Misquoting Jesus with Bart Ehrman

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

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

In each new episode, my host Megan Lewis and I will discuss just about everything you can imagine about the New Testament and the early years of Christianity.

• Issues connected with the historical Jesus
• The mysterious book of Revelation
• The non-canonical gospels
• Early Christian groups such as the Gnostics

In the podcast, I'll explain New Testament and early Christian scholarship in layperson's terms so that you could learn what the issues are, see what the scholars have argued, and allow you then to make up your own mind.

Please follow the show on your favorite app so you don't miss out. You can also enjoy the show in video format by subscribing to my YouTube channel, which you can find by visiting bartehrman.com/youtube.

I hope you tune in!

For a religion that claims to view their god as the most powerful, supreme being in the universe, some Christians have an interesting habit of placing restrictions on what he can and can’t do.

God can’t make a world without suffering, he has to inspire a collection of written texts (that have no mistakes in them), and he certainly can’t be sympathetic to anyone who practices other religion. But where do these limitations come from, and what purpose do they serve? In short: who says?

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

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

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

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