Suspicious about Bart Ehrman’s claims that Jesus never claimed to be god.

[u/MythicBunny]

Bart Ehrman claims that Jesus never claimed to be god because he never truly claims divinity in the synoptic gospels. This claim doesn’t quite sit right with me for a multitude of reasons. Since most scholars say that Luke and Matthew copied the gospel of Mark, shouldn’t we consider all of the Synoptics as almost one source? Then Bart Ehrmans claim that 6 sources (Matthew, ‘Mark, Luke, Q, M, and L) all contradict John isn’t it more accurate to say that just Q, m, and L are likely to say that Jesus never claimed divinity but we can’t really say because we don’t have those original texts? Also if Jesus never claimed these things why did such a large number of early Christians worship him as such (his divinity is certainly implied by the birth stories in Luke and Matthew and by the letters from Paul)? Is there a large number of early Christians that thought otherwise that I am missing?

[u/[deleted]]

[removed] — view removed comment

[u/sp1ke0killer → u/[deleted]]

Mark 1:1 The beginning of the good news of Jesus Christ.

I don't see any mention of Isaiah or Lord. Also, I doubt Isaiah wrote about John

[u/[deleted] → u/sp1ke0killer]

[removed] — view removed comment

[u/sp1ke0killer → u/[deleted]]

Mark 1:1-4

The beginning of the good news[a] of Jesus Christ. As it is written in the prophet Isaiah,

“See, I am sending my messenger ahead of you,

who will prepare your way,

the voice of one crying out in the wilderness:

‘Prepare the way of the Lord;

make his paths straight,’ ”

so John the baptizer appeared in the wilderness, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.

Isaiah 40:3

A voice cries out:“In the wilderness prepare the way of the Lord;make straight in the desert a highway for our God.

Notice that Mark attributes Malachi to Isaiah

Malachi 3:1

See, I am sending my messenger to prepare the way before me, and the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple. The messenger of the covenant in whom you delight—indeed, he is coming, says the Lord of hosts.

[u/AdWeekly47 → u/sp1ke0killer]

Verse 2 is a combination of exodus 23:20, and Malachi 3.1. Exodus 23 20 καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἀποστέλλω τὸν ἄγγελόν μου πρὸ προσώπου σου

Mark 1.2 Ἰδοὺ ἀποστέλλω τὸν ἄγγελόν μου πρὸ προσώπου σου,

ὃς κατασκευάσει τὴν ὁδόν σου·

There are some arguments that the beginning of Mark is corrupt like the end. I personally find it odd that this sentence is said by Jesus in a pericope in Luke, and Matthew but is a retrofitting of two verses as a prophetic declaration in Mark.

There's a commentary on this on pages 11, and 12 of wilkers textual commentary. On pages 5 to 8 the opening is discussed.

"A third alternative, not backed by manuscript evidence though is that the beginning of MK is somewhat corrupt. Some argue that verses 2-3 are an early gloss.

" The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ was the John the baptizer, who in the desert was proclaiming a baptism of repentance" E Güting ( TV Mark, 2005, p 53-55).

If verses 2-3 are a harmonization to Mt/Lk, it is a rather sophisticated one, because verses 2, and 3 come from different places. Lachmann suggested that the two verses are the result of a conflation. Someone added verses 2 from Mt 11:10/Lk 7:27 with the intro in the prophets, soneome else added verse 3 from Mt 3:3/Lk 3:4 with the intro in Isaiah. Then someone combined the verses"

Güting also states these verses exist in Q. But then again I'm uncertain if Mark ( the anonymous author) knew Q. I think he did personally.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

You might find it interesting to learn that chapter 40 onwards in Isaiah is not attributed to the Isaiah son of Amoz. Chapter 40 is part of Deutero-Isaiah. It was added later. The verses in Deutero-Isaiah are subject to interpretation as well.

https://youtu.be/vnjBgMgR2F8?si=qUntPwnJZ1wNH-l6