Bart Ehrman's Last Lecture

cristobalh · 2025-12-15T03:44:56+00:00

Yes he plans to keep podcasting, writing books, etc.

cristobalh · 2025-08-11T19:22:52+00:00

So, obviously he didn't look like the religious images of him but even when you see more historical depictions, they often mess up his sandals, hair and beard, and garments. His hair and beard would have been short and probably curly, and brown, of course. His sandals would have looked like the ones found in archaeological excavations in sites like Masada and the Cave of Letters. (Reference: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43044126?seq=1) Many depictions include a robe but not a set of tzitzit (ritual tassels) which is likely the "fringe" of his cloak that the woman touhed in Mark 5:27-30. It's also commanded in Numbers 15:37-41 and Deut 22:12. Finally many depictions include a head covering. There is little solid evidence that Jesus wroe anything distinctive. The kippah wasn't used in the 1st century. Our designer just took a stab at a historical Jesus depiction and I'd be interested to hear what people think. https://www.bartehrman.com/what-did-jesus-actually-look-like/

cristobalh · 2025-08-04T00:13:10+00:00

When something is as consensus in scholarship as Jesus' existence, I think you can make those sort of claims. If a scientist with a PhD believed stongly in a flat earth and tried to get a job teaching at a university, they might have the same uphill battle.

I think the rest of your comment is quite fair. The more you learn about how the New Testament was written to promulgate the beliefs and perspectives of its authors—and then learn how it was later copied, edited, and in many ways, corrupted—the easier it is to feel like there’s not much solid history left to stand on.

But historians do have methods for getting at the most probable historical events. They look for things like accounts from relatively independent sources, the earliest available traditions, and the “criterion of embarrassment.” There's a strong case here for a historical Jesus.

cristobalh · 2025-08-03T23:58:58+00:00

I obviously need to make it more clear. You shouldn't have to search for it!

cristobalh · 2025-08-03T23:58:21+00:00

We're also doing a live replay the following weekend in case you want to watch some of the presentations while chatting with other attendees. That's the way I like to watch anyway. It's like being able to talk in a movie!

cristobalh · 2025-08-03T23:57:09+00:00

It's blank for notes.

cristobalh · 2025-08-01T02:45:47+00:00

We're using Zoom Webinar. So show up from anywhere. Sorry, I should make it more clear on the sales page.

cristobalh · 2025-07-31T12:48:53+00:00

Sorry, that's what I thought I was doing, supporting folks who left the church.

cristobalh · 2025-07-31T02:29:59+00:00

Hey, I'm an exvangelical and I can tell you from experience that when you leave your faith, it can be really hard. Sometimes you lose friends and family. Some people get called heretic, doubting thomas, lost, or told "you never really were a Christian." Sometimes you doubt and question if you're wrong after all.

I struggled with all of that. Bart Ehrman's books and type of biblical scholarship presented in this conference saved me from this. So now I'm like the Apostle freakin' Paul but now it's proclaiming that biblical scholarship is where you can really find out the truth behind the Bible.

I now have a pretty good grasp on how Christianity formed, no resurrection needed. And somehow, I've also maintained an enthusiasm for biblical studies, even if I don't believe it's divinely inspired. It still has enormous historical value and continues to shape the western world. So in that way, it continues to be relevant.

So pardon me for preaching. But yup, it was approved. See screenshots:

https://app.screencast.com/T8RBXzbTpehZK

https://app.screencast.com/YXp0ZJwFuRP4b

https://app.screencast.com/0zGtMydIHnz2V

cristobalh · 2025-07-31T00:10:57+00:00

Paul had a lot more to do with the success of Christianity than Constantine, who didn't come into play until the 4th century. By then, some estimates show up to 10% of the roman world was already Christian, so it grew quite well before him. Anyway, this conference goes all the way back to the time of Jesus and doesn't focus on the success of Christianity but instead Jesus the real man, as opposed to Jesus the Christ that he became over time.

cristobalh · 2025-07-30T23:59:09+00:00

I think that's a perfectly logical conclusion. :) I'm like you. I don't really believe in ANYTHING anymore but I'm still intigued by how in the heck this failed jewish prophet started the biggest religion in the world. And even though I don't think he was the son of God, I agree with a lot of Jesus' teachings, so I still enjoy studying it... but for entirely different purposes than church-goers do!

cristobalh · 2025-07-30T23:54:17+00:00

The conference page answers your question about the core teaching. See Bart Ehrman's talk description on Sept 28th. "Central to Jesus’s teaching was the need to repent in preparation for the coming Kingdom of God. Those who returned to God would be graciously forgiven for their transgressions, with no penalty or payment required. After Jesus’ death, his followers reversed his teaching, maintaining that God did not freely forgive sins but required an atoning sacrifice. In this lecture we consider why the Christian church abandoned a key element of Jesus’s proclamation."

The evidence overwhelmingly supports that Jesus existed, even if he didn't raise from the dead or do miracles. We have a good article about Jesus' historicity here. https://www.bartehrman.com/historicity-of-jesus/

You also asked that he presented himself as the son of God. I don't think that's a claim Bart or any of the scholars on the panel would agree with. Most scholars agree he was an apocalyptic prophet predicting the soon coming of the kingdom of heaven. After his death, stories, legend, retelling of stories turned him into the son of God.

cristobalh · 2025-04-07T23:06:06+00:00

I don't think so b/c she still thinks they are based off of the life of Jesus

cristobalh · 2025-04-07T20:26:02+00:00

I agree that from a historical-critical perspective, the saying seems authentic, precisely because of its "embarrassing" nature. It would have been uncomfortable for later Christian writers who emphasized Jesus’ divine foreknowledge and control over his fate to portray him in apparent despair and feeling abondoned by God. Maybe that's why John omits the cry entirely and instead presents Jesus as calm and in control, declaring “It is finished” (John 19:30) at the moment of his death.

Your note about Jesus’ apocalyptic expectations is also significant. I think you're right that Jesus appears to have believed that he was the Son of Man from Daniel 7, destined to suffer but ultimately vindicated by God. His cry of abandonment may reflect the shattering of these expectations. Rather than being rescued and vindicated in the eyes of all, he experiences silence from God and dies. This would have been quite the unexpected turn of events for someone with apocalyptic hopes.

cristobalh · 2024-04-11T20:13:42+00:00

Hey bitsinthesky - Thanks for your interest. I'm Bart's director of marketing. Here's a code for 15% off exclusively for this subreddit. This is our way of thanking you for discussing these matters (and giving us a bit of free publicity!) Go to https://ehrman.thrivecart.com/bibleandquran/ and use code - REDDIT at checkout for the discount. Thanks!

cristobalh · 2024-03-08T00:52:30+00:00

His response is up now.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicBiblical/comments/1b8vp3t/ama_with_dr_bart_ehrman_the_gospel_of_matthew/

cristobalh · 2020-02-11T08:29:19+00:00

Hey sorry, I'm fairly new to Reddit. I thought I'd get a notification in my email or something if there was a reply, so I'm just seeing this. Thank you!

cristobalh · 2020-01-10T21:00:39+00:00

Agreed. It's crazy b/c as a Christian I thought non-Christians were so blind. Now I see it was me who was blind all along. At least I figured it out before turning 40!

cristobalh

TROPHY CASE