I listened to Bart Ehrman's presentation here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYl24xibc2I
There is not much new in the video and most who read books about Christian eschatology probably won't find many new disclosures either. On the other hand, I've never agreed with Ehrman more than I have when it comes to his views of hell, and how ancient Jews and Christians viewed hell and heaven. Yet there are obviously points of disagreement too.
If I understand him correctly, Ehrman states that the belief in ascending to heaven at death was not an early Christian view; rather, we can find the immortal soul doctrine in Plato and early Greek writers like Homer (see Odyssey 11).
Ehrman claims that the ancient Hebrews did not have a concept of life after death. While this assertion is commonly set forth in the scholarly literature, it's by no means certain that the Hebrew Bible posits this view. Granted, Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10 reports that the dead are conscious of nothing and there is no activity in Sheol: no wisdom nor devising nor knowledge. But does this mean the idea of a resurrection was a much later idea in Judaism, and that it did not exist during patriarchal times or whenever Israel had kings?
Admittedly, much work needs to be done on this question, yet there may be indications that Abraham believed in the bodily resurrection. That is how the writer of Hebrews understands him (Hebrews 11:19). What made the writer of Hebrews proclaim that Abraham expected to receive Isaac back from the dead? Of course, we also know about the promise given in Daniel 12:1-2 and Job 14:13-14. Bart also likely knows that a variety of beliefs on the body and soul existed in ancient times. For example, some 1st century Jews did believe in an immortal soul.
Jesus spoke Aramaic, but not Greek? Bart needs to read more. See the first volume of John's Meier's Marginal Jew series: Meier argues that Jesus could have been trilingual.
I think Ehrman is spot on when he mentions the wicked will not be tormented forever, but simply destroyed.
Sporadic theological and historical musings by Edgar Foster (Ph.D. in Theology and Religious Studies and one of Jehovah's Witnesses).
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6F01724871E00C45
ReplyDeleteI agree, and it's especially the case when it comes to Job (which as far as I can understand, most Hebrew bible scholars, even critical ones, posit as very early), I also think Daniel 12 is a pretty clear example.
ReplyDeleteDo you know Meier's argument that Jesus could have been trilingual? is it because of his occupation and its relationship to nearby cosmopolitan cities? I've read simialar arguments, but most have argued a limited trilingualism, like perhaps being able to communicate, but not read and write.
Roman, Stan Porter wrote an article about whether Jesus spoke Greek or not. See also https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwi1rsmy2NDuAhUjo1kKHWhOAjw4ChAWMAR6BAgMEAI&url=https%3A%2F%2Frepository.up.ac.za%2Fbitstream%2Fhandle%2F2263%2F28276%2FComplete.pdf%3Fsequence%3D8&usg=AOvVaw3kdQBEfUHxKUh4vvGbWpjr
ReplyDeleteIt's been a while since I read Meier's book, but I could probably find the section in his book again.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/43044128?seq=1
ReplyDeletehttps://www.biblicallanguagecenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/9789004263406_04-EBRAISTI.pdf
ReplyDeleteThanks brother, in my second point I took issue with Meier's claim that Jesus probably didn't travel to Sepphoris/Tiberius and other Galilean large cities, I forget Meier's exact argument, if I remember correctly it involved Jesus avoiding those cities in his ministry. I sided with others who argued that he avoided those cities because he was choosing his audience, which would mean he was familiar with Sepphoris Tiberius enough to know the population, I also argued that Jesus was familiar with aspects of urban cosmopolitan culture which is best explained-given his class background-by the likelyhood if his having visted Sepphoris and Tiberius for purposes of work.
ReplyDeleteI also find it unlikely that a Tekton, like Jesus and his Father, would not have taken advantage of employment opportunities in those larger cities during their expansive periods, when they lived so close.
Brother Montero, the discussion I was thinking about begins around page 265 of The Marginal Jew book (volume 1). Meier talks about the Hebrew/Aramaic influences on Jesus, then he writes:
ReplyDelete"Scholarship must rather proceed with the most probable opinion, viz., that Jesus regularly and perhaps exclusively taught in Aramaic, his Greek being of a practical, business type, and perhaps rudimentary to boot. In a quadrilingual country, Jesus may indeed have been a trilingual Jew; but he was probably not a trilingual teacher."
He then proceeds to examine questions about Jesus' literacy. I'm also going to quote page 283 here since you raised these questions, but I'm only providing information, not taking sides:
"In fairness, it should be noted that some scholars suggest an alternate description of Jesus' socioeconomic status. According to them, both Joseph and Jesus were master builders who traveled extensively, worked sometimes in cities like Sepphoris and Jerusalem, and were relatively well to do. If such were the case, the renunciation of wealth by Jesus as he began his public ministry would have been all the more radical. Such scenarios, however, usually rest on an acritical meshing of various texts, dubious exegesis, and more than a little imagination.169 Nothing in the Gnspels speaks positively for such a hypothesis."
Just to respond to Meier (which I also do in Jesus's Manifesto), his traveling to Sepphoris or other major cities to work is not necessarily an indication of his being of a higher socioeconomic status, since he could have traveled there because he and his family needed work .... (as many have demonstrated the growing precarity, which is also reflected in the gospels).
ReplyDeleteI actually think it's not unlikely that Jesus had some greek, especially if he did travel to those cities.
The last thing I'll say is of course one can't prove Jesus worked in these larger cities, of course it rests on imagination ... but so much historical reconstruction does ... you have to work with what you have.
Jesus is presented in the gospels as being very comfortable in a cosmopolitan setting, comfortable with soldiers, tax collectors, government officials, and so on, he also has knowledge of market dynamics, patronage, politics, etc etc ... however, he's also very grounded in "peasant" culture, and uses that kind of imagry, as well as reflecting an anti-wealth attitude ...
I think the general model of someone who is broadly within the downwardly mobil, but slightly above subsistance peasantry, or perhaps a craftsman within that broad class, who has experience in various settings (small villages as well as cities), probably based in both economic concerns and religious (working on building projects and traveling to Jerusalem for festivals), and can move and converse comfortably among various social classes and settings, and who is embedded within the prophetic justice tradition exemplified by John the Baptist, fits the data pretty well.
Of course you could say Jesus was a very unique and extra-ordinary person, and I certainly say that (the most extra-ordinary person), but to give a historical accounting, I think it certainly fits the bill ... I mean, I would be extremely suprised if there were craftsmen in Nazareth who WOULD'NT take adavantage of the vast building and economic boom going on in the Galilean cities at the time ... especially when we also see the evidence of commercialization, which (as social-scientists have demostrated) almost always hurts the traditional peasantry.
That being said, I must say, Meier is among the most careful, and the best, historical Jesus scholars alive today (up their with Dale Allison and NT Wright), so I have the upmost respect for his work, even if I'm not on board with everything he claims :).
You've pretty much expressed my thoughts on the issue. I think Jesus likely used Greek on a regular basis, but I also want to speak with the evidence we have, so I don't think the issue can be resolved by historical investigations. At least, not yet.
ReplyDelete