'Nope. Jesus is Not Yahweh' ~ Dr Bart Ehrman (2021-04-19) #

## Description

I read the article by Professor Bart Ehrman on his blog: https://ehrmanblog.org/nope-jesus-is-not-yahweh/

Summary of 'Nope. Jesus is Not Yahweh' ~ Dr Bart Ehrman #

This summary is AI generated - there may be inaccuracies. *

00:00:00 00:10:00 #

Dr. Bart Ehrman discusses how some modern Christians may misinterpret verses in the Bible regarding Christ's authority. He points out that while Christ had equal authority as God himself, he did not have the same authority as Yahweh before his incarnation. discusses how Paul, the author of Philippians, did not believe in a trinity of God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as understood later in Christianity. He argues that this doctrine developed later, and that it is an evolution into a new species of theology that did not exist in the New Testament.

00:00:00 In this article, Bart Ehrman explains why traditional Christian theology does not believe that Jesus is actually Yahweh, the god of the Hebrew Bible. Rather, Yahweh is a holy name that is only used by the high priest during the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur. Christians who read the Old Testament saw Jesus as his son whom he exalted to his right hand.

• 00:05:00 Dr. Bart Ehrman discusses how some modern Christians may misinterpret verses in the Bible regarding Christ's authority. He points out that while Christ had equal authority as God himself, he did not have the same authority as Yahweh before his incarnation.
• 00:10:00 Discusses how Paul, the author of Philippians, did not believe in a trinity of God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as understood later in Christianity. He argues that this doctrine developed later, and that it is an evolution into a new species of theology that did not exist in the New Testament.

Full transcript with timestamps: CLICK TO EXPAND

0:00:01 nope jesus is0:00:03 not yahweh this is the title of an0:00:06 article0:00:07 just published two days ago uh on bart0:00:10 ehrman's blog0:00:11 um and it's really very good and i0:00:13 wanted just to read it to you and offer0:00:15 a few comments0:00:16 for those few of you who still don't0:00:17 know who bart ehrman is0:00:19 he is currently the james a gray0:00:21 distinguished professor0:00:23 of religious studies at the university0:00:24 of north carolina0:00:26 at chapel hill he's an american and he's0:00:29 one of the world's if not the world's0:00:30 leaders0:00:31 leading textual critic and uh a new0:00:34 testament scholar as well0:00:36 um he is a prodigious writer uh and he0:00:39 uh virtually every day something new0:00:41 comes out and it's very he's very0:00:43 readable0:00:44 and um this article nope jesus is not uh0:00:46 yahweh i just wanted to share it with0:00:48 you0:00:48 published uh just two days ago uh on the0:00:51 17th of april0:00:52 and he says in my last post i pointed0:00:55 out that0:00:56 some conservative evangelical christians0:00:59 claim0:00:59 that jesus in the bible is actually to0:01:02 be understood as0:01:03 yahweh i think that's completely wrong0:01:07 and in this post i want to explain why0:01:10 of course yahweh is the name of god in0:01:12 the jewish bible so christians are0:01:13 saying or many christians are saying0:01:15 that jesus is this god jesus is god0:01:19 he continues it is not the view of0:01:22 traditional0:01:23 christian theology at least as i learned0:01:25 it once upon a time0:01:27 it was certainly not the view of the0:01:29 earliest christians0:01:31 and it is not a view set forth in the0:01:33 bible0:01:34 the bible of course does not have the0:01:36 trinity0:01:37 but when christianity formulated the0:01:39 doctrine of the trinity0:01:41 the father was yahweh and christ was his0:01:44 son0:01:44 at least that's what christians who read0:01:46 the old testament said0:01:48 of course the name yahweh is not found0:01:51 in the new testament at all0:01:53 since it's a hebrew word and the greek0:01:55 is in new testament is in greek0:01:57 the new testament does not give god a0:01:59 personal name0:02:02 when christians want to find another0:02:04 divine being in the old testament to0:02:06 identify as christ0:02:08 they went to passages like psalm 1100:02:11 which begins the lord said to my lord0:02:14 sit at my right hand until i make your0:02:17 enemies0:02:18 your footstool based on what i said in0:02:21 my0:02:22 previous post you can reconstruct uh0:02:25 who is talking to whom here notice that0:02:28 the first lord0:02:29 is in capital letters and the second is0:02:33 not so another way of putting this would0:02:35 be yahweh0:02:36 said to adonai the point here just to0:02:40 break from the reading for a second is0:02:42 that the the name of god yahweh was a0:02:44 holy name0:02:45 but he really uttered by the high priest0:02:48 yom kippur and was not mentioned by0:02:51 israelites normally at all so they use0:02:53 another word adonai0:02:55 which means lord to refer to god0:02:58 so whenever in english translations it's0:03:00 still the convention today when the word0:03:02 yahweh0:03:02 is in the hebrew they0:03:06 write l-o-r-d in block capitals and that0:03:09 indicates0:03:09 in the original hebrew it's yahweh has0:03:11 been referred to0:03:13 excuse me adonai simply means lord and0:03:16 can refer to0:03:16 people you know if you'd be a a king a0:03:19 lord or0:03:20 or a father figure so um he's saying0:03:23 psalm 110 if you actually look at the0:03:25 hebrew it says0:03:26 yahweh said to adonai so it's not two0:03:29 divine beings it's one and obviously the0:03:31 one is god0:03:32 yahweh in interpreting that passage0:03:34 christians asked0:03:36 who is that elevated christ our lord0:03:39 to his right hand obviously god the0:03:42 father0:03:42 elevated christ and so god the father is0:03:45 yahweh0:03:46 and the one elevated to his right hand0:03:48 is the lord jesus0:03:51 christians appeal to this verse in0:03:52 reference to christ a good0:03:54 deal and indeed he mentions a number of0:03:57 times0:03:58 when it occurs these christians were not0:04:01 seeing jesus as0:04:02 yahweh but as his son whom he0:04:05 exalted to his right hand this is a0:04:08 really important point0:04:09 this is there's a thing about new0:04:10 testament scholarship really good0:04:12 scholarship0:04:13 is it pays very careful and meticulous0:04:16 attention to what's actually been stated0:04:18 in the text0:04:20 rather than reading it through a later0:04:22 christian tradition or any tradition0:04:24 church tradition it covers it takes all0:04:27 that away0:04:28 and focuses just on the text read in its0:04:30 historical and cultural0:04:32 context and often that gives readings of0:04:35 the bible which are quite different0:04:37 from uh christian later christian0:04:39 readings0:04:41 so he continues christians such as the0:04:43 2nd century0:04:44 justin martyr also found references to0:04:48 the pre-incarnate christ0:04:49 in the old testament traditions of the0:04:52 angel of the lord0:04:53 who was gods yahweh's chief0:04:56 representative0:04:57 on earth delivering god's message with0:05:00 god's0:05:00 full authority in the stories of the0:05:02 patriarchs for example in genesis0:05:05 and exodus who was this mysterious0:05:08 angel for christians he was christ0:05:11 before he was born of the virgin mary0:05:14 i wonder if the confusion among0:05:16 evangelicals about the christian0:05:17 understanding of christ0:05:19 when they say he is yahweh is because0:05:21 the angel of the lord0:05:23 is so fully representative of yahweh0:05:26 himself0:05:27 that he is sometimes called yahweh after0:05:31 he has clearly identified0:05:33 not as yahweh but his angel0:05:36 why would he be called yahweh if he was0:05:38 yahweh's messenger0:05:40 because by the way angel means messenger0:05:42 uh in the bible0:05:44 it would be kind of like if a messenger0:05:46 of the king comes to you and orders you0:05:48 to do something0:05:49 you tell your neighbors that the king0:05:51 has told you to do something0:05:53 well actually his messenger did but he0:05:56 was so0:05:57 fully representative of the king that0:06:00 his words0:06:01 were the kings this happens when the0:06:04 angel of the lord speaks to moses from0:06:06 the burning bush0:06:07 in the famous passage of exodus 3 as you0:06:10 can see0:06:11 this by the way is a favorite passage of0:06:13 christian apologists trying to prove0:06:14 that jesus is god0:06:16 but the early christians so far as i0:06:18 know were clear on this matter0:06:21 this was christ coming in his0:06:23 pre-incarnate state0:06:24 as god's chief representative the angel0:06:27 of the lord0:06:28 who was given such authority that he0:06:31 could be considered as0:06:32 having the full status of the lord0:06:35 capital lord0:06:36 even though he was merely his angel0:06:40 the view that christians took of christ0:06:43 some modern christians may misinterpret0:06:46 the christ poem0:06:47 in philippians 2 in this way philippians0:06:50 20:06:50 is the letter that paul wrote to the0:06:52 philippians in the second chapter0:06:54 is an absolute favorite of christian0:06:56 evangelists i i have it constantly0:06:59 read to me as if this proves something0:07:01 to me as if i've never read the passage0:07:03 before0:07:03 anyway bartoman says this about it i0:07:06 talked about the poem at length a month0:07:07 or so ago0:07:08 on the blog when christ is exalted0:07:12 after his death god gives him0:07:15 the name that is above every name so0:07:18 that all creation will worship and0:07:20 confess him0:07:21 that is a reference to isaiah 45 where0:07:24 yahweh alone0:07:25 has the name above every name so that0:07:28 all worship0:07:29 and confess him alone possibly these0:07:32 modern christians are thinking0:07:34 that christ before must have been given0:07:37 the name0:07:38 yahweh and therefore he is0:07:41 yahweh but the passage doesn't seem to0:07:44 mean0:07:44 that the ultimate lord of all yahweh is0:07:47 the one who gives jesus that name0:07:50 above all others now obviously stepping0:07:52 aside from bar here0:07:54 who has the ultimate authority the0:07:55 universe god0:07:57 no one gives god authority if god gives0:08:00 authority to another entity another0:08:02 person another being0:08:04 that person is not god from all eternity0:08:07 they receive that authority from yahweh0:08:10 so this language of receiving is really0:08:12 important god doesn't receive authority0:08:14 from anyone else at least not the god of0:08:17 uh abraham moses jesus and muhammad0:08:21 so it's worth noting that in this very0:08:23 passage this is in0:08:24 philippians 2 when god gives jesus his0:08:27 name0:08:28 it does not mean that he has made a name0:08:30 switch for jesus0:08:32 on the contrary the passage says that0:08:34 the name to which0:08:35 everyone will bow in worship and confess0:08:37 is jesus0:08:39 not yahweh that at the name of jesus0:08:42 every knee shall bow and every tongue0:08:44 confess and quote0:08:46 jesus own name is exalted0:08:50 so how did yahweh give him a name0:08:54 above all others surely that would mean0:08:57 that would be yahweh's own name right0:09:00 well0:09:00 yes and no says bart ehrman he did give0:09:03 him0:09:04 the name but not in the literal sense of0:09:07 now you0:09:07 are yahweh but in the biblical sense0:09:10 i've been describing you now have the0:09:13 full authority of yahweh0:09:15 what you say and do is equal to the0:09:18 authority of yahweh0:09:19 saying and doing it jesus now0:09:23 at his exaltation not before0:09:26 really important point in my view is0:09:29 given equal authority as the lord0:09:31 himself0:09:32 he now has the highest name dash0:09:35 authority equal to god0:09:38 but that does not mean he is god slash0:09:40 yahweh0:09:41 being equal is different from being0:09:45 identical being equal is different0:09:48 from being identical i just want to just0:09:50 go back here a few0:09:52 sentences um where he says0:09:56 jesus now at his exaltation not before0:09:59 so jesus didn't have this authority0:10:02 before his exaltation he was given it0:10:05 after his exaltation so he wasn't god0:10:07 before he wasn't in any sense0:10:09 as the name or as ontologically or0:10:12 metaphysically0:10:13 it was something that god gave to him0:10:15 therefore he could not have been god0:10:18 and the penultimate paragraph is another0:10:20 analogy0:10:21 when someone says to you open up in the0:10:24 name of the king0:10:25 or in the name of the law the name0:10:28 means the authority and that must be0:10:32 what0:10:32 is meant in philippians 2. since0:10:36 the literal name is still jesus but the0:10:38 authority0:10:39 the name has is now the authority of god0:10:43 almighty yahweh himself so0:10:46 i simply don't think it's right that0:10:48 christian theology understands jesus as0:10:50 yahweh well i guess some christians do0:10:53 since that appears to be what they think0:10:56 i wonder when they started thinking it0:10:58 dot dot end quote end of the passage0:11:02 so i think that's um actually quite0:11:03 quite helpful and0:11:05 uh i love the forensic way he analyzes0:11:07 uh these passages0:11:09 um and uh he makes clear that uh well0:11:12 firstly0:11:13 what do we conclude what can i conclude0:11:15 that paul the apostle paul who wrote0:11:17 philippians was not a trinitarian0:11:19 he didn't believe in god the father got0:11:20 the son and got the holy spirit0:11:23 uh when he speaks of god he means the0:11:25 father0:11:26 the father certainly gives his son jesus0:11:29 authority but there's no sense of an0:11:31 eternal0:11:32 trinity from all eternity there was0:11:34 father son and holy spirit0:11:35 that is absent from paul's thinking so0:11:38 the doctrine of the trinity that0:11:39 developed later is very much an0:11:41 evolution into a new species0:11:44 of uh theology really that didn't exist0:11:48 in the new testament um i just wanted to0:11:51 share that with you i will put0:11:52 the link to the bar ehrman blog in the0:11:55 description below0:11:57 it's worth a read and worth chewing over0:12:00 i think it's very interesting until next0:12:02 time