesus is this revolutionary teaching of Jesus that you shouldn't merely love your that you shouldn't merely love your that you shouldn't merely love your family members or your friends or those family members or your friends or those family members or your friends or those closest to you, but you you should closest to you, but you you should closest to you, but you you should generally love those far away from you, generally love those far away from you, generally love those far away from you, those who are outsiders, those who maybe those who are outsiders, those who maybe those who are outsiders, those who maybe you don't know, and maybe even those who you don't know, and maybe even those who you don't know, and maybe even those who are your enemies. are your enemies. are your enemies. We call this altruism. Uh we might call We call this altruism. Uh we might call We call this altruism. Uh we might call this uh sort of philanthropic sort of this uh sort of philanthropic sort of this uh sort of philanthropic sort of care and giving for those who are care and giving for those who are care and giving for those who are hurting or suffering and in pain. hurting or suffering and in pain. hurting or suffering and in pain. And what's What's is that in the modern And what's What's is that in the modern And what's What's is that in the modern Western world Western world Western world because we grow up in a world that's because we grow up in a world that's because we grow up in a world that's pretty much been sort of affected so pretty much been sort of affected so pretty much been sort of affected so much by Judeo-Christian thinking, much by Judeo-Christian thinking, much by Judeo-Christian thinking, everyone assumes that religion as core everyone assumes that religion as core everyone assumes that religion as core is about morality. In fact, if you were is about morality. In fact, if you were is about morality. In fact, if you were asked the average person out there, what asked the average person out there, what asked the average person out there, what is religion trying to do? Make you a is religion trying to do? Make you a is religion trying to do? Make you a good person, right? This is what good person, right? This is what good person, right? This is what religion's about. What they don't religion's about. What they don't religion's about. What they don't realize is that in ancient Greco-Roman realize is that in ancient Greco-Roman realize is that in ancient Greco-Roman world, that wasn't the case. In the world, that wasn't the case. In the world, that wasn't the case. In the pantheon of gods and the pantheon of pantheon of gods and the pantheon of pantheon of gods and the pantheon of religious systems, people didn't religious systems, people didn't religious systems, people didn't associate their ethics with their associate their ethics with their associate their ethics with their religion so much. Um it's not so much religion so much. Um it's not so much religion so much. Um it's not so much that they weren't ethical. People were that they weren't ethical. People were that they weren't ethical. People were trying to be good people in their own trying to be good people in their own trying to be good people in their own ways for other reasons, but in terms of ways for other reasons, but in terms of ways for other reasons, but in terms of the religious beliefs, people did not the religious beliefs, people did not the religious beliefs, people did not associate their belief in a particular associate their belief in a particular associate their belief in a particular deity with how to live.

deity with how to live. deity with how to live. The way you related to the gods wasn't The way you related to the gods wasn't The way you related to the gods wasn't so much by being a good person. The way so much by being a good person. The way so much by being a good person. The way you related to the gods in the you related to the gods in the you related to the gods in the Greco-Roman world was by ritual and Greco-Roman world was by ritual and Greco-Roman world was by ritual and sacrifice. You were trying to please the sacrifice. You were trying to please the sacrifice. You were trying to please the gods so they would send rain on your gods so they would send rain on your gods so they would send rain on your crops or allow you to be victorious in crops or allow you to be victorious in crops or allow you to be victorious in war. war. war. And so there wasn't a real direct And so there wasn't a real direct And so there wasn't a real direct association with morality association with morality association with morality and religion. And beyond that, there and religion. And beyond that, there and religion. And beyond that, there certainly wasn't this sense that you certainly wasn't this sense that you certainly wasn't this sense that you ought to care for those who are ought to care for those who are ought to care for those who are downtrodden and in need and who are downtrodden and in need and who are downtrodden and in need and who are suffering outside your immediate family suffering outside your immediate family suffering outside your immediate family unit. We assume that philanthropy and unit. We assume that philanthropy and unit. We assume that philanthropy and care for these people is just what a care for these people is just what a care for these people is just what a good person should do if you're a good person should do if you're a good person should do if you're a citizen in the Western world. That was citizen in the Western world. That was citizen in the Western world. That was not true in the Greco-Roman world. In not true in the Greco-Roman world. In not true in the Greco-Roman world. In the Greco-Roman world, Bart Ehrman's the Greco-Roman world, Bart Ehrman's the Greco-Roman world, Bart Ehrman's exactly right on this point. Uh in the exactly right on this point. Uh in the exactly right on this point. Uh in the Greco-Roman world, there wasn't a value Greco-Roman world, there wasn't a value Greco-Roman world, there wasn't a value that if someone is sick and dying that that if someone is sick and dying that that if someone is sick and dying that you should try to take care of them. Um you should try to take care of them. Um you should try to take care of them. Um in fact, one of the famous examples of in fact, one of the famous examples of in fact, one of the famous examples of this was at the late 2nd century, this was at the late 2nd century, this was at the late 2nd century, there's a very famous plague that ripped there's a very famous plague that ripped there's a very famous plague that ripped through Rome, and even the emperor through Rome, and even the emperor through Rome, and even the emperor Marcus Aurelius fled the city, and Marcus Aurelius fled the city, and Marcus Aurelius fled the city, and almost every elite rich person fled the almost every elite rich person fled the almost every elite rich person fled the city. Even the doctors. city. Even the doctors. city. Even the doctors. One of the most famous doctors named One of the most famous doctors named One of the most famous doctors named Galen fled the city, and the people who Galen fled the city, and the people who Galen fled the city, and the people who stayed behind were the Christians.

stayed behind were the Christians. stayed behind were the Christians. And it soon became clear that they were And it soon became clear that they were And it soon became clear that they were different than everybody else in the different than everybody else in the different than everybody else in the world. They were the ones building world. They were the ones building world. They were the ones building hospitals eventually. They were the ones hospitals eventually. They were the ones hospitals eventually. They were the ones starting the orphanages. starting the orphanages. starting the orphanages. So he is right on this point that So he is right on this point that So he is right on this point that Christians' distinctive ethic really Christians' distinctive ethic really Christians' distinctive ethic really revolutionized the world. Now, here's revolutionized the world. Now, here's revolutionized the world. Now, here's the thing. When I saw the title for the the thing. When I saw the title for the the thing. When I saw the title for the book, I was a little struck by it book, I was a little struck by it book, I was a little struck by it because he's not the first one to to because he's not the first one to to because he's not the first one to to speak to this in the academic In fact, speak to this in the academic In fact, speak to this in the academic In fact, just recently just recently just recently Tom Holland's book Dominion did the same Tom Holland's book Dominion did the same Tom Holland's book Dominion did the same thing. And then even before that, Rodney thing. And then even before that, Rodney thing. And then even before that, Rodney Stark was saying this back in the 1990s. Stark was saying this back in the 1990s. Stark was saying this back in the 1990s. So, this isn't really a new idea, but So, this isn't really a new idea, but So, this isn't really a new idea, but certainly with Ehrman's help, I'm sure certainly with Ehrman's help, I'm sure certainly with Ehrman's help, I'm sure he'll popularize it in perhaps ways that he'll popularize it in perhaps ways that he'll popularize it in perhaps ways that have not been uh popularized before. have not been uh popularized before. have not been uh popularized before. What struck me is it almost could be a What struck me is it almost could be a What struck me is it almost could be a Christian title, right? Love Thy Christian title, right? Love Thy Christian title, right? Love Thy Neighbor, How the Teachings of Jesus Neighbor, How the Teachings of Jesus Neighbor, How the Teachings of Jesus Transformed the Moral Conscience of the Transformed the Moral Conscience of the Transformed the Moral Conscience of the West. If you didn't if I didn't know, I West. If you didn't if I didn't know, I West. If you didn't if I didn't know, I would think, oh, maybe a Christian wrote would think, oh, maybe a Christian wrote would think, oh, maybe a Christian wrote that book. Um but they didn't that book. Um but they didn't that book. Um but they didn't >> [laughter] >> [laughter] >> [laughter] >> Well, part of the history of this book, >> Well, part of the history of this book, >> Well, part of the history of this book, and we're going to get there, I know. and we're going to get there, I know. and we're going to get there, I know. Part of the history of the book is Part of the history of the book is Part of the history of the book is you're you're you're you hear that title, and then you hear you hear that title, and then you hear you hear that title, and then you hear the main premise, you're thinking, well, the main premise, you're thinking, well, the main premise, you're thinking, well, are you for or you against Christianity are you for or you against Christianity are you for or you against Christianity here? What what's going on? And and as I here? What what's going on? And and as I here? What what's going on? And and as I said, he seems very much for this one said, he seems very much for this one said, he seems very much for this one particular Christian ethic.

particular Christian ethic. particular Christian ethic. What we'll quickly discover, though, is What we'll quickly discover, though, is What we'll quickly discover, though, is that he's that he's that he's uh really only about this one main uh really only about this one main uh really only about this one main particular Christian ethic. And that particular Christian ethic. And that particular Christian ethic. And that even though Christianity is composed of even though Christianity is composed of even though Christianity is composed of many many many distinctive Christian ethics, he's not distinctive Christian ethics, he's not distinctive Christian ethics, he's not as keen about all the others. So, for as keen about all the others. So, for as keen about all the others. So, for example, he doesn't really mention in example, he doesn't really mention in example, he doesn't really mention in the book he kind of alludes to this that the book he kind of alludes to this that the book he kind of alludes to this that one of the major one of the major one of the major uh Christian ethical practices that made uh Christian ethical practices that made uh Christian ethical practices that made it distinctive in the Roman world was it distinctive in the Roman world was it distinctive in the Roman world was not just altruism. not just altruism. not just altruism. One of the things that made Christians One of the things that made Christians One of the things that made Christians so radical and different in the ancient so radical and different in the ancient so radical and different in the ancient Roman world was their sexual ethic. Roman world was their sexual ethic. Roman world was their sexual ethic. Um particularly the way that they Um particularly the way that they Um particularly the way that they demanded sexual fidelity not just from demanded sexual fidelity not just from demanded sexual fidelity not just from wives, but also from husbands. That wives, but also from husbands. That wives, but also from husbands. That husbands were to be sexually faithful to husbands were to be sexually faithful to husbands were to be sexually faithful to their wives. That idea, there their wives. That idea, there their wives. That idea, there in the way Christians manifested it, it in the way Christians manifested it, it in the way Christians manifested it, it would have been revolutionary, too. That would have been revolutionary, too. That would have been revolutionary, too. That didn't really come up in the book. Um didn't really come up in the book. Um didn't really come up in the book. Um but I think that shows you that the but I think that shows you that the but I think that shows you that the Christian ethic was distinctive in more Christian ethic was distinctive in more Christian ethic was distinctive in more ways than just the one he's mentioned. ways than just the one he's mentioned. ways than just the one he's mentioned. Yeah. Okay, that is super interesting. Yeah. Okay, that is super interesting. Yeah. Okay, that is super interesting. Um Okay, that's super interesting. So, Um Okay, that's super interesting. So, Um Okay, that's super interesting. So, so we can kind of think from the title, so we can kind of think from the title, so we can kind of think from the title, like maybe this will be a positive take like maybe this will be a positive take like maybe this will be a positive take on Christianity. And it is a positive on Christianity. And it is a positive on Christianity. And it is a positive take on love your enemies. Um but in take on love your enemies. Um but in take on love your enemies. Um but in Ehrman's uh interview with Douthat, he Ehrman's uh interview with Douthat, he Ehrman's uh interview with Douthat, he was very quick to level a charge against was very quick to level a charge against was very quick to level a charge against all believers. And he said he comes all believers. And he said he comes all believers. And he said he comes right off the bat, he comes out swinging right off the bat, he comes out swinging right off the bat, he comes out swinging and says and says and says so many Christians in our world claim to so many Christians in our world claim to so many Christians in our world claim to be Christian, claim to be followers of be Christian, claim to be followers of be Christian, claim to be followers of Jesus, but they do not follow his most Jesus, but they do not follow his most Jesus, but they do not follow his most basic teaching about loving your basic teaching about loving your basic teaching about loving your enemies."

enemies." enemies." What would you say to that? What would you say to that? What would you say to that? Yeah, this was interesting. Um, he Yeah, this was interesting. Um, he Yeah, this was interesting. Um, he covers this in the book, too, not just covers this in the book, too, not just covers this in the book, too, not just in the Dawkins interview, which is in the Dawkins interview, which is in the Dawkins interview, which is sort of a a challenge to some sort of a a challenge to some sort of a a challenge to some Christians. I'm sure he would say not Christians. I'm sure he would say not Christians. I'm sure he would say not all Christians, but some Christians who all Christians, but some Christians who all Christians, but some Christians who don't live consistently with the ethic don't live consistently with the ethic don't live consistently with the ethic he's he's talking about. This ethic is he's he's talking about. This ethic is he's he's talking about. This ethic is altruism and care for those who are altruism and care for those who are altruism and care for those who are downtrodden and and and hurting outside downtrodden and and and hurting outside downtrodden and and and hurting outside the the uh immediate family. And he's the the uh immediate family. And he's the the uh immediate family. And he's like, "Well, look, if you're a like, "Well, look, if you're a like, "Well, look, if you're a Christian, shouldn't you live Christian, shouldn't you live Christian, shouldn't you live consistently with your own Christian consistently with your own Christian consistently with your own Christian worldview? worldview? worldview? Shouldn't you do what Christianity says Shouldn't you do what Christianity says Shouldn't you do what Christianity says you should do?" And so, there's a little you should do?" And so, there's a little you should do?" And so, there's a little bit of a wag the finger here at bit of a wag the finger here at bit of a wag the finger here at Christians saying, "Hey, you should do Christians saying, "Hey, you should do Christians saying, "Hey, you should do better better better uh in living consistently with your uh in living consistently with your uh in living consistently with your worldview. Why is it that so many worldview. Why is it that so many worldview. Why is it that so many Christians claim to follow Jesus, but Christians claim to follow Jesus, but Christians claim to follow Jesus, but then don't follow Jesus?" then don't follow Jesus?" then don't follow Jesus?" And just pausing on that for a moment, And just pausing on that for a moment, And just pausing on that for a moment, we can I can hear say yet another thing we can I can hear say yet another thing we can I can hear say yet another thing I agree with Ehrman on. I agree with Ehrman on. I agree with Ehrman on. Um, there'll be many things coming on Um, there'll be many things coming on Um, there'll be many things coming on that we won't agree on. Uh, that we won't agree on. Uh, that we won't agree on. Uh, where he's right. I mean, Christians where he's right. I mean, Christians where he's right. I mean, Christians should live consistently should live consistently should live consistently with the claims of Jesus and with the with the claims of Jesus and with the with the claims of Jesus and with the entire Christian system they're entire Christian system they're entire Christian system they're purporting to follow. You should live purporting to follow. You should live purporting to follow. You should live consistently consistently consistently with your own worldview. Now, what's with your own worldview. Now, what's with your own worldview. Now, what's ironic, and Ehrman doesn't really say ironic, and Ehrman doesn't really say ironic, and Ehrman doesn't really say this plainly, at least, is you know who this plainly, at least, is you know who this plainly, at least, is you know who the person that talked the most about the person that talked the most about the person that talked the most about living inconsistently with your own living inconsistently with your own living inconsistently with your own worldview and not consistently living worldview and not consistently living worldview and not consistently living out what you say you believe was Jesus out what you say you believe was Jesus out what you say you believe was Jesus himself. And this was one of the things himself. And this was one of the things himself. And this was one of the things that's interesting is that it that's interesting is that it that's interesting is that it it's one thing for Ehrman to say, "Hey, it's one thing for Ehrman to say, "Hey, it's one thing for Ehrman to say, "Hey, Christians, do better." But the person Christians, do better." But the person Christians, do better." But the person who started saying that was Jesus who started saying that was Jesus who started saying that was Jesus saying, "You've got to live consistently saying, "You've got to live consistently saying, "You've got to live consistently publicly as much as you do privately.

publicly as much as you do privately. publicly as much as you do privately. You've got to be the same on the outside You've got to be the same on the outside You've got to be the same on the outside as you are on the inside." And of as you are on the inside." And of as you are on the inside." And of course, he had a different word for course, he had a different word for course, he had a different word for that. He called that hypocrisy, right? that. He called that hypocrisy, right? that. He called that hypocrisy, right? Don't be a hypocrite, which is basically Don't be a hypocrite, which is basically Don't be a hypocrite, which is basically another way of saying, "Live another way of saying, "Live another way of saying, "Live consistently with what you say uh you consistently with what you say uh you consistently with what you say uh you believe." Um, and so, sometimes people believe." Um, and so, sometimes people believe." Um, and so, sometimes people look at the inconsistency of Christians look at the inconsistency of Christians look at the inconsistency of Christians and say it undermines the Christian and say it undermines the Christian and say it undermines the Christian worldview. worldview. worldview. And at some level, I I get that. I mean, And at some level, I I get that. I mean, And at some level, I I get that. I mean, if Christians could never live, if Christians could never live, if Christians could never live, you know, better than anyone else, you you know, better than anyone else, you you know, better than anyone else, you might wonder if there's any real power might wonder if there's any real power might wonder if there's any real power or any distinctiveness there. Fair or any distinctiveness there. Fair or any distinctiveness there. Fair enough. enough. enough. But at the same time, it also be needs But at the same time, it also be needs But at the same time, it also be needs to be acknowledged that the to be acknowledged that the to be acknowledged that the inconsistency of Christians inconsistency of Christians inconsistency of Christians is actually evidence for our worldview. is actually evidence for our worldview. is actually evidence for our worldview. And what I mean by that is it shows you And what I mean by that is it shows you And what I mean by that is it shows you that there's a deep-seated problem in that there's a deep-seated problem in that there's a deep-seated problem in all of us, a darkness inside of us that all of us, a darkness inside of us that all of us, a darkness inside of us that we're always continuing to fight we're always continuing to fight we're always continuing to fight against. And sometimes we we we fight against. And sometimes we we we fight against. And sometimes we we we fight against it successfully and sometimes we against it successfully and sometimes we against it successfully and sometimes we don't. And everybody's a mixed bag. don't. And everybody's a mixed bag. don't. And everybody's a mixed bag. Everybody's inconsistent. And in the Everybody's inconsistent. And in the Everybody's inconsistent. And in the Christian space, we just we have a Christian space, we just we have a Christian space, we just we have a phrase for that. We say everyone's a phrase for that. We say everyone's a phrase for that. We say everyone's a sinner, right? We just mean everyone's a sinner, right? We just mean everyone's a sinner, right? We just mean everyone's a sinner. And so, the Christian message is sinner. And so, the Christian message is sinner. And so, the Christian message is you're a sinner need forgiveness. So, you're a sinner need forgiveness. So, you're a sinner need forgiveness. So, whenever you see someone living whenever you see someone living whenever you see someone living inconsistently with their claims, you're inconsistently with their claims, you're inconsistently with their claims, you're like, "Well, that's why Christianity like, "Well, that's why Christianity like, "Well, that's why Christianity exists."

exists." exists." Cuz there are Christians that need Cuz there are Christians that need Cuz there are Christians that need forgiveness. So, forgiveness. So, forgiveness. So, he mentions it as a problem, and I he mentions it as a problem, and I he mentions it as a problem, and I agree. Uh I think the thing that I would agree. Uh I think the thing that I would agree. Uh I think the thing that I would add here is that I I don't think it's it add here is that I I don't think it's it add here is that I I don't think it's it you need to look at it in the full you need to look at it in the full you need to look at it in the full context. The person who's the most context. The person who's the most context. The person who's the most opposed to this in Christians is Jesus opposed to this in Christians is Jesus opposed to this in Christians is Jesus himself. Yeah, that's a really good himself. Yeah, that's a really good himself. Yeah, that's a really good That's an excellent point. That's an excellent point. That's an excellent point. Um one remarkable feature about the book Um one remarkable feature about the book Um one remarkable feature about the book is that Ehrman seems really positive on is that Ehrman seems really positive on is that Ehrman seems really positive on a core Christian ethic. At one point, he a core Christian ethic. At one point, he a core Christian ethic. At one point, he says, "I'm writing to celebrate the good says, "I'm writing to celebrate the good says, "I'm writing to celebrate the good brought into the Western world by the brought into the Western world by the brought into the Western world by the Christian movement." And at the same Christian movement." And at the same Christian movement." And at the same time, doesn't believe in the core truth time, doesn't believe in the core truth time, doesn't believe in the core truth of Christianity and claims to be an of Christianity and claims to be an of Christianity and claims to be an atheist. And he's not the only one. I atheist. And he's not the only one. I atheist. And he's not the only one. I was thinking, "Boy, we see this all over was thinking, "Boy, we see this all over was thinking, "Boy, we see this all over the place." Like, all kinds of high the place." Like, all kinds of high the place." Like, all kinds of high There are all kinds of high-profile There are all kinds of high-profile There are all kinds of high-profile atheists who take on something of a atheists who take on something of a atheists who take on something of a Christian label. So, Bart Ehrman says, Christian label. So, Bart Ehrman says, Christian label. So, Bart Ehrman says, "I'm a Christian atheist." Richard "I'm a Christian atheist." Richard "I'm a Christian atheist." Richard Dawkins says, "I'm a cultural Dawkins says, "I'm a cultural Dawkins says, "I'm a cultural Christian." Tom Holland says, "I'm not a Christian." Tom Holland says, "I'm not a Christian." Tom Holland says, "I'm not a materialist, so I must be a Christian." materialist, so I must be a Christian." materialist, so I must be a Christian." What do you make of this desire for What do you make of this desire for What do you make of this desire for Christian morality, but not Christianity Christian morality, but not Christianity Christian morality, but not Christianity itself? Can someone have Christian itself? Can someone have Christian itself? Can someone have Christian ethics without Christianity?

ethics without Christianity? ethics without Christianity? Yeah, so this is a fascinating trend to Yeah, so this is a fascinating trend to Yeah, so this is a fascinating trend to watch. I mean, you mentioned some of the watch. I mean, you mentioned some of the watch. I mean, you mentioned some of the names I would have mentioned, which is names I would have mentioned, which is names I would have mentioned, which is the whole new atheist movement was a the whole new atheist movement was a the whole new atheist movement was a little bit of this. And I think a little little bit of this. And I think a little little bit of this. And I think a little bit uh with folks like Tom Holland and bit uh with folks like Tom Holland and bit uh with folks like Tom Holland and others, but you see people with this others, but you see people with this others, but you see people with this they seem to be drawn to Christianity in they seem to be drawn to Christianity in they seem to be drawn to Christianity in some ways. They seem to they sort of some ways. They seem to they sort of some ways. They seem to they sort of want it to be true. want it to be true. want it to be true. I I feel a little bit of that when I I I feel a little bit of that when I I I feel a little bit of that when I read Ehrman's book here. I get the sense read Ehrman's book here. I get the sense read Ehrman's book here. I get the sense that he's really happy with this one that he's really happy with this one that he's really happy with this one aspect of Christianity and and wishes it aspect of Christianity and and wishes it aspect of Christianity and and wishes it were true and probably thinks at some were true and probably thinks at some were true and probably thinks at some level it's true, but he doesn't want the level it's true, but he doesn't want the level it's true, but he doesn't want the whole package. Um he he he doesn't want whole package. Um he he he doesn't want whole package. Um he he he doesn't want to to to to to buy into something here. And you to to buy into something here. And you to to buy into something here. And you know, fair enough. Um you know, you know, fair enough. Um you know, you know, fair enough. Um you know, you know, you you you know, you you you know, you you you people try to have their theological people try to have their theological people try to have their theological cake here and eat it, too. cake here and eat it, too. cake here and eat it, too. But but I want to point something out But but I want to point something out But but I want to point something out here that I think needs to be pointed here that I think needs to be pointed here that I think needs to be pointed out that is often missing in these out that is often missing in these out that is often missing in these discussions. Ehrman was very quick to discussions. Ehrman was very quick to discussions. Ehrman was very quick to say, "Hey, Christians, say, "Hey, Christians, say, "Hey, Christians, you need to live consistently with your you need to live consistently with your you need to live consistently with your own worldview." And I've already said I own worldview." And I've already said I own worldview." And I've already said I agree. But I might suggest that Ehrman agree. But I might suggest that Ehrman agree. But I might suggest that Ehrman could take that same advice and ask the could take that same advice and ask the could take that same advice and ask the question, "Is he living consistently question, "Is he living consistently question, "Is he living consistently with his own worldview?"

with his own worldview?" with his own worldview?" What I find interesting about the book, What I find interesting about the book, What I find interesting about the book, and I I find this interesting too across and I I find this interesting too across and I I find this interesting too across other interviews he's given, is that other interviews he's given, is that other interviews he's given, is that there seems to be very little there seems to be very little there seems to be very little philosophical self-reflection on whether philosophical self-reflection on whether philosophical self-reflection on whether he's living consistently with his own he's living consistently with his own he's living consistently with his own claims, with his own worldview. I I claims, with his own worldview. I I claims, with his own worldview. I I appreciate him saying that Christians appreciate him saying that Christians appreciate him saying that Christians ought to do so and I've agreed with it. ought to do so and I've agreed with it. ought to do so and I've agreed with it. I would simply push the claim back on I would simply push the claim back on I would simply push the claim back on him and say, "Well, have you lived and him and say, "Well, have you lived and him and say, "Well, have you lived and do you live and do your beliefs reflect do you live and do your beliefs reflect do you live and do your beliefs reflect the consistently of your own worldview?" the consistently of your own worldview?" the consistently of your own worldview?" And here's where we come back to his And here's where we come back to his And here's where we come back to his worldview. He is an atheist. worldview. He is an atheist. worldview. He is an atheist. But he's not even just an atheist, he's But he's not even just an atheist, he's But he's not even just an atheist, he's really what you might call a hard really what you might call a hard really what you might call a hard atheist. He's what's called a atheist. He's what's called a atheist. He's what's called a materialist. He believes the only thing materialist. He believes the only thing materialist. He believes the only thing that exists in the universe are are that exists in the universe are are that exists in the universe are are material things. There's molecules and material things. There's molecules and material things. There's molecules and rocks and trees and planets and stars rocks and trees and planets and stars rocks and trees and planets and stars and and and elements in the ground. I mean, he he he elements in the ground. I mean, he he he elements in the ground. I mean, he he he is a materialist thinks that all that is a materialist thinks that all that is a materialist thinks that all that that exists is physical material things. that exists is physical material things. that exists is physical material things. But I would challenge him here, and I But I would challenge him here, and I But I would challenge him here, and I think others have tried to do this, is think others have tried to do this, is think others have tried to do this, is it, "Okay, so you want to have this it, "Okay, so you want to have this it, "Okay, so you want to have this beautiful moral system beautiful moral system beautiful moral system that Christianity provides for you, but that Christianity provides for you, but that Christianity provides for you, but you want to retain the very thing that you want to retain the very thing that you want to retain the very thing that undercuts it, which is an atheistic undercuts it, which is an atheistic undercuts it, which is an atheistic worldview that says all that exists in worldview that says all that exists in worldview that says all that exists in the universe are a bunch of bags of the universe are a bunch of bags of the universe are a bunch of bags of molecules interacting with other bags of molecules interacting with other bags of molecules interacting with other bags of molecules. And what would we where are molecules. And what would we where are molecules. And what would we where are we going to get any sort of moral we going to get any sort of moral we going to get any sort of moral normativity out of one bag of molecules normativity out of one bag of molecules normativity out of one bag of molecules interacting with another bag of interacting with another bag of interacting with another bag of molecules?

molecules? molecules? Um and this is this becomes particularly Um and this is this becomes particularly Um and this is this becomes particularly clear later in the book when and we'll clear later in the book when and we'll clear later in the book when and we'll we'll come back to this too, I'm sure is we'll come back to this too, I'm sure is we'll come back to this too, I'm sure is that at the end of the book Ehrman he that at the end of the book Ehrman he that at the end of the book Ehrman he does this in his other books too has a does this in his other books too has a does this in his other books too has a sort of a long list of sort of what I sort of a long list of sort of what I sort of a long list of sort of what I might call moral complaints. might call moral complaints. might call moral complaints. Um things that he's upset about in the Um things that he's upset about in the Um things that he's upset about in the world. The world ought to be another way world. The world ought to be another way world. The world ought to be another way than it is. We ought not to be racist. than it is. We ought not to be racist. than it is. We ought not to be racist. We ought not to be sexist. We ought not We ought not to be sexist. We ought not We ought not to be sexist. We ought not to be anti-Semitic. to be anti-Semitic. to be anti-Semitic. And by the way, I agree with that whole And by the way, I agree with that whole And by the way, I agree with that whole list. We ought not to be any of those list. We ought not to be any of those list. We ought not to be any of those things. Um but one might wonder is that things. Um but one might wonder is that things. Um but one might wonder is that consistent with his world view? consistent with his world view? consistent with his world view? Do do you in a in a atheistic world view Do do you in a in a atheistic world view Do do you in a in a atheistic world view where there's just matter in motion and where there's just matter in motion and where there's just matter in motion and bags of molecules, is there really bags of molecules, is there really bags of molecules, is there really anything in a cold dark universe to say anything in a cold dark universe to say anything in a cold dark universe to say that that act is wrong or that act is that that act is wrong or that act is that that act is wrong or that act is right? I would suggest you that right? I would suggest you that right? I would suggest you that philosophically speaking, if he's if he philosophically speaking, if he's if he philosophically speaking, if he's if he were consistent with his own world view, were consistent with his own world view, were consistent with his own world view, he would simply acknowledge the fact he would simply acknowledge the fact he would simply acknowledge the fact that there is no ought in an atheistic that there is no ought in an atheistic that there is no ought in an atheistic world view. There's just an is. Things world view. There's just an is. Things world view. There's just an is. Things are just are they are are they are. They are just are they are are they are. They are just are they are are they are. They shouldn't be another way. They shouldn't shouldn't be another way. They shouldn't shouldn't be another way. They shouldn't be one way or the other. They just are. be one way or the other. They just are. be one way or the other. They just are. The only system that actually provides The only system that actually provides The only system that actually provides an ought is the Christian system.

an ought is the Christian system. an ought is the Christian system. So what you have here is him, I think, So what you have here is him, I think, So what you have here is him, I think, recognizing along with others the recognizing along with others the recognizing along with others the goodness of the system but but their own goodness of the system but but their own goodness of the system but but their own world view is totally inconsistent with world view is totally inconsistent with world view is totally inconsistent with it. So my my push back would be live it. So my my push back would be live it. So my my push back would be live consistently with your own world view consistently with your own world view consistently with your own world view as you're challenging Christians to do as you're challenging Christians to do as you're challenging Christians to do the same. the same. the same. Yeah, that is fascinating. Yeah, that is fascinating. Yeah, that is fascinating. Yeah, it's interesting, right? Because Yeah, it's interesting, right? Because Yeah, it's interesting, right? Because we also see that in Christian circles we also see that in Christian circles we also see that in Christian circles where you're be like, I really want the where you're be like, I really want the where you're be like, I really want the Bible but I'll just take the sexual Bible but I'll just take the sexual Bible but I'll just take the sexual ethics from the world or I'll just take ethics from the world or I'll just take ethics from the world or I'll just take the financial ethics from the world or the financial ethics from the world or the financial ethics from the world or >> Yeah, I I think another way to say it is >> Yeah, I I think another way to say it is >> Yeah, I I think another way to say it is Ehrman is probably frustrated and I Ehrman is probably frustrated and I Ehrman is probably frustrated and I think there's some fairness to this with think there's some fairness to this with think there's some fairness to this with Christians who pick and choose Christians who pick and choose Christians who pick and choose the parts of Christianity they want to the parts of Christianity they want to the parts of Christianity they want to follow. follow. follow. But one of the things I'll point out is But one of the things I'll point out is But one of the things I'll point out is that he actually kind of does the same that he actually kind of does the same that he actually kind of does the same in the sense that the only part of in the sense that the only part of in the sense that the only part of Christianity he wants is this one part. Christianity he wants is this one part. Christianity he wants is this one part. But, if he's calling Christians to live But, if he's calling Christians to live But, if he's calling Christians to live consistently with their own worldview, consistently with their own worldview, consistently with their own worldview, which is he seems to be doing, does he which is he seems to be doing, does he which is he seems to be doing, does he want Christians to live consistently want Christians to live consistently want Christians to live consistently with the sexual ethics of the worldview? with the sexual ethics of the worldview? with the sexual ethics of the worldview? He seems upset when we do that. It seems He seems upset when we do that. It seems He seems upset when we do that. It seems like if if if he were just being like if if if he were just being like if if if he were just being consistent across the board, he would consistent across the board, he would consistent across the board, he would say, "Of course you have that view of say, "Of course you have that view of say, "Of course you have that view of sexuality because that's consistent with sexuality because that's consistent with sexuality because that's consistent with your worldview and I I give you that your worldview and I I give you that your worldview and I I give you that freely. Of course, I expect you to have freely. Of course, I expect you to have freely. Of course, I expect you to have that." That's kind of not what happens.

that." That's kind of not what happens. that." That's kind of not what happens. He he seems to be like, "Well, you just He he seems to be like, "Well, you just He he seems to be like, "Well, you just should have the parts of the worldview should have the parts of the worldview should have the parts of the worldview that I that I that I happen to prefer." And I think that happen to prefer." And I think that happen to prefer." And I think that shows a little bit of the arbitrariness shows a little bit of the arbitrariness shows a little bit of the arbitrariness of the of the of the criticism. of the of the of the criticism. of the of the of the criticism. That's super interesting. That's super interesting. That's super interesting. Okay, what's also interesting is the Okay, what's also interesting is the Okay, what's also interesting is the timing of this, right? Um I'm sure this timing of this, right? Um I'm sure this timing of this, right? Um I'm sure this book was not released on accident right book was not released on accident right book was not released on accident right near Easter time. Um and Ehrman says, near Easter time. Um and Ehrman says, near Easter time. Um and Ehrman says, and we know that this is true, um that and we know that this is true, um that and we know that this is true, um that it he says that it turns out there's a it he says that it turns out there's a it he says that it turns out there's a lot of mainline Protestant ministers lot of mainline Protestant ministers lot of mainline Protestant ministers today who don't think Jesus was today who don't think Jesus was today who don't think Jesus was literally born of a virgin or even that literally born of a virgin or even that literally born of a virgin or even that he was necessarily physically raised he was necessarily physically raised he was necessarily physically raised from the dead. from the dead. from the dead. And as Ehrman was telling his own story, And as Ehrman was telling his own story, And as Ehrman was telling his own story, he said, "I was moving in that he said, "I was moving in that he said, "I was moving in that direction, right? I was I was shedding direction, right? I was I was shedding direction, right? I was I was shedding sort of my beliefs that these things sort of my beliefs that these things sort of my beliefs that these things actually happened." But, he says, "I was actually happened." But, he says, "I was actually happened." But, he says, "I was still a committed Christian at that still a committed Christian at that still a committed Christian at that time." Which made me wonder, time." Which made me wonder, time." Which made me wonder, can you disbelieve the virgin birth or can you disbelieve the virgin birth or can you disbelieve the virgin birth or disbelieve a physical resurrection and disbelieve a physical resurrection and disbelieve a physical resurrection and still be a committed Christian? At what still be a committed Christian? At what still be a committed Christian? At what point do you have to stop calling point do you have to stop calling point do you have to stop calling yourself a committed Christian? yourself a committed Christian? yourself a committed Christian? Well, the yes, I I I read that too and Well, the yes, I I I read that too and Well, the yes, I I I read that too and and and saw that too and was fascinated and and saw that too and was fascinated and and saw that too and was fascinated by this because by this because by this because on one level, as we just discussed, he's on one level, as we just discussed, he's on one level, as we just discussed, he's he's he's sort of saying to Christians, he's he's sort of saying to Christians, he's he's sort of saying to Christians, "Hey, do a better job living "Hey, do a better job living "Hey, do a better job living consistently with your own your own consistently with your own your own consistently with your own your own scriptural premise here. You should scriptural premise here. You should scriptural premise here. You should follow it faithfully if you're going to follow it faithfully if you're going to follow it faithfully if you're going to claim to be a Christian." And I think claim to be a Christian." And I think claim to be a Christian." And I think he's right.

he's right. he's right. But, then at the same time, when it But, then at the same time, when it But, then at the same time, when it comes to sort of the resurrection, he comes to sort of the resurrection, he comes to sort of the resurrection, he seems to think, "Well, that's optional. seems to think, "Well, that's optional. seems to think, "Well, that's optional. You don't have to follow that." And I You don't have to follow that." And I You don't have to follow that." And I know many good ministers of of Christian know many good ministers of of Christian know many good ministers of of Christian churches, he says, that don't believe in churches, he says, that don't believe in churches, he says, that don't believe in the resurrection, but they're still good the resurrection, but they're still good the resurrection, but they're still good Christians, and I'm I'm literally Christians, and I'm I'm literally Christians, and I'm I'm literally scratching my head. I'm like, "Well, scratching my head. I'm like, "Well, scratching my head. I'm like, "Well, are we having two different are we having two different are we having two different conversations here because it seems like conversations here because it seems like conversations here because it seems like you just said Christians should live you just said Christians should live you just said Christians should live faithfully with their own worldview, but faithfully with their own worldview, but faithfully with their own worldview, but on the flip side you're like willing to on the flip side you're like willing to on the flip side you're like willing to say, 'Yeah, but you can still be a say, 'Yeah, but you can still be a say, 'Yeah, but you can still be a Christian without the resurrection.' I'm Christian without the resurrection.' I'm Christian without the resurrection.' I'm like, "Well, like, "Well, like, "Well, then what does it mean to live then what does it mean to live then what does it mean to live faithfully with your own Christian faithfully with your own Christian faithfully with your own Christian worldview?" Now, worldview?" Now, worldview?" Now, there's some there's some doctrines you there's some there's some doctrines you there's some there's some doctrines you could theoretically jettison and still could theoretically jettison and still could theoretically jettison and still be fine, be fine, be fine, um um um you know, because there's different you know, because there's different you know, because there's different rankings of doctrines, but the rankings of doctrines, but the rankings of doctrines, but the resurrection is not one of them. And of resurrection is not one of them. And of resurrection is not one of them. And of course, Bart knows this. I mean, we know course, Bart knows this. I mean, we know course, Bart knows this. I mean, we know that the resurrection played a central that the resurrection played a central that the resurrection played a central role in the early Christian faith. He role in the early Christian faith. He role in the early Christian faith. He debated a lot of that with Douthat in debated a lot of that with Douthat in debated a lot of that with Douthat in the interview. But then on top of that, the interview. But then on top of that, the interview. But then on top of that, Paul himself, Paul himself, Paul himself, in one of our various well-established in one of our various well-established in one of our various well-established Pauline letters in the 50s of the 1st Pauline letters in the 50s of the 1st Pauline letters in the 50s of the 1st century, relying on earlier tradition in century, relying on earlier tradition in century, relying on earlier tradition in 1 Corinthians 15, makes it clear that 1 Corinthians 15, makes it clear that 1 Corinthians 15, makes it clear that the resurrection was absolutely core to the resurrection was absolutely core to the resurrection was absolutely core to the faith from the very start and goes the faith from the very start and goes the faith from the very start and goes on to say that if Jesus isn't risen on to say that if Jesus isn't risen on to say that if Jesus isn't risen raised from the dead, which is all a big raised from the dead, which is all a big raised from the dead, which is all a big waste of time, effectively.

waste of time, effectively. waste of time, effectively. If Jesus isn't raised from the dead, If Jesus isn't raised from the dead, If Jesus isn't raised from the dead, then we're to be pitied above all then we're to be pitied above all then we're to be pitied above all people. people. people. If you would have gone up to Paul at If you would have gone up to Paul at If you would have gone up to Paul at that time ago, but Paul, of course, that time ago, but Paul, of course, that time ago, but Paul, of course, you're recognizing that Christians don't you're recognizing that Christians don't you're recognizing that Christians don't really have to believe in the really have to believe in the really have to believe in the resurrection. They can still be a resurrection. They can still be a resurrection. They can still be a Christian, right? I mean, this isn't Christian, right? I mean, this isn't Christian, right? I mean, this isn't really that big a deal. Paul would have really that big a deal. Paul would have really that big a deal. Paul would have said, "If you just read anything I just said, "If you just read anything I just said, "If you just read anything I just wrote?" Well, no, this is the whole wrote?" Well, no, this is the whole wrote?" Well, no, this is the whole thing. If If Jesus didn't conquer death, thing. If If Jesus didn't conquer death, thing. If If Jesus didn't conquer death, if Jesus is not a living savior, then if Jesus is not a living savior, then if Jesus is not a living savior, then you are lost uh in your sins, he says in you are lost uh in your sins, he says in you are lost uh in your sins, he says in 1 Corinthians 15. So, here I remain once 1 Corinthians 15. So, here I remain once 1 Corinthians 15. So, here I remain once again baffled with the claim that again baffled with the claim that again baffled with the claim that Christians should live consistently with Christians should live consistently with Christians should live consistently with their own worldview. And what I think their own worldview. And what I think their own worldview. And what I think we're realizing is he doesn't really we're realizing is he doesn't really we're realizing is he doesn't really mean that. He means just I want you mean that. He means just I want you mean that. He means just I want you Christians to do the things I really Christians to do the things I really Christians to do the things I really want you to do. And I'm like, "Well, want you to do. And I'm like, "Well, want you to do. And I'm like, "Well, sorry, we don't get to pick our own sorry, we don't get to pick our own sorry, we don't get to pick our own system." Um we're we're not creating our system." Um we're we're not creating our system." Um we're we're not creating our own religion. We're following one that own religion. We're following one that own religion. We're following one that we at least believe in principle is we at least believe in principle is we at least believe in principle is that's been given to us. Now, he might that's been given to us. Now, he might that's been given to us. Now, he might debate that, fair enough, but we at debate that, fair enough, but we at debate that, fair enough, but we at least believe that. So, we don't think least believe that. So, we don't think least believe that. So, we don't think we can we can just decide which parts to we can we can just decide which parts to we can we can just decide which parts to follow and and which parts not to. What follow and and which parts not to. What follow and and which parts not to. What I'm a little surprised by is that he I'm a little surprised by is that he I'm a little surprised by is that he seems quite willing to do that when it seems quite willing to do that when it seems quite willing to do that when it comes to the resurrection, and that's comes to the resurrection, and that's comes to the resurrection, and that's that's something I I can't quite wrap my that's something I I can't quite wrap my that's something I I can't quite wrap my mind around. Yeah, that's interesting.

mind around. Yeah, that's interesting. mind around. Yeah, that's interesting. It's So, his deconversion seemed to It's So, his deconversion seemed to It's So, his deconversion seemed to follow something of a progression, follow something of a progression, follow something of a progression, right? Where he moved from, you know, I right? Where he moved from, you know, I right? Where he moved from, you know, I believe in this literal resurrection on believe in this literal resurrection on believe in this literal resurrection on the third day to thinking, well, maybe the third day to thinking, well, maybe the third day to thinking, well, maybe the resurrection was like Jesus was the resurrection was like Jesus was the resurrection was like Jesus was spiritually present with his disciples spiritually present with his disciples spiritually present with his disciples later to moving all the way to, man, if later to moving all the way to, man, if later to moving all the way to, man, if there is a god out there, he doesn't there is a god out there, he doesn't there is a god out there, he doesn't care about the world enough to intervene care about the world enough to intervene care about the world enough to intervene in any suffering. in any suffering. in any suffering. In fact, if you ask, why did you stop In fact, if you ask, why did you stop In fact, if you ask, why did you stop believing in God? He would tell you, believing in God? He would tell you, believing in God? He would tell you, because of the problem with of evil or because of the problem with of evil or because of the problem with of evil or the problem of suffering, right? Given the problem of suffering, right? Given the problem of suffering, right? Given the state of suffering in the world, he the state of suffering in the world, he the state of suffering in the world, he says it's unlikely there is a god who is says it's unlikely there is a god who is says it's unlikely there is a god who is active. That's right. And we hear that a active. That's right. And we hear that a active. That's right. And we hear that a lot. That's not an a new thing. Um lot. That's not an a new thing. Um lot. That's not an a new thing. Um could a good god, or maybe any kind of could a good god, or maybe any kind of could a good god, or maybe any kind of god, allow horrors like um children who god, allow horrors like um children who god, allow horrors like um children who get cancer or women who fall into sex get cancer or women who fall into sex get cancer or women who fall into sex trafficking or the Holocaust? trafficking or the Holocaust? trafficking or the Holocaust? Yeah, so uh it is true in Orman's Yeah, so uh it is true in Orman's Yeah, so uh it is true in Orman's testimony, and he said this in other testimony, and he said this in other testimony, and he said this in other places, too, that that he distinguishes places, too, that that he distinguishes places, too, that that he distinguishes between two phases. One is, when did I between two phases. One is, when did I between two phases. One is, when did I stop believing the Bible was was, you stop believing the Bible was was, you stop believing the Bible was was, you know, the word of God in the traditional know, the word of God in the traditional know, the word of God in the traditional sense, at least. And then, when did I sense, at least. And then, when did I sense, at least. And then, when did I jettison Christianity entirely and jettison Christianity entirely and jettison Christianity entirely and become an atheist? The second stage of become an atheist? The second stage of become an atheist? The second stage of that, he argues, was, as you noted, due that, he argues, was, as you noted, due that, he argues, was, as you noted, due to the problem of evil, right?

to the problem of evil, right? to the problem of evil, right? And just pausing on that for a moment, And just pausing on that for a moment, And just pausing on that for a moment, this has been and and still is one of this has been and and still is one of this has been and and still is one of the most significant challenges to the the most significant challenges to the the most significant challenges to the Christian faith that that is leveled. If Christian faith that that is leveled. If Christian faith that that is leveled. If you were to ask someone, hey, what's the you were to ask someone, hey, what's the you were to ask someone, hey, what's the biggest thing you face as a Christian to biggest thing you face as a Christian to biggest thing you face as a Christian to wrestle with, intellectually, wrestle with, intellectually, wrestle with, intellectually, philosophically, emotionally, philosophically, emotionally, philosophically, emotionally, theologically, almost certainly, we all theologically, almost certainly, we all theologically, almost certainly, we all struggle with, well, why do bad things struggle with, well, why do bad things struggle with, well, why do bad things happen in the world? Why doesn't God happen in the world? Why doesn't God happen in the world? Why doesn't God intervene? Where was he during some of intervene? Where was he during some of intervene? Where was he during some of these really tragic events, both these really tragic events, both these really tragic events, both globally, historically, and in our own globally, historically, and in our own globally, historically, and in our own lives? lives? lives? And what I would say, first of all, is And what I would say, first of all, is And what I would say, first of all, is that that that Christians should not that that that Christians should not that that that Christians should not duck that problem. And what I mean by duck that problem. And what I mean by duck that problem. And what I mean by that is that we should not pretend that that is that we should not pretend that that is that we should not pretend that there's no weightiness to that. We there's no weightiness to that. We there's no weightiness to that. We should not pretend that that evil in the should not pretend that that evil in the should not pretend that that evil in the world isn't a thing or that we're not world isn't a thing or that we're not world isn't a thing or that we're not really bothered by it or there's nothing really bothered by it or there's nothing really bothered by it or there's nothing to see here. In fact, the Bible actually to see here. In fact, the Bible actually to see here. In fact, the Bible actually is filled with people who really is filled with people who really is filled with people who really struggle with that exact thing and that struggle with that exact thing and that struggle with that exact thing and that may be a comfort for someone to know is may be a comfort for someone to know is may be a comfort for someone to know is it there's people in the Bible that cry it there's people in the Bible that cry it there's people in the Bible that cry out to God, where were you? There's out to God, where were you? There's out to God, where were you? There's people in the Bible they're like, why people in the Bible they're like, why people in the Bible they're like, why why why? why why? why why? And what I want to say is a couple And what I want to say is a couple And what I want to say is a couple things in response to the problem of things in response to the problem of things in response to the problem of evil. First, I want to suggest that the evil. First, I want to suggest that the evil. First, I want to suggest that the Bible does provide a number of really Bible does provide a number of really Bible does provide a number of really remarkable addressings of the problem.

remarkable addressings of the problem. remarkable addressings of the problem. One of the things that that's One of the things that that's One of the things that that's fundamental to the Christian claim is fundamental to the Christian claim is fundamental to the Christian claim is that God didn't simply watch evil happen that God didn't simply watch evil happen that God didn't simply watch evil happen in the world from a distance but came in the world from a distance but came in the world from a distance but came and entered into the world in the person and entered into the world in the person and entered into the world in the person of Jesus Christ suffering alongside us of Jesus Christ suffering alongside us of Jesus Christ suffering alongside us and suffering for us and by doing so and suffering for us and by doing so and suffering for us and by doing so beat the very enemy that we're also beat the very enemy that we're also beat the very enemy that we're also afraid of, namely death. Okay, so that's afraid of, namely death. Okay, so that's afraid of, namely death. Okay, so that's fundamental to the Christian claim about fundamental to the Christian claim about fundamental to the Christian claim about how evil uh is going to be defeated. A how evil uh is going to be defeated. A how evil uh is going to be defeated. A second thing we would say is that second thing we would say is that second thing we would say is that Christians address the problem of evil Christians address the problem of evil Christians address the problem of evil is that someday God has promised that is that someday God has promised that is that someday God has promised that he'll return in the person of Christ and he'll return in the person of Christ and he'll return in the person of Christ and eradicate it. He will judge it, he will eradicate it. He will judge it, he will eradicate it. He will judge it, he will bring righteousness back to the world, bring righteousness back to the world, bring righteousness back to the world, he will set the world alright. Uh evil he will set the world alright. Uh evil he will set the world alright. Uh evil will not only be vanquished but it will will not only be vanquished but it will will not only be vanquished but it will be mended and healed and the world set be mended and healed and the world set be mended and healed and the world set right as it should be. right as it should be. right as it should be. That doesn't answer every question we That doesn't answer every question we That doesn't answer every question we have but here's one thing I would say have but here's one thing I would say have but here's one thing I would say about it is it Christians do have an about it is it Christians do have an about it is it Christians do have an answer. It's actually very good answer answer. It's actually very good answer answer. It's actually very good answer at the end of the day which is that God at the end of the day which is that God at the end of the day which is that God will come and vanquish evil and destroy will come and vanquish evil and destroy will come and vanquish evil and destroy it and set the world alright. So, what I it and set the world alright. So, what I it and set the world alright. So, what I always ask people when I talk to them always ask people when I talk to them always ask people when I talk to them about this is so tell me your about your about this is so tell me your about your about this is so tell me your about your solution to the problem of evil. solution to the problem of evil. solution to the problem of evil. What How is God going to fix it? How is What How is God going to fix it? How is What How is God going to fix it? How is it How is the world going to be made it How is the world going to be made it How is the world going to be made right on your on your worldview? Now, if right on your on your worldview? Now, if right on your on your worldview? Now, if I were to ask that to Bart Ehrman who's I were to ask that to Bart Ehrman who's I were to ask that to Bart Ehrman who's an atheist, I imagine that his answer an atheist, I imagine that his answer an atheist, I imagine that his answer would be and would have to be well, my would be and would have to be well, my would be and would have to be well, my worldview has no solution to the problem worldview has no solution to the problem worldview has no solution to the problem of evil.

of evil. of evil. The in atheist world things are never The in atheist world things are never The in atheist world things are never made right. In an atheist world things made right. In an atheist world things made right. In an atheist world things are never mended, things are never are never mended, things are never are never mended, things are never healed, they're never fixed. healed, they're never fixed. healed, they're never fixed. Now, he may not be happy with our answer Now, he may not be happy with our answer Now, he may not be happy with our answer to the problem of evil but I would to the problem of evil but I would to the problem of evil but I would compare it to the atheist view and say compare it to the atheist view and say compare it to the atheist view and say we have actually a pretty good answer we have actually a pretty good answer we have actually a pretty good answer compared to the atheist view. The compared to the atheist view. The compared to the atheist view. The atheist view doesn't have an answer at atheist view doesn't have an answer at atheist view doesn't have an answer at all to the problem of evil. all to the problem of evil. all to the problem of evil. But that just brings up brings up a But that just brings up brings up a But that just brings up brings up a second thing I would say in response to second thing I would say in response to second thing I would say in response to his claim when he brings up the problem his claim when he brings up the problem his claim when he brings up the problem of evil and that is of evil and that is of evil and that is I would argue that the problem of evil I would argue that the problem of evil I would argue that the problem of evil is maybe a bigger problem for the is maybe a bigger problem for the is maybe a bigger problem for the atheist than it is for for Christian and atheist than it is for for Christian and atheist than it is for for Christian and let me explain why. let me explain why. let me explain why. If you in fact want to become an atheist If you in fact want to become an atheist If you in fact want to become an atheist because the world is so evil, because the world is so evil, because the world is so evil, evil actually has to be a real thing. evil actually has to be a real thing. evil actually has to be a real thing. Evil has to actually exist. There Evil has to actually exist. There Evil has to actually exist. There actually has to be something objectively actually has to be something objectively actually has to be something objectively definable as good and something definable as good and something definable as good and something something objectively definable as evil something objectively definable as evil something objectively definable as evil so that you can say the world is not as so that you can say the world is not as so that you can say the world is not as it should be. And because it's not as it it should be. And because it's not as it it should be. And because it's not as it should be, I'm therefore going to reject should be, I'm therefore going to reject should be, I'm therefore going to reject God. But the only way you can say it's God. But the only way you can say it's God. But the only way you can say it's not as it should be is if there's some not as it should be is if there's some not as it should be is if there's some standard the world's not meeting. And it standard the world's not meeting. And it standard the world's not meeting. And it can't be simply your your personal can't be simply your your personal can't be simply your your personal preferences. preferences. preferences. In other words, to put it differently, In other words, to put it differently, In other words, to put it differently, the argument the argument the argument for the problem of evil doesn't work if for the problem of evil doesn't work if for the problem of evil doesn't work if someone simply says I don't like the someone simply says I don't like the someone simply says I don't like the world. world. world. That's not an argument.

That's not an argument. That's not an argument. You may not prefer this world, you may You may not prefer this world, you may You may not prefer this world, you may not like it, it may not do do it for not like it, it may not do do it for not like it, it may not do do it for you. That's not an argument. In order you. That's not an argument. In order you. That's not an argument. In order for Ehrman's argument to work, there for Ehrman's argument to work, there for Ehrman's argument to work, there actually has to be objective evil in the actually has to be objective evil in the actually has to be objective evil in the world. But where does that come from on world. But where does that come from on world. But where does that come from on an atheistic system? an atheistic system? an atheistic system? At one point in Ehrman's book, he makes At one point in Ehrman's book, he makes At one point in Ehrman's book, he makes the case that I can explain moral the case that I can explain moral the case that I can explain moral behavior by evolutionary tendencies. And behavior by evolutionary tendencies. And behavior by evolutionary tendencies. And that in our DNA DNA, evolution has that in our DNA DNA, evolution has that in our DNA DNA, evolution has programmed all of us to try to preserve programmed all of us to try to preserve programmed all of us to try to preserve the species and that's why we behave in the species and that's why we behave in the species and that's why we behave in what ways we call moral. what ways we call moral. what ways we call moral. But then later in the book, Ehrman But then later in the book, Ehrman But then later in the book, Ehrman brings up the Holocaust. And you can brings up the Holocaust. And you can brings up the Holocaust. And you can tell when he brings it he brings up the tell when he brings it he brings up the tell when he brings it he brings up the Holocaust and talks about it as a moral Holocaust and talks about it as a moral Holocaust and talks about it as a moral atrocity. atrocity. atrocity. And by the way, I agree. It is a moral And by the way, I agree. It is a moral And by the way, I agree. It is a moral atrocity. atrocity. atrocity. But are we really believe that that But are we really believe that that But are we really believe that that Ehrman's core objection to the Holocaust Ehrman's core objection to the Holocaust Ehrman's core objection to the Holocaust is that the Nazis didn't follow the is that the Nazis didn't follow the is that the Nazis didn't follow the evolutionary DNA that programmed them to evolutionary DNA that programmed them to evolutionary DNA that programmed them to preserve the species? preserve the species? preserve the species? That's Is that the complaint? That's Is that the complaint? That's Is that the complaint? Or is the complaint that that was Or is the complaint that that was Or is the complaint that that was morally wrong. That was horrendous evil morally wrong. That was horrendous evil morally wrong. That was horrendous evil and evil's real. and evil's real. and evil's real. So, I think there's a choice here in So, I think there's a choice here in So, I think there's a choice here in Ehrman's system. Either he embraces the Ehrman's system. Either he embraces the Ehrman's system. Either he embraces the reality of evil and the reality of good, reality of evil and the reality of good, reality of evil and the reality of good, which requires a God, or you reject God which requires a God, or you reject God which requires a God, or you reject God and admit there's no good and evil. Um and admit there's no good and evil. Um and admit there's no good and evil. Um you can't have it both ways. And I would you can't have it both ways. And I would you can't have it both ways. And I would encourage you to start actually reading encourage you to start actually reading encourage you to start actually reading some more modern philosophers. Joel some more modern philosophers. Joel some more modern philosophers. Joel Marks is an atheistic philosopher who Marks is an atheistic philosopher who Marks is an atheistic philosopher who sort of sort of sort of uh I think rightly chided his fellow uh I think rightly chided his fellow uh I think rightly chided his fellow atheists for not following this out atheists for not following this out atheists for not following this out consistently. And if he or others would consistently. And if he or others would consistently. And if he or others would read Joel Marks, they might realize, read Joel Marks, they might realize, read Joel Marks, they might realize, "Wait a second. There's a number of "Wait a second. There's a number of "Wait a second. There's a number of atheists that say, 'You can't really do atheists that say, 'You can't really do atheists that say, 'You can't really do this. You can't really decide, I'm going this. You can't really decide, I'm going this. You can't really decide, I'm going to have my neat little package of good to have my neat little package of good to have my neat little package of good and evil and also be an atheist. It's

and evil and also be an atheist. It's and evil and also be an atheist. It's one or the other.'" And he's pushed his one or the other.'" And he's pushed his one or the other.'" And he's pushed his fellow atheists just to admit that fellow atheists just to admit that fellow atheists just to admit that without God, uh there is no right or without God, uh there is no right or without God, uh there is no right or wrong. There is no morality. wrong. There is no morality. wrong. There is no morality. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yep, I think you're right. It also makes Yep, I think you're right. It also makes Yep, I think you're right. It also makes me think of um me think of um me think of um a lot of times I'm wondering if their a lot of times I'm wondering if their a lot of times I'm wondering if their desire desire desire the the atheists um look to salvation in the the atheists um look to salvation in the the atheists um look to salvation in politics or like that continuing politics or like that continuing politics or like that continuing evolution, right? But you're but if if evolution, right? But you're but if if evolution, right? But you're but if if that's being undermined, then it gets a that's being undermined, then it gets a that's being undermined, then it gets a little bit muddy pretty fast. little bit muddy pretty fast. little bit muddy pretty fast. Okay. Okay. Okay. So, in many of Ehrman's writings, he So, in many of Ehrman's writings, he So, in many of Ehrman's writings, he casts significant um doubt on the casts significant um doubt on the casts significant um doubt on the trustworthiness of the Gospels. Here's trustworthiness of the Gospels. Here's trustworthiness of the Gospels. Here's where we're going to get to your sweet where we're going to get to your sweet where we're going to get to your sweet spot. Um in his interview with Dale Fit, spot. Um in his interview with Dale Fit, spot. Um in his interview with Dale Fit, he mentioned three reasons why he he mentioned three reasons why he he mentioned three reasons why he doesn't trust the Gospels to be doesn't trust the Gospels to be doesn't trust the Gospels to be accurate. You've probably heard them accurate. You've probably heard them accurate. You've probably heard them before. I know. before. I know. before. I know. >> [laughter] >> [laughter] >> [laughter] >> I'm going to ask you about each one of >> I'm going to ask you about each one of >> I'm going to ask you about each one of them. I'll be fine. them. I'll be fine. them. I'll be fine. Yep, the first thing he lays out is he Yep, the first thing he lays out is he Yep, the first thing he lays out is he says, "Hey, there are contradictions says, "Hey, there are contradictions says, "Hey, there are contradictions between the Gospels, right?" And one of between the Gospels, right?" And one of between the Gospels, right?" And one of his favorite examples is a is in Mark.

his favorite examples is a is in Mark. his favorite examples is a is in Mark. Jesus eats the Passover meal with his Jesus eats the Passover meal with his Jesus eats the Passover meal with his disciples, and then he's arrested that disciples, and then he's arrested that disciples, and then he's arrested that night, and then he is crucified in the night, and then he is crucified in the night, and then he is crucified in the morning. morning. morning. But in John, it says that Jesus was But in John, it says that Jesus was But in John, it says that Jesus was brought out by Pilate to the people brought out by Pilate to the people brought out by Pilate to the people where he presented him to the people and where he presented him to the people and where he presented him to the people and said, "You vote." And they yelled, said, "You vote." And they yelled, said, "You vote." And they yelled, "Crucify him." on the day of preparation "Crucify him." on the day of preparation "Crucify him." on the day of preparation for the Passover, which would have dated for the Passover, which would have dated for the Passover, which would have dated it a day before that Mark says. So, it a day before that Mark says. So, it a day before that Mark says. So, doesn't this seem like there is a a big doesn't this seem like there is a a big doesn't this seem like there is a a big discrepancy between those or how how can discrepancy between those or how how can discrepancy between those or how how can we think about biblical contradictions we think about biblical contradictions we think about biblical contradictions like this? like this? like this? Yeah, I can still remember this in my Yeah, I can still remember this in my Yeah, I can still remember this in my freshman religion class at UNC Chapel freshman religion class at UNC Chapel freshman religion class at UNC Chapel Hill. Uh you know, the repertoire of of Hill. Uh you know, the repertoire of of Hill. Uh you know, the repertoire of of apparent contradictions hasn't changed apparent contradictions hasn't changed apparent contradictions hasn't changed much in in 30 years, and I know this is much in in 30 years, and I know this is much in in 30 years, and I know this is one of his go-to favorites. And he's got one of his go-to favorites. And he's got one of his go-to favorites. And he's got others, too, I'm sure. And I've I've others, too, I'm sure. And I've I've others, too, I'm sure. And I've I've I've read and and actually reviewed his I've read and and actually reviewed his I've read and and actually reviewed his book Jesus Interrupted for those who book Jesus Interrupted for those who book Jesus Interrupted for those who want to read more about his claim about want to read more about his claim about want to read more about his claim about contradictions and some of my rebuttals. contradictions and some of my rebuttals. contradictions and some of my rebuttals. So, you can find that review. So, you can find that review. So, you can find that review. Um but this is his favorite. I hear him Um but this is his favorite. I hear him Um but this is his favorite. I hear him mention this as one of his top examples. mention this as one of his top examples. mention this as one of his top examples. I have to admit I'm a little befuddled I have to admit I'm a little befuddled I have to admit I'm a little befuddled by that. You know, of all the examples by that. You know, of all the examples by that. You know, of all the examples to pick, I just don't find this one to pick, I just don't find this one to pick, I just don't find this one persuasive. Um I understand where he's persuasive. Um I understand where he's persuasive. Um I understand where he's coming from, but I think the evidence coming from, but I think the evidence coming from, but I think the evidence that Jesus is crucified on a different that Jesus is crucified on a different that Jesus is crucified on a different day of the Jewish calendar in the Gospel day of the Jewish calendar in the Gospel day of the Jewish calendar in the Gospel of John is actually relatively thin. His of John is actually relatively thin. His of John is actually relatively thin. His argument, as you indicated, is that in argument, as you indicated, is that in argument, as you indicated, is that in the Synoptics, the Passover lambs are the Synoptics, the Passover lambs are the Synoptics, the Passover lambs are sacrificed on a Thursday, sacrificed on a Thursday, sacrificed on a Thursday, so they could eat the meal that night, so they could eat the meal that night, so they could eat the meal that night, and then Jesus himself dies on a Friday.

and then Jesus himself dies on a Friday. and then Jesus himself dies on a Friday. Um which is after the Passover. But Um which is after the Passover. But Um which is after the Passover. But according to Ehrman, in John, uh the according to Ehrman, in John, uh the according to Ehrman, in John, uh the meal they eat on Thursday night is not meal they eat on Thursday night is not meal they eat on Thursday night is not the Passover meal cuz the lambs are the Passover meal cuz the lambs are the Passover meal cuz the lambs are actually sacrificed on that Friday, the actually sacrificed on that Friday, the actually sacrificed on that Friday, the same moment in which Jesus is dying. same moment in which Jesus is dying. same moment in which Jesus is dying. But the evidence for this is pretty But the evidence for this is pretty But the evidence for this is pretty thin. One of the pieces of evidence thin. One of the pieces of evidence thin. One of the pieces of evidence appealed to is that John the Baptist in appealed to is that John the Baptist in appealed to is that John the Baptist in John calls Jesus the Lamb of God. John calls Jesus the Lamb of God. John calls Jesus the Lamb of God. Ok- okay. Ok- okay. Ok- okay. Um theologically, practically, uh Um theologically, practically, uh Um theologically, practically, uh sacrificially, he is the Lamb of God. I sacrificially, he is the Lamb of God. I sacrificially, he is the Lamb of God. I don't know that that's a swing vote for don't know that that's a swing vote for don't know that that's a swing vote for a different day. a different day. a different day. Uh secondly, he argues that in John 13, Uh secondly, he argues that in John 13, Uh secondly, he argues that in John 13, the the the there's no institution of the the the there's no institution of the the the there's no institution of the Lord's Supper. They have a last meal the Lord's Supper. They have a last meal the Lord's Supper. They have a last meal together, but they don't show the bread together, but they don't show the bread together, but they don't show the bread and the wine. and the wine. and the wine. Okay, but John leaves out lots of things Okay, but John leaves out lots of things Okay, but John leaves out lots of things in his gospel. John was the last gospel in his gospel. John was the last gospel in his gospel. John was the last gospel written. He wasn't rehashing everything written. He wasn't rehashing everything written. He wasn't rehashing everything in the first gospels. in the first gospels. in the first gospels. If that That's not the only thing that If that That's not the only thing that If that That's not the only thing that he he omits. So, but omission doesn't he he omits. So, but omission doesn't he he omits. So, but omission doesn't mean that he denies that it happened. He mean that he denies that it happened. He mean that he denies that it happened. He had a different purpose in describing had a different purpose in describing had a different purpose in describing what happened at that final meal. what happened at that final meal. what happened at that final meal. The real thing hinges on one verse, The real thing hinges on one verse, The real thing hinges on one verse, actually, and that's John 19:14, where actually, and that's John 19:14, where actually, and that's John 19:14, where it talks about the preparation of the it talks about the preparation of the it talks about the preparation of the Passover.

Passover. Passover. Uh paraskeuē, I think, to pascha here in Uh paraskeuē, I think, to pascha here in Uh paraskeuē, I think, to pascha here in the Greek, the Greek, the Greek, um which basically can be taken in two um which basically can be taken in two um which basically can be taken in two different ways. One could be it's the different ways. One could be it's the different ways. One could be it's the preparation of the Passover lamb. preparation of the Passover lamb. preparation of the Passover lamb. That would prove Ehrman's view. That would prove Ehrman's view. That would prove Ehrman's view. The second way to take that phrase is The second way to take that phrase is The second way to take that phrase is the preparation day of Passover week, the preparation day of Passover week, the preparation day of Passover week, which is just the preparation for the which is just the preparation for the which is just the preparation for the Sabbath, which is the next day. Sabbath, which is the next day. Sabbath, which is the next day. Um I think the pass is going to be taken Um I think the pass is going to be taken Um I think the pass is going to be taken there any either way, but I don't see a there any either way, but I don't see a there any either way, but I don't see a reason why it has to be taken the way he reason why it has to be taken the way he reason why it has to be taken the way he suggested. I think the the term suggested. I think the the term suggested. I think the the term preparation day is a very common term preparation day is a very common term preparation day is a very common term for Friday for Friday for Friday in the Jewish calendar because of the in the Jewish calendar because of the in the Jewish calendar because of the Jewish Sabbath on Saturday. So, it's an Jewish Sabbath on Saturday. So, it's an Jewish Sabbath on Saturday. So, it's an interesting theory. interesting theory. interesting theory. Um you know, I understand why he could Um you know, I understand why he could Um you know, I understand why he could read it that way. Does it have to be read it that way. Does it have to be read it that way. Does it have to be read that way? Not at all. In fact, of read that way? Not at all. In fact, of read that way? Not at all. In fact, of all the supposed contradictions, I find all the supposed contradictions, I find all the supposed contradictions, I find that one of the least compelling. But, that one of the least compelling. But, that one of the least compelling. But, here's the point. He he he puts a lot of here's the point. He he he puts a lot of here's the point. He he he puts a lot of weight on these apparent contradictions. weight on these apparent contradictions. weight on these apparent contradictions. I think most of those, when you start I think most of those, when you start I think most of those, when you start really digging into them, you realize really digging into them, you realize really digging into them, you realize that the gospel authors had different that the gospel authors had different that the gospel authors had different ways of telling the story, different ways of telling the story, different ways of telling the story, different ways of writing. Modern historiography ways of writing. Modern historiography ways of writing. Modern historiography is different than ancient is different than ancient is different than ancient historiography. And if we keep those historiography. And if we keep those historiography. And if we keep those things in mind, I think we quickly things in mind, I think we quickly things in mind, I think we quickly realize a lot of those contradictions realize a lot of those contradictions realize a lot of those contradictions uh can be resolved. uh can be resolved. uh can be resolved. Hm. That's good. Okay, so that was his Hm. That's good. Okay, so that was his Hm. That's good. Okay, so that was his first charge. Um and his second argument first charge. Um and his second argument first charge. Um and his second argument is that they were written so long after is that they were written so long after is that they were written so long after events took place. So, if Jesus died events took place. So, if Jesus died events took place. So, if Jesus died around 30-ish AD, and our contention is around 30-ish AD, and our contention is around 30-ish AD, and our contention is the gospels were written around 60 AD.

the gospels were written around 60 AD. the gospels were written around 60 AD. Ehrman would say or in the 80s or 90s, Ehrman would say or in the 80s or 90s, Ehrman would say or in the 80s or 90s, but if we say 60s, 80s, 90s, a while a but if we say 60s, 80s, 90s, a while a but if we say 60s, 80s, 90s, a while a while afterward, while afterward, while afterward, um who could remember exactly what Jesus um who could remember exactly what Jesus um who could remember exactly what Jesus said after all that period of time, said after all that period of time, said after all that period of time, right? Um if this was 30 years later, right? Um if this was 30 years later, right? Um if this was 30 years later, who could remember what he said on the who could remember what he said on the who could remember what he said on the Sermon on the Mount? Who knows what when Sermon on the Mount? Who knows what when Sermon on the Mount? Who knows what when he was talking to the woman at the well? he was talking to the woman at the well? he was talking to the woman at the well? Who could remember all of this? Who could remember all of this? Who could remember all of this? Yeah, this opens up a whole vast field Yeah, this opens up a whole vast field Yeah, this opens up a whole vast field of study about the way oral transmission of study about the way oral transmission of study about the way oral transmission happened in the early Christian faith, happened in the early Christian faith, happened in the early Christian faith, one of course that we can't fully unpack one of course that we can't fully unpack one of course that we can't fully unpack here. What's interesting though is that here. What's interesting though is that here. What's interesting though is that there is an older version of this and a there is an older version of this and a there is an older version of this and a newer version of this field. In the newer version of this field. In the newer version of this field. In the older version of this field, which fell older version of this field, which fell older version of this field, which fell under this heading really called form under this heading really called form under this heading really called form criticism, there was a widespread idea criticism, there was a widespread idea criticism, there was a widespread idea that circulation of tradition in early that circulation of tradition in early that circulation of tradition in early Christianity was all done in anonymous Christianity was all done in anonymous Christianity was all done in anonymous communities, communities, communities, and it was changed widely and radically, and it was changed widely and radically, and it was changed widely and radically, and that what you started with is not and that what you started with is not and that what you started with is not what you end with, kind of like the kids what you end with, kind of like the kids what you end with, kind of like the kids telephone game you played with in telephone game you played with in telephone game you played with in elementary school, where you'd whisper elementary school, where you'd whisper elementary school, where you'd whisper in one kid's ear and they'd whisper in one kid's ear and they'd whisper in one kid's ear and they'd whisper around the circle and it come back out around the circle and it come back out around the circle and it come back out as something as something as something entirely different. But now, the whole entirely different. But now, the whole entirely different. But now, the whole form critical model has been almost form critical model has been almost form critical model has been almost completely rejected by modern scholars.

completely rejected by modern scholars. completely rejected by modern scholars. And there's been a complete flipping of And there's been a complete flipping of And there's been a complete flipping of the narrative. the narrative. the narrative. This doesn't deny that there was a This doesn't deny that there was a This doesn't deny that there was a period of oral transmission. But the period of oral transmission. But the period of oral transmission. But the idea that it was always done in this idea that it was always done in this idea that it was always done in this anonymous sort of community, change anonymous sort of community, change anonymous sort of community, change whatever you want kind of way, has been whatever you want kind of way, has been whatever you want kind of way, has been challenged and challenged significantly. challenged and challenged significantly. challenged and challenged significantly. And one of the things that scholars have And one of the things that scholars have And one of the things that scholars have recognized through more and more study recognized through more and more study recognized through more and more study is that the tradition wasn't transmitted is that the tradition wasn't transmitted is that the tradition wasn't transmitted anonymously. anonymously. anonymously. It's trans transmitted through formal It's trans transmitted through formal It's trans transmitted through formal tradents or formal eyewitnesses or those tradents or formal eyewitnesses or those tradents or formal eyewitnesses or those who were authorized to transmit the who were authorized to transmit the who were authorized to transmit the tradition uh reliably. We actually have tradition uh reliably. We actually have tradition uh reliably. We actually have evidence this of this in the New evidence this of this in the New evidence this of this in the New Testament itself. If if people who read Testament itself. If if people who read Testament itself. If if people who read the New Testament pay attention, they'll the New Testament pay attention, they'll the New Testament pay attention, they'll realize that built within the New realize that built within the New realize that built within the New Testament is is evidence of a system of Testament is is evidence of a system of Testament is is evidence of a system of passing down tradition in reliable, passing down tradition in reliable, passing down tradition in reliable, formal, controlled ways. formal, controlled ways. formal, controlled ways. Good example of this is the passage I Good example of this is the passage I Good example of this is the passage I just mentioned moments ago in 1 just mentioned moments ago in 1 just mentioned moments ago in 1 Corinthians 15. Paul says, "What I Corinthians 15. Paul says, "What I Corinthians 15. Paul says, "What I received, I passed down to you that received, I passed down to you that received, I passed down to you that Christ died according uh to the Christ died according uh to the Christ died according uh to the scriptures and was raised 3 days later scriptures and was raised 3 days later scriptures and was raised 3 days later according to the scriptures." That whole according to the scriptures." That whole according to the scriptures." That whole section is understood by many scholars section is understood by many scholars section is understood by many scholars to be what is effectively an early early to be what is effectively an early early to be what is effectively an early early creedal statement that predates Paul by creedal statement that predates Paul by creedal statement that predates Paul by generations.

generations. generations. And was formalized and carefully And was formalized and carefully And was formalized and carefully transmitted. That's the example of the transmitted. That's the example of the transmitted. That's the example of the kind of thing was happening in the early kind of thing was happening in the early kind of thing was happening in the early church. In fact, a lot agree that that church. In fact, a lot agree that that church. In fact, a lot agree that that creedal statement goes back probably creedal statement goes back probably creedal statement goes back probably well into the 40s of the 1st century. So well into the 40s of the 1st century. So well into the 40s of the 1st century. So now, this supposedly big gap starts now, this supposedly big gap starts now, this supposedly big gap starts shrinking pretty fast. We have evidence shrinking pretty fast. We have evidence shrinking pretty fast. We have evidence of that creedal transmission in places of that creedal transmission in places of that creedal transmission in places like Philippians 2, 1 Corinthians 8, 1 like Philippians 2, 1 Corinthians 8, 1 like Philippians 2, 1 Corinthians 8, 1 Corinthians 15, 1 Corinthians 11, and on Corinthians 15, 1 Corinthians 11, and on Corinthians 15, 1 Corinthians 11, and on and on it goes. And then I'd add another and on it goes. And then I'd add another and on it goes. And then I'd add another layer to this that's not mentioned is layer to this that's not mentioned is layer to this that's not mentioned is the idea of using early Christian the idea of using early Christian the idea of using early Christian notebooks. This idea that people just notebooks. This idea that people just notebooks. This idea that people just sat around for 30 or 40 years with no sat around for 30 or 40 years with no sat around for 30 or 40 years with no inkling at all to write anything down, I inkling at all to write anything down, I inkling at all to write anything down, I think does not fit with what we know think does not fit with what we know think does not fit with what we know about the ancient Roman world. It was about the ancient Roman world. It was about the ancient Roman world. It was common when you would take notes from common when you would take notes from common when you would take notes from your leader, your rabbi, your master, your leader, your rabbi, your master, your leader, your rabbi, your master, you would write these things down. So you would write these things down. So you would write these things down. So oral transmission was happening, yes, oral transmission was happening, yes, oral transmission was happening, yes, but alongside probably some early but alongside probably some early but alongside probably some early written text that would have also written text that would have also written text that would have also stabilized the the stabilized the the stabilized the the So, yes, it sounds really scary to think So, yes, it sounds really scary to think So, yes, it sounds really scary to think this big gap of time telephone game, but this big gap of time telephone game, but this big gap of time telephone game, but when you look at all the data actually, when you look at all the data actually, when you look at all the data actually, we have good reasons to think the we have good reasons to think the we have good reasons to think the tradition was reliably transmitted over tradition was reliably transmitted over tradition was reliably transmitted over that block of time. that block of time. that block of time. It also maybe it's cuz we're so far away It also maybe it's cuz we're so far away It also maybe it's cuz we're so far away now, but 30 years to me doesn't feel now, but 30 years to me doesn't feel now, but 30 years to me doesn't feel like that long of time. People would like that long of time. People would like that long of time. People would still be alive that knew Jesus, and so still be alive that knew Jesus, and so still be alive that knew Jesus, and so it just doesn't seem It's like yeah, 30 it just doesn't seem It's like yeah, 30 it just doesn't seem It's like yeah, 30 years isn't like 300. One of the years isn't like 300. One of the years isn't like 300. One of the examples I've given in a in my book examples I've given in a in my book examples I've given in a in my book Surviving Religion 101 is a is a um Surviving Religion 101 is a is a um Surviving Religion 101 is a is a um historical account historical account of historical account historical account of historical account historical account of the Revolutionary War written by John the Revolutionary War written by John the Revolutionary War written by John Adams before he died. And he wrote it Adams before he died. And he wrote it Adams before he died. And he wrote it about 30 years about 30 years about 30 years uh after Oh, actually it was more than uh after Oh, actually it was more than uh after Oh, actually it was more than that. It may have been It may have been that. It may have been It may have been that. It may have been It may have been more than 30 years after the events more than 30 years after the events more than 30 years after the events themselves.

themselves. themselves. Um but he was still a person who was Um but he was still a person who was Um but he was still a person who was there. there. there. We have no reason to discount what was We have no reason to discount what was We have no reason to discount what was in that just because of the gap of time. in that just because of the gap of time. in that just because of the gap of time. You could say, "Well, you forgot. Your You could say, "Well, you forgot. Your You could say, "Well, you forgot. Your memory is blurred." Well, maybe. But but memory is blurred." Well, maybe. But but memory is blurred." Well, maybe. But but I'm telling you if I have an historical I'm telling you if I have an historical I'm telling you if I have an historical record available to me written by record available to me written by record available to me written by someone someone someone uh who has boots on the ground, even if uh who has boots on the ground, even if uh who has boots on the ground, even if it was written 30 or 40 years later, I'm it was written 30 or 40 years later, I'm it was written 30 or 40 years later, I'm going to take that historical record. going to take that historical record. going to take that historical record. Yeah, that's good. Yeah, that's good. Yeah, that's good. Okay, so here's Ehrman's third problem Okay, so here's Ehrman's third problem Okay, so here's Ehrman's third problem that he has. According to him, and that he has. According to him, and that he has. According to him, and you're addressing this a little bit you're addressing this a little bit you're addressing this a little bit already, but the Gospels are not already, but the Gospels are not already, but the Gospels are not eyewitness accounts. So, he says we eyewitness accounts. So, he says we eyewitness accounts. So, he says we don't know who the authors were because don't know who the authors were because don't know who the authors were because the Gospels circulated anonymously for the Gospels circulated anonymously for the Gospels circulated anonymously for years. Right? Feeling like they're So, years. Right? Feeling like they're So, years. Right? Feeling like they're So, he he would say, "Hey, the the people he he would say, "Hey, the the people he he would say, "Hey, the the people who wrote the Gospels um as we have them who wrote the Gospels um as we have them who wrote the Gospels um as we have them now were disconnected from the events. now were disconnected from the events. now were disconnected from the events. They weren't there. They wrote them They weren't there. They wrote them They weren't there. They wrote them later, and they were outside of later, and they were outside of later, and they were outside of Palestine. They didn't know the culture. Palestine. They didn't know the culture. Palestine. They didn't know the culture. Um Um Um why would we trust those guys?" why would we trust those guys?" why would we trust those guys?" Yeah, he he made a statement in the in Yeah, he he made a statement in the in Yeah, he he made a statement in the in the Doubt interview that I I found the Doubt interview that I I found the Doubt interview that I I found remarkable. He he he said that there was remarkable. He he he said that there was remarkable. He he he said that there was a long period of this the Gospels a long period of this the Gospels a long period of this the Gospels circulating anonymously.

circulating anonymously. circulating anonymously. I I would simply ask, "What's the I I would simply ask, "What's the I I would simply ask, "What's the evidence for that?" evidence for that?" evidence for that?" There there actually is no evidence for There there actually is no evidence for There there actually is no evidence for that. that. that. We don't have Let me just lay it out We don't have Let me just lay it out We don't have Let me just lay it out here. We don't have a single example here. We don't have a single example here. We don't have a single example of any of our four Gospels, Matthew, of any of our four Gospels, Matthew, of any of our four Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, circulate in the Mark, Luke, and John, circulate in the Mark, Luke, and John, circulate in the early church without the name attached early church without the name attached early church without the name attached to them that's attached to them now. Not to them that's attached to them now. Not to them that's attached to them now. Not a single example anywhere. a single example anywhere. a single example anywhere. Now, of course, you have fragments of Now, of course, you have fragments of Now, of course, you have fragments of the Gospels that the Gospels that the Gospels that don't have the cover page on them or the don't have the cover page on them or the don't have the cover page on them or the or the last page where the title's or the last page where the title's or the last page where the title's included. That's not what we're talking included. That's not what we're talking included. That's not what we're talking about cuz you're not expected to see the about cuz you're not expected to see the about cuz you're not expected to see the title there. title there. title there. But do we ever find the Gospel of Mark But do we ever find the Gospel of Mark But do we ever find the Gospel of Mark circulating without the title The Gospel circulating without the title The Gospel circulating without the title The Gospel According to Mark? No. Do you ever find According to Mark? No. Do you ever find According to Mark? No. Do you ever find the Gospel of Luke circulating without the Gospel of Luke circulating without the Gospel of Luke circulating without the title Gospel According to Luke? No. the title Gospel According to Luke? No. the title Gospel According to Luke? No. In fact, not only do we find every copy In fact, not only do we find every copy In fact, not only do we find every copy with the titles, but the titles are with the titles, but the titles are with the titles, but the titles are actually all the same. Historically, we actually all the same. Historically, we actually all the same. Historically, we never call Mark the Gospel of Philip. We never call Mark the Gospel of Philip. We never call Mark the Gospel of Philip. We never call the Gospel of John the Gospel never call the Gospel of John the Gospel never call the Gospel of John the Gospel of Thomas. We don't have any evidence of Thomas. We don't have any evidence of Thomas. We don't have any evidence that the church was confused about who that the church was confused about who that the church was confused about who these authors were or that there's these authors were or that there's these authors were or that there's different titles attached to them. So, different titles attached to them. So, different titles attached to them. So, this idea that the Gospels had this big this idea that the Gospels had this big this idea that the Gospels had this big period of period of period of of circulating anonymously and then of circulating anonymously and then of circulating anonymously and then these names were attached later has these names were attached later has these names were attached later has absolutely zero evidence for it. More absolutely zero evidence for it. More absolutely zero evidence for it. More than that, it's even worse because if than that, it's even worse because if than that, it's even worse because if you have a long period of anonymous you have a long period of anonymous you have a long period of anonymous circulation, what's the chance of the circulation, what's the chance of the circulation, what's the chance of the church all agreeing what to call these church all agreeing what to call these church all agreeing what to call these these Gospels later?

these Gospels later? these Gospels later? So, So, So, what does that tell you? That tells you what does that tell you? That tells you what does that tell you? That tells you that the titles actually have a lot more that the titles actually have a lot more that the titles actually have a lot more historical significance historical significance historical significance to who wrote these books than than we to who wrote these books than than we to who wrote these books than than we might actually realize. Another might actually realize. Another might actually realize. Another statement that he made is that there's statement that he made is that there's statement that he made is that there's no indication from the authors of these no indication from the authors of these no indication from the authors of these Gospels that they are eyewitness Gospels that they are eyewitness Gospels that they are eyewitness reports. reports. reports. I I find that baffling on multiple I I find that baffling on multiple I I find that baffling on multiple levels. For one, the Gospel of John levels. For one, the Gospel of John levels. For one, the Gospel of John expressly says it's an eyewitness expressly says it's an eyewitness expressly says it's an eyewitness report. It was written by someone who report. It was written by someone who report. It was written by someone who was the beloved disciple. He says he was the beloved disciple. He says he was the beloved disciple. He says he wrote these things and he was actually wrote these things and he was actually wrote these things and he was actually at the Last Supper whom Jesus laid his at the Last Supper whom Jesus laid his at the Last Supper whom Jesus laid his head on his chest. So, whoever you head on his chest. So, whoever you head on his chest. So, whoever you identify the beloved disciple as and we identify the beloved disciple as and we identify the beloved disciple as and we would argue John the son of son of would argue John the son of son of would argue John the son of son of Zebedee is a reasonable conclusion there Zebedee is a reasonable conclusion there Zebedee is a reasonable conclusion there claims to be an eyewitness Gospel. And claims to be an eyewitness Gospel. And claims to be an eyewitness Gospel. And then I would add to that Luke. Now, Luke then I would add to that Luke. Now, Luke then I would add to that Luke. Now, Luke himself doesn't claim to be an himself doesn't claim to be an himself doesn't claim to be an eyewitness Gospel, but he says in the eyewitness Gospel, but he says in the eyewitness Gospel, but he says in the very opening prologue that that very opening prologue that that very opening prologue that that basically he's a student of the people basically he's a student of the people basically he's a student of the people who were the eyewitnesses. who were the eyewitnesses. who were the eyewitnesses. Um the apostles. And so, you have what Um the apostles. And so, you have what Um the apostles. And so, you have what you would call one step from eyewitness you would call one step from eyewitness you would call one step from eyewitness testimony, testimony, testimony, uh would be sort of a what what what uh would be sort of a what what what uh would be sort of a what what what some early historians would call some early historians would call some early historians would call secondary autopsy, but that's actually secondary autopsy, but that's actually secondary autopsy, but that's actually really good, too. If I was in a If I'm really good, too. If I was in a If I'm really good, too. If I was in a If I'm an historian and I want to get close to an historian and I want to get close to an historian and I want to get close to an historical event, what do I want?

an historical event, what do I want? an historical event, what do I want? Either someone who was there or someone Either someone who was there or someone Either someone who was there or someone who got his information from someone who who got his information from someone who who got his information from someone who was there, and that's exactly who you was there, and that's exactly who you was there, and that's exactly who you have in the person of Luke. have in the person of Luke. have in the person of Luke. Now, when you look at Mark, Now, when you look at Mark, Now, when you look at Mark, you know, I know that Ehrman is not you know, I know that Ehrman is not you know, I know that Ehrman is not convinced about Peter's tradition behind convinced about Peter's tradition behind convinced about Peter's tradition behind Mark, but you may not realize it, the Mark, but you may not realize it, the Mark, but you may not realize it, the tradition of of the fact that Mark's tradition of of the fact that Mark's tradition of of the fact that Mark's gospel is effectively the memories of gospel is effectively the memories of gospel is effectively the memories of Peter has a deep, wide historical Peter has a deep, wide historical Peter has a deep, wide historical resonance with the early Christian resonance with the early Christian resonance with the early Christian world. We have this all the way back in world. We have this all the way back in world. We have this all the way back in the first century. Papias quotes someone the first century. Papias quotes someone the first century. Papias quotes someone from the first century who says that from the first century who says that from the first century who says that basically Peter is behind Mark's gospel. basically Peter is behind Mark's gospel. basically Peter is behind Mark's gospel. And then we have the same thing repeated And then we have the same thing repeated And then we have the same thing repeated by Justin Martyr, and the same thing by Justin Martyr, and the same thing by Justin Martyr, and the same thing repeated by Irenaeus, and the same thing repeated by Irenaeus, and the same thing repeated by Irenaeus, and the same thing repeated by Tertullian and Clement of repeated by Tertullian and Clement of repeated by Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria. What does that What does Alexandria. What does that What does Alexandria. What does that What does that whole matrix tell you? that whole matrix tell you? that whole matrix tell you? That tells you when you look at the four That tells you when you look at the four That tells you when you look at the four gospels, actually you have very good gospels, actually you have very good gospels, actually you have very good reasons to think they're associated with reasons to think they're associated with reasons to think they're associated with people who were there in the first people who were there in the first people who were there in the first century. And so the idea that there's no century. And so the idea that there's no century. And so the idea that there's no evidence for that, I would flip it and evidence for that, I would flip it and evidence for that, I would flip it and say actually there's tremendous evidence say actually there's tremendous evidence say actually there's tremendous evidence for that, and I think there's hardly any for that, and I think there's hardly any for that, and I think there's hardly any evidence that they circulated evidence that they circulated evidence that they circulated anonymously. Now, of course you could anonymously. Now, of course you could anonymously. Now, of course you could have a name attached to them from the have a name attached to them from the have a name attached to them from the very beginning that's wrong, that's very beginning that's wrong, that's very beginning that's wrong, that's possible, but but when you do history, possible, but but when you do history, possible, but but when you do history, you don't really ask what's possible, you don't really ask what's possible, you don't really ask what's possible, you ask what's probable. And if you have you ask what's probable. And if you have you ask what's probable. And if you have those names from the very early time, those names from the very early time, those names from the very early time, it's really likely that they reflect it's really likely that they reflect it's really likely that they reflect real authorship.

real authorship. real authorship. Yeah, that makes sense. That makes Yeah, that makes sense. That makes Yeah, that makes sense. That makes sense. sense. sense. Okay, so here is the story Okay, so here is the story Okay, so here is the story if you if you would say to Bart Ehrman, if you if you would say to Bart Ehrman, if you if you would say to Bart Ehrman, "Okay, how did How do you think "Okay, how did How do you think "Okay, how did How do you think Christianity came into being if it isn't Christianity came into being if it isn't Christianity came into being if it isn't true?" true?" true?" He would tell you this story, okay? The He would tell you this story, okay? The He would tell you this story, okay? The story goes like this. story goes like this. story goes like this. Jesus' followers thought that he was the Jesus' followers thought that he was the Jesus' followers thought that he was the Messiah. They They were convinced of it, Messiah. They They were convinced of it, Messiah. They They were convinced of it, and then he was arrested and crucified, and then he was arrested and crucified, and then he was arrested and crucified, and they didn't know what to think. And and they didn't know what to think. And and they didn't know what to think. And then a couple of his followers, maybe then a couple of his followers, maybe then a couple of his followers, maybe Peter or Mary Magdalene or a couple Peter or Mary Magdalene or a couple Peter or Mary Magdalene or a couple really strong followers, thought that really strong followers, thought that really strong followers, thought that they saw him alive. Maybe they they saw him alive. Maybe they they saw him alive. Maybe they hallucinated it, maybe they dreamed it, hallucinated it, maybe they dreamed it, hallucinated it, maybe they dreamed it, or whatever it would be. They thought or whatever it would be. They thought or whatever it would be. They thought they saw maybe they saw a person in a they saw maybe they saw a person in a they saw maybe they saw a person in a crowd and they thought it was him. Um crowd and they thought it was him. Um crowd and they thought it was him. Um anybody who's had someone die, right, anybody who's had someone die, right, anybody who's had someone die, right, and really wishes they could see that and really wishes they could see that and really wishes they could see that person can relate to like, I think that person can relate to like, I think that person can relate to like, I think that was them. was them. was them. And then maybe Peter and Mary Magdalene And then maybe Peter and Mary Magdalene And then maybe Peter and Mary Magdalene talked about this so much over and over talked about this so much over and over talked about this so much over and over again that they convinced themselves and again that they convinced themselves and again that they convinced themselves and convinced all the people around them convinced all the people around them convinced all the people around them that they really had seen Jesus alive. that they really had seen Jesus alive. that they really had seen Jesus alive. And from there the disciples began to And from there the disciples began to And from there the disciples began to reason, "Oh, well, if Jesus is alive, reason, "Oh, well, if Jesus is alive, reason, "Oh, well, if Jesus is alive, then we got this wrong. We thought he then we got this wrong. We thought he then we got this wrong. We thought he was coming to destroy the Romans.

was coming to destroy the Romans. was coming to destroy the Romans. Maybe God wanted him to die and come Maybe God wanted him to die and come Maybe God wanted him to die and come back to life instead. Well, why that? Um back to life instead. Well, why that? Um back to life instead. Well, why that? Um maybe he had to die to save us uh maybe he had to die to save us uh maybe he had to die to save us uh because he loves us. Why would he have because he loves us. Why would he have because he loves us. Why would he have to die to save you? Oh, maybe it's to die to save you? Oh, maybe it's to die to save you? Oh, maybe it's because it's a sacrifice for our sins. because it's a sacrifice for our sins. because it's a sacrifice for our sins. And let's tell everybody that and and And let's tell everybody that and and And let's tell everybody that and and maybe that is how Christianity was born maybe that is how Christianity was born maybe that is how Christianity was born instead. Do you think that is a could be instead. Do you think that is a could be instead. Do you think that is a could be a reasonable explanation for the a reasonable explanation for the a reasonable explanation for the beginning of Christianity? beginning of Christianity? beginning of Christianity? Yeah, I think you know where I'm going Yeah, I think you know where I'm going Yeah, I think you know where I'm going to go with this one. Um to go with this one. Um to go with this one. Um yeah, it's an interesting story. yeah, it's an interesting story. yeah, it's an interesting story. Um purely hypothetical. Um purely hypothetical. Um purely hypothetical. Um Um Um you know, it's a reconstruction you know, it's a reconstruction you know, it's a reconstruction of what could explain of what could explain of what could explain what I think is some of the best what I think is some of the best what I think is some of the best evidence for the resurrection. Lurking evidence for the resurrection. Lurking evidence for the resurrection. Lurking behind that explanation is a reality behind that explanation is a reality behind that explanation is a reality that Ehrman is trying to address. And that Ehrman is trying to address. And that Ehrman is trying to address. And for the listener who may not understand, for the listener who may not understand, for the listener who may not understand, here's that reality. here's that reality. here's that reality. There's the question of of whether Jesus There's the question of of whether Jesus There's the question of of whether Jesus really rose from the dead or not, which really rose from the dead or not, which really rose from the dead or not, which is a important historical question to is a important historical question to is a important historical question to address. address. address. But there's a different historical But there's a different historical But there's a different historical question to address that's linked to it question to address that's linked to it question to address that's linked to it that often people don't think about. And that often people don't think about. And that often people don't think about. And that is not how do I explain whether that is not how do I explain whether that is not how do I explain whether Jesus rose from the dead, but how do I Jesus rose from the dead, but how do I Jesus rose from the dead, but how do I explain how people came to believe he explain how people came to believe he explain how people came to believe he rose from the dead.

rose from the dead. rose from the dead. It's absolutely an historical fact that It's absolutely an historical fact that It's absolutely an historical fact that early Christians believed that Jesus had early Christians believed that Jesus had early Christians believed that Jesus had risen from the dead, that he came back risen from the dead, that he came back risen from the dead, that he came back to life, that he rose physically and to life, that he rose physically and to life, that he rose physically and bodily, bodily, bodily, um and that transformed that early um and that transformed that early um and that transformed that early Christian uh mission from dying to back Christian uh mission from dying to back Christian uh mission from dying to back to life to eventually in a few to life to eventually in a few to life to eventually in a few generations taking over the entire Roman generations taking over the entire Roman generations taking over the entire Roman world. To understand this, you just have world. To understand this, you just have world. To understand this, you just have to understand what it meant to have a to understand what it meant to have a to understand what it meant to have a dead Messiah. Um we tend to think that dead Messiah. Um we tend to think that dead Messiah. Um we tend to think that when when when Jesus died, then the when when when Jesus died, then the when when when Jesus died, then the disciples were sort of saying, "Well, disciples were sort of saying, "Well, disciples were sort of saying, "Well, I've got to looking at their watch I've got to looking at their watch I've got to looking at their watch going, well, I got going, well, I got going, well, I got you know, 3 days to kill here, and it's you know, 3 days to kill here, and it's you know, 3 days to kill here, and it's all going to be fine, and he'll come all going to be fine, and he'll come all going to be fine, and he'll come back, and we'll be good." But that's not back, and we'll be good." But that's not back, and we'll be good." But that's not what happened. The disciples were in what happened. The disciples were in what happened. The disciples were in utter despair. They didn't think, "We utter despair. They didn't think, "We utter despair. They didn't think, "We can save this thing. They didn't think, can save this thing. They didn't think, can save this thing. They didn't think, "We could we could redeem this somehow." "We could we could redeem this somehow." "We could we could redeem this somehow." For them, it was over. A dead Messiah For them, it was over. A dead Messiah For them, it was over. A dead Messiah was no Messiah. was no Messiah. was no Messiah. Ehrman's reconstruction almost makes it Ehrman's reconstruction almost makes it Ehrman's reconstruction almost makes it seem like seem like seem like that the disciples were sort of eager to that the disciples were sort of eager to that the disciples were sort of eager to see Jesus behind every tree and around see Jesus behind every tree and around see Jesus behind every tree and around every corner, as if, you know, you're every corner, as if, you know, you're every corner, as if, you know, you're just sort of ready to see a loved one in just sort of ready to see a loved one in just sort of ready to see a loved one in a dream or a vision. And and and then, a dream or a vision. And and and then, a dream or a vision. And and and then, if it happened, that would transform the if it happened, that would transform the if it happened, that would transform the whole movement. I would suggest that whole movement. I would suggest that whole movement. I would suggest that it's mistaken on both those grounds.

it's mistaken on both those grounds. it's mistaken on both those grounds. One, the disciples and the early One, the disciples and the early One, the disciples and the early followers of Jesus were not in a followers of Jesus were not in a followers of Jesus were not in a disposition to see Jesus. So much so disposition to see Jesus. So much so disposition to see Jesus. So much so that even when they saw him, they didn't that even when they saw him, they didn't that even when they saw him, they didn't recognize him. And even when they saw recognize him. And even when they saw recognize him. And even when they saw him, they hardly believed. And it took him, they hardly believed. And it took him, they hardly believed. And it took time and time and time again to get them time and time and time again to get them time and time and time again to get them to believe. So they were not in a to believe. So they were not in a to believe. So they were not in a position to start seeing visions. And position to start seeing visions. And position to start seeing visions. And then secondly, then secondly, then secondly, he's making it sound like that the the he's making it sound like that the the he's making it sound like that the the sort of visionary experience is a sort of visionary experience is a sort of visionary experience is a parallel to what the Gospels are parallel to what the Gospels are parallel to what the Gospels are describing. Is it true that people in describing. Is it true that people in describing. Is it true that people in the modern day, you could explain by the modern day, you could explain by the modern day, you could explain by psychology, think they saw a loved one psychology, think they saw a loved one psychology, think they saw a loved one alive? Of course that happens. alive? Of course that happens. alive? Of course that happens. Does it happen in groups? Does it happen in groups? Does it happen in groups? Does does do hallucinations happen in Does does do hallucinations happen in Does does do hallucinations happen in groups, where they all together see one groups, where they all together see one groups, where they all together see one person? person? person? And even if you thought you saw somebody And even if you thought you saw somebody And even if you thought you saw somebody in a group, is it sustained? Does it in a group, is it sustained? Does it in a group, is it sustained? Does it happen again and again, so much so that happen again and again, so much so that happen again and again, so much so that over a period of time, in weeks, maybe over a period of time, in weeks, maybe over a period of time, in weeks, maybe even a month, the person is still there? even a month, the person is still there? even a month, the person is still there? These are very different scenarios. The These are very different scenarios. The These are very different scenarios. The idea that you can explain the early idea that you can explain the early idea that you can explain the early Christian belief in the resurrection by Christian belief in the resurrection by Christian belief in the resurrection by appealing to to group hallucinations, appealing to to group hallucinations, appealing to to group hallucinations, which effectively is what the appeal which effectively is what the appeal which effectively is what the appeal here is to, here is to, here is to, is is a answer. is is a answer. is is a answer. And I would even argue it's a possible And I would even argue it's a possible And I would even argue it's a possible answer.

answer. answer. Is it the most likely answer? I I'll let Is it the most likely answer? I I'll let Is it the most likely answer? I I'll let the listener decide whether they think the listener decide whether they think the listener decide whether they think that's more persuasive. The only I would that's more persuasive. The only I would that's more persuasive. The only I would suggest this, the only way someone suggest this, the only way someone suggest this, the only way someone thinks that's a more likely answer is if thinks that's a more likely answer is if thinks that's a more likely answer is if they rule out the supernatural from the they rule out the supernatural from the they rule out the supernatural from the outset. If you If you don't think outset. If you If you don't think outset. If you If you don't think supernatural things can happen, then of supernatural things can happen, then of supernatural things can happen, then of course you'd think it's more likely to course you'd think it's more likely to course you'd think it's more likely to have a group hallucination. But if God have a group hallucination. But if God have a group hallucination. But if God intervenes in the world and supernatural intervenes in the world and supernatural intervenes in the world and supernatural things are possible, why is it more things are possible, why is it more things are possible, why is it more likely that you would have a group likely that you would have a group likely that you would have a group hallucination when you know how how hallucination when you know how how hallucination when you know how how those don't really happen? In fact, one those don't really happen? In fact, one those don't really happen? In fact, one of the reasons you wonder when you're of the reasons you wonder when you're of the reasons you wonder when you're hallucinating whether you're actually hallucinating whether you're actually hallucinating whether you're actually hallucinating, don't you say to the hallucinating, don't you say to the hallucinating, don't you say to the person next to you, "Are you seeing what person next to you, "Are you seeing what person next to you, "Are you seeing what I'm seeing?" I mean, there's no such I'm seeing?" I mean, there's no such I'm seeing?" I mean, there's no such thing as a group hallucination. So, I I thing as a group hallucination. So, I I thing as a group hallucination. So, I I don't I don't find that more compelling. don't I don't find that more compelling. don't I don't find that more compelling. So, what he suggested in the little So, what he suggested in the little So, what he suggested in the little narrative you've repeated there is a narrative you've repeated there is a narrative you've repeated there is a option, yes. option, yes. option, yes. And I'm sure we can come up with 35 more And I'm sure we can come up with 35 more And I'm sure we can come up with 35 more options. options. options. But is that a better option? I would say But is that a better option? I would say But is that a better option? I would say it's only a better option if you already it's only a better option if you already it's only a better option if you already rule out God's intervention from the rule out God's intervention from the rule out God's intervention from the outset. outset. outset. Yeah, I mean, doesn't a group Yeah, I mean, doesn't a group Yeah, I mean, doesn't a group hallucination also seem supernatural? hallucination also seem supernatural? hallucination also seem supernatural? Right. Well, he would argue that Right. Well, he would argue that Right. Well, he would argue that psychologists have explained such psychologists have explained such psychologists have explained such things. Yeah. Yeah.

things. Yeah. Yeah. things. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That's interesting. Yeah. That's interesting. Yeah. That's interesting. Okay. Okay. Okay. Um this is This is uh my favorite Um this is This is uh my favorite Um this is This is uh my favorite question that I'm my second favorite question that I'm my second favorite question that I'm my second favorite question that I'm going to ask you. Um question that I'm going to ask you. Um question that I'm going to ask you. Um it's a long one though. So, um this is it's a long one though. So, um this is it's a long one though. So, um this is more about the way that he thinks, the more about the way that he thinks, the more about the way that he thinks, the way that that Ehrman argues things. So, way that that Ehrman argues things. So, way that that Ehrman argues things. So, first of all, as I'm I was listening to first of all, as I'm I was listening to first of all, as I'm I was listening to this conversation he's having with with this conversation he's having with with this conversation he's having with with Douthat, he says, Douthat, he says, Douthat, he says, "If the gospel accounts agree, that "If the gospel accounts agree, that "If the gospel accounts agree, that means they were probably copying each means they were probably copying each means they were probably copying each other, right? So, then you don't have to other, right? So, then you don't have to other, right? So, then you don't have to take them seriously cuz they're all take them seriously cuz they're all take them seriously cuz they're all copying each other. But if they don't copying each other. But if they don't copying each other. But if they don't agree," he argues, "that means that they agree," he argues, "that means that they agree," he argues, "that means that they are contradictory and untrustworthy cuz are contradictory and untrustworthy cuz are contradictory and untrustworthy cuz they don't agree with each other, right? they don't agree with each other, right? they don't agree with each other, right? So, you can't If they agree, they were So, you can't If they agree, they were So, you can't If they agree, they were copying. If they don't agree, they're copying. If they don't agree, they're copying. If they don't agree, they're untrustworthy." So, he's arguing both untrustworthy." So, he's arguing both untrustworthy." So, he's arguing both sides. And then he does it again. A sides. And then he does it again. A sides. And then he does it again. A little bit later in the conversation he little bit later in the conversation he little bit later in the conversation he says, "We can't trust people who were says, "We can't trust people who were says, "We can't trust people who were not there to write it down accurately not there to write it down accurately not there to write it down accurately cuz they were not there. cuz they were not there. cuz they were not there. However, we also cannot trust people who However, we also cannot trust people who However, we also cannot trust people who were there because they probably had an were there because they probably had an were there because they probably had an ulterior motive to portray things a ulterior motive to portray things a ulterior motive to portray things a certain way. So, we can't trust people certain way. So, we can't trust people certain way. So, we can't trust people who were there to write it down. We also who were there to write it down. We also who were there to write it down. We also can't people trust people who weren't can't people trust people who weren't can't people trust people who weren't there to write it down.

there to write it down. there to write it down. Then a little bit later he says, Then a little bit later he says, Then a little bit later he says, "You can't trust anything that Jesus "You can't trust anything that Jesus "You can't trust anything that Jesus said or did if it's only found in one said or did if it's only found in one said or did if it's only found in one account of the Gospels. So, if it's a account of the Gospels. So, if it's a account of the Gospels. So, if it's a story only told say in Matthew, you story only told say in Matthew, you story only told say in Matthew, you can't trust that because it's then not can't trust that because it's then not can't trust that because it's then not corroborated by those other Gospels." corroborated by those other Gospels." corroborated by those other Gospels." However, he also says, "You cannot trust However, he also says, "You cannot trust However, he also says, "You cannot trust it if it was written in several Gospels it if it was written in several Gospels it if it was written in several Gospels because that is just proof that they because that is just proof that they because that is just proof that they were copying each other, which means it were copying each other, which means it were copying each other, which means it was really just one account, which means was really just one account, which means was really just one account, which means therefore it's untrustworthy." See what therefore it's untrustworthy." See what therefore it's untrustworthy." See what he's doing there? It feels like oh, he's doing there? It feels like oh, he's doing there? It feels like oh, we're we go in this little circle over we're we go in this little circle over we're we go in this little circle over and over again of like you can't trust and over again of like you can't trust and over again of like you can't trust it this way. Oh, but you can't trust it it this way. Oh, but you can't trust it it this way. Oh, but you can't trust it this way either. this way either. this way either. Yeah, I think what you're picking up on Yeah, I think what you're picking up on Yeah, I think what you're picking up on there is a broader trend that other there is a broader trend that other there is a broader trend that other scholars have pointed out over the scholars have pointed out over the scholars have pointed out over the years. years. years. Um in some of Ehrman's work. And I think Um in some of Ehrman's work. And I think Um in some of Ehrman's work. And I think that broader trend is this this idea of that broader trend is this this idea of that broader trend is this this idea of setting up impossible standards setting up impossible standards setting up impossible standards that could never be met. that could never be met. that could never be met. And then when you sort of get close to And then when you sort of get close to And then when you sort of get close to meeting them, well, then the goal posts meeting them, well, then the goal posts meeting them, well, then the goal posts seem to back just a little further each seem to back just a little further each seem to back just a little further each time. time. time. Um this happened in the Dal interview Um this happened in the Dal interview Um this happened in the Dal interview when Ross pointed out, "Wait, you know, when Ross pointed out, "Wait, you know, when Ross pointed out, "Wait, you know, there's a lot of corroboration of the there's a lot of corroboration of the there's a lot of corroboration of the Gospels that show that they really Gospels that show that they really Gospels that show that they really understood geography and names in understood geography and names in understood geography and names in ancient Mediterranean world. I mean, ancient Mediterranean world. I mean, ancient Mediterranean world. I mean, doesn't that count for something?"

doesn't that count for something?" doesn't that count for something?" And rather than saying, "You know what? And rather than saying, "You know what? And rather than saying, "You know what? That does count for something. I think That does count for something. I think That does count for something. I think that's a probably a notch on your side." that's a probably a notch on your side." that's a probably a notch on your side." Rather than saying that it's like, Rather than saying that it's like, Rather than saying that it's like, "Well, well, no, it doesn't really "Well, well, no, it doesn't really "Well, well, no, it doesn't really matter because it still doesn't tell you matter because it still doesn't tell you matter because it still doesn't tell you what exactly Jesus said and did." And what exactly Jesus said and did." And what exactly Jesus said and did." And use the example, "Even if I know someone use the example, "Even if I know someone use the example, "Even if I know someone died, if if if even if I know where the died, if if if even if I know where the died, if if if even if I know where the Empire State Building is in New York, Empire State Building is in New York, Empire State Building is in New York, doesn't mean that my my recollections of doesn't mean that my my recollections of doesn't mean that my my recollections of what happened there are accurate." You what happened there are accurate." You what happened there are accurate." You know what? Technically, he's right. One know what? Technically, he's right. One know what? Technically, he's right. One doesn't prove the other. But you notice doesn't prove the other. But you notice doesn't prove the other. But you notice the standard just keeps getting a the standard just keeps getting a the standard just keeps getting a higher. It's not even good enough now higher. It's not even good enough now higher. It's not even good enough now that the Gospels are historically that the Gospels are historically that the Gospels are historically reliable. It's not even good enough that reliable. It's not even good enough that reliable. It's not even good enough that they show Mediterranean knowledge. You they show Mediterranean knowledge. You they show Mediterranean knowledge. You You wonder, "Well, what would the You wonder, "Well, what would the You wonder, "Well, what would the standard be?" standard be?" standard be?" And I and I I I see this also in New And I and I I I see this also in New And I and I I I see this also in New Testament textual criticism, you know, Testament textual criticism, you know, Testament textual criticism, you know, you're like, "We got a really good text you're like, "We got a really good text you're like, "We got a really good text of the New Testament. We can see all the of the New Testament. We can see all the of the New Testament. We can see all the way back into the 2nd century of the New way back into the 2nd century of the New way back into the 2nd century of the New Testament text." attacks. yeah, but what Testament text." attacks. yeah, but what Testament text." attacks. yeah, but what about the 1st century? And we don't about the 1st century? And we don't about the 1st century? And we don't really have the autographs. And so, really have the autographs. And so, really have the autographs. And so, until you have the autographs, you until you have the autographs, you until you have the autographs, you really don't know. really don't know. really don't know. What's going on there? What's going on there? What's going on there? I think what's what's going on there is I think what's what's going on there is I think what's what's going on there is is a standard that historians just don't is a standard that historians just don't is a standard that historians just don't normally operate with. Historians aren't normally operate with. Historians aren't normally operate with. Historians aren't looking for absolute Cartesian looking for absolute Cartesian looking for absolute Cartesian mathematical truth of something in mathematical truth of something in mathematical truth of something in history cuz history doesn't give that to history cuz history doesn't give that to history cuz history doesn't give that to you. you. you. You can't get that from history. History You can't get that from history. History You can't get that from history. History gives you probabilities. History gives gives you probabilities. History gives gives you probabilities. History gives you what likely happened. Now, what's you what likely happened. Now, what's you what likely happened. Now, what's interesting is in other comments, Remin interesting is in other comments, Remin interesting is in other comments, Remin admits this. He's like, you know, admits this. He's like, you know, admits this. He's like, you know, history only gives you what likely history only gives you what likely history only gives you what likely happened. But then, when you start happened. But then, when you start happened. But then, when you start showing what likely happened, it just he showing what likely happened, it just he showing what likely happened, it just he demands a standard that just cannot be demands a standard that just cannot be demands a standard that just cannot be ever attained. Now, there's a word for ever attained. Now, there's a word for ever attained. Now, there's a word for that in the religious sphere.

that in the religious sphere. that in the religious sphere. When someone always demands absolute When someone always demands absolute When someone always demands absolute certainty about everything, we usually certainty about everything, we usually certainty about everything, we usually call them fundamentalists. call them fundamentalists. call them fundamentalists. Um and, you know, usually fundamentalism Um and, you know, usually fundamentalism Um and, you know, usually fundamentalism is is associated with people on the is is associated with people on the is is associated with people on the right. And uh there's fundamentalist right. And uh there's fundamentalist right. And uh there's fundamentalist Christian churches out there that have, Christian churches out there that have, Christian churches out there that have, I think, unreasonable demands for I think, unreasonable demands for I think, unreasonable demands for certainty just about everything they certainty just about everything they certainty just about everything they ever believe. ever believe. ever believe. But I think it also shows you that you But I think it also shows you that you But I think it also shows you that you don't have to be on the right to have a don't have to be on the right to have a don't have to be on the right to have a fundamentalist tendency. So, you can fundamentalist tendency. So, you can fundamentalist tendency. So, you can also have a fundamentalist tendency on also have a fundamentalist tendency on also have a fundamentalist tendency on the left, where you realize that you're the left, where you realize that you're the left, where you realize that you're setting up a standard that no one could setting up a standard that no one could setting up a standard that no one could ever reasonably meet. So, I I often ever reasonably meet. So, I I often ever reasonably meet. So, I I often wonder, what would it take to convince wonder, what would it take to convince wonder, what would it take to convince someone like that someone like that someone like that that things are true? I don't think any that things are true? I don't think any that things are true? I don't think any historical arguments would do it because historical arguments would do it because historical arguments would do it because historical arguments by definition are historical arguments by definition are historical arguments by definition are always at the end of the day limited and always at the end of the day limited and always at the end of the day limited and probabilistic. It's going to take It probabilistic. It's going to take It probabilistic. It's going to take It would take an an act of God, really, a would take an an act of God, really, a would take an an act of God, really, a supernatural act of God to bring uh some supernatural act of God to bring uh some supernatural act of God to bring uh some some level of persuasion there. some level of persuasion there. some level of persuasion there. Um and so, I think what what the Um and so, I think what what the Um and so, I think what what the listener needs to realize is that listener needs to realize is that listener needs to realize is that don't don't don't confuse proof with don't don't don't confuse proof with don't don't don't confuse proof with persuasion. persuasion. persuasion. Um even if someone's not persuaded, Um even if someone's not persuaded, Um even if someone's not persuaded, there can still really be good arguments there can still really be good arguments there can still really be good arguments for something. for something. for something. Um I think there's really good arguments Um I think there's really good arguments Um I think there's really good arguments for the for the authorship of the for the for the authorship of the for the for the authorship of the Gospels. I think there's really good Gospels. I think there's really good Gospels. I think there's really good arguments that the that the that the arguments that the that the that the arguments that the that the that the transi- the tradition has been has been transi- the tradition has been has been transi- the tradition has been has been transmitted reliably.

transmitted reliably. transmitted reliably. Because someone refuses to assent to Because someone refuses to assent to Because someone refuses to assent to that by always taking the the highest that by always taking the the highest that by always taking the the highest standard possible and complaining that standard possible and complaining that standard possible and complaining that it's not been met is not a reason to it's not been met is not a reason to it's not been met is not a reason to think there's not good evidence. And I think there's not good evidence. And I think there's not good evidence. And I think that distinction is important. think that distinction is important. think that distinction is important. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, that makes sense. Yeah, that makes sense. Yeah, that makes sense. Hm. Hm. Hm. Okay. Okay. Okay. One final question for you, unless I One final question for you, unless I One final question for you, unless I think of another one. think of another one. think of another one. Since you took Ehrman's class a couple Since you took Ehrman's class a couple Since you took Ehrman's class a couple of years ago, of years ago, of years ago, you have devoted your life you have devoted your life you have devoted your life >> a couple of years ago. Yep. >> a couple of years ago. Yep. >> a couple of years ago. Yep. You devoted your life to being a You devoted your life to being a You devoted your life to being a biblical scholar. You started You did biblical scholar. You started You did biblical scholar. You started You did the same path, more or less, that Bart the same path, more or less, that Bart the same path, more or less, that Bart Ehrman took, right? You're You're Ehrman took, right? You're You're Ehrman took, right? You're You're Christian Christian Christian and you and you were going to study this and you and you were going to study this and you and you were going to study this more fully, just like he did. more fully, just like he did. more fully, just like he did. What effect has that had on your What effect has that had on your What effect has that had on your personal faith? personal faith? personal faith? Has this dive into historical matters Has this dive into historical matters Has this dive into historical matters ever shaken your faith or strengthened ever shaken your faith or strengthened ever shaken your faith or strengthened it or maybe some combination of them? it or maybe some combination of them? it or maybe some combination of them? Yeah, it's it's a really great question. Yeah, it's it's a really great question. Yeah, it's it's a really great question. I think it's interesting to observe how I think it's interesting to observe how I think it's interesting to observe how different people respond to different different people respond to different different people respond to different things when they do academic work. Um things when they do academic work. Um things when they do academic work. Um you know, I never knew what my you know, I never knew what my you know, I never knew what my experience would be when I started my experience would be when I started my experience would be when I started my academic work.

academic work. academic work. I ended up uh studying with a with a I ended up uh studying with a with a I ended up uh studying with a with a well-known textual critical scholar well-known textual critical scholar well-known textual critical scholar named Larry Hurtado at the University of named Larry Hurtado at the University of named Larry Hurtado at the University of Edinburgh and worked on apocryphal texts Edinburgh and worked on apocryphal texts Edinburgh and worked on apocryphal texts with him. And I always thought to with him. And I always thought to with him. And I always thought to myself, you know, I'm just going to myself, you know, I'm just going to myself, you know, I'm just going to follow the evidence where it goes and follow the evidence where it goes and follow the evidence where it goes and see what I learn and never knowing when see what I learn and never knowing when see what I learn and never knowing when that would where that would take me in that would where that would take me in that would where that would take me in advance. Um and as I think about advance. Um and as I think about advance. Um and as I think about scholars in general, I think there's scholars in general, I think there's scholars in general, I think there's sort of there's sort of two extremes out sort of there's sort of two extremes out sort of there's sort of two extremes out there um that end up happening. there um that end up happening. there um that end up happening. One extreme for For evangelicals, I One extreme for For evangelicals, I One extreme for For evangelicals, I mean. One extreme for evangelical mean. One extreme for evangelical mean. One extreme for evangelical scholars is sort of a uh you know, scholars is sort of a uh you know, scholars is sort of a uh you know, nothing's ever a problem extreme, where nothing's ever a problem extreme, where nothing's ever a problem extreme, where they they they they've never they've they they they they've never they've they they they they've never they've never never run into a historical never never run into a historical never never run into a historical conundrum in their life. Everything is conundrum in their life. Everything is conundrum in their life. Everything is easily solved. It's quick and simple. easily solved. It's quick and simple. easily solved. It's quick and simple. Nothing to see here. I I think anyone Nothing to see here. I I think anyone Nothing to see here. I I think anyone who's done deep scholarship knows that who's done deep scholarship knows that who's done deep scholarship knows that it's not quite that way. it's not quite that way. it's not quite that way. There's real conundrums out there and we There's real conundrums out there and we There's real conundrums out there and we have to work through those. have to work through those. have to work through those. Um and then the other extreme is end up Um and then the other extreme is end up Um and then the other extreme is end up happening where you end up saying, "None happening where you end up saying, "None happening where you end up saying, "None of this is true. I'm going to abandon it of this is true. I'm going to abandon it of this is true. I'm going to abandon it all all all um and it's all a lie. um and it's all a lie. um and it's all a lie. Um, Um, Um, what I what I've tried to do in my own what I what I've tried to do in my own what I what I've tried to do in my own scholarship and and and not it's not scholarship and and and not it's not scholarship and and and not it's not something that I've tried to do. I think something that I've tried to do. I think something that I've tried to do. I think this is where God has led me is is this is where God has led me is is this is where God has led me is is thankfully I don't feel like I've landed thankfully I don't feel like I've landed thankfully I don't feel like I've landed in any of those extremes, of course. I'm in any of those extremes, of course. I'm in any of those extremes, of course. I'm not not not saying there's never a conundrum or a saying there's never a conundrum or a saying there's never a conundrum or a problem that really you can be problem that really you can be problem that really you can be challenging. There are. And at the same challenging. There are. And at the same challenging. There are. And at the same time, the the sort of utter skeptical time, the the sort of utter skeptical time, the the sort of utter skeptical result is also, I think, not a pathway result is also, I think, not a pathway result is also, I think, not a pathway that the evidence takes you to. My that the evidence takes you to. My that the evidence takes you to. My experience on the contrary has been that experience on the contrary has been that experience on the contrary has been that the deeper I go, the more encouraged I the deeper I go, the more encouraged I the deeper I go, the more encouraged I am.

am. am. That's That's my general summary. Um, That's That's my general summary. Um, That's That's my general summary. Um, notwithstanding the challenges and notwithstanding the challenges and notwithstanding the challenges and you're going to have them, but the you're going to have them, but the you're going to have them, but the deeper I go, the more encouraged I am. deeper I go, the more encouraged I am. deeper I go, the more encouraged I am. The more I learn about the early The more I learn about the early The more I learn about the early Christian canon, the way Christians Christian canon, the way Christians Christian canon, the way Christians evaluated the early Christian texts, the evaluated the early Christian texts, the evaluated the early Christian texts, the way these texts are transmitted and way these texts are transmitted and way these texts are transmitted and talked about in the ancient world, talked about in the ancient world, talked about in the ancient world, um, and the distinctive system by which um, and the distinctive system by which um, and the distinctive system by which Christians transmitted their material, I Christians transmitted their material, I Christians transmitted their material, I I just leave more and more encouraged. I just leave more and more encouraged. I just leave more and more encouraged. Um, can I provide Cartesian level Um, can I provide Cartesian level Um, can I provide Cartesian level mathematical proof to the skeptic to mathematical proof to the skeptic to mathematical proof to the skeptic to convince them? No. convince them? No. convince them? No. Sorry, I can't do that. Uh, but if asked Sorry, I can't do that. Uh, but if asked Sorry, I can't do that. Uh, but if asked whether there's good evidence whether there's good evidence whether there's good evidence for for thinking these things have for for thinking these things have for for thinking these things have historical rootedness, I think there's historical rootedness, I think there's historical rootedness, I think there's tremendously good evidence and each step tremendously good evidence and each step tremendously good evidence and each step along the way I've been more and more along the way I've been more and more along the way I've been more and more encouraged. Mhm, praise the Lord. That encouraged. Mhm, praise the Lord. That encouraged. Mhm, praise the Lord. That is encouraging to me as well as a person is encouraging to me as well as a person is encouraging to me as well as a person who doesn't dig into this to know that who doesn't dig into this to know that who doesn't dig into this to know that what you're finding, um, feels solid what you're finding, um, feels solid what you're finding, um, feels solid underneath you. underneath you. underneath you. That's really good. Mike, thank you so That's really good. Mike, thank you so That's really good. Mike, thank you so much, uh, for joining me today and much, uh, for joining me today and much, uh, for joining me today and having this discussion. It has been having this discussion. It has been having this discussion. It has been fascinating and I really appreciate your fascinating and I really appreciate your fascinating and I really appreciate your time. Thank you, Sarah. Great to be with time. Thank you, Sarah. Great to be with time. Thank you, Sarah. Great to be with you.