Introduction and Overview of the Series

Part 1 of 5 · Ep. 239

Guest [00:00:03] Mormon Stories Podcast is a production of the Open Stories Foundation. All donations to Mormon Stories are fully tax deductible and go directly towards keeping the podcast alive and towards building a community of support for Mormons like you. To support the podcast or to join the community, please become a monthly subscriber today@mormonstories.org

Guest [00:00:26] Teach Me to Walk in the Light

Brian Johnston [00:00:33] welcome to Mormon Stories Podcast. My name is Brian Johnston and I will be the guest host today. By way of introduction, I've done some other podcasts on Fowler's Stages of Faith, a podcast on LDS spouse disaffection and marriage relationships, and I am also one of the co founders of staylds.com which is a site that explores Middle Way Mormonism, faith disaffection, and practical advice on LDS religion and spirituality. From that perspective, I will be interviewing Jared Anderson, who is a New Testament scholar. He completed an undergraduate degree at the University of Utah in Middle Eastern Studies with with an emphasis in Hebrew and also studied Greek and Latin with Margaret Toscano. His honors thesis was on Joseph Smith's study and use of ancient languages. Jared went on to complete a master's degree in Religious Studies from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and during his graduate school had a chance to work with some top scholars from UNC and Duke. He is currently finishing up his PhD at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. And his advisor is Dr. Bart Ehrman, who some listeners may be familiar with. Dr. Ehrman has written some popular books on New Testament history and textual criticism, such as Misquoting Jesus, Jesus Interrupted, and God's Problem. The topic of Jared's dissertation is going to be the form of the Gospel of Mark used by the author of the Gospel of Matthew. Jared plans to continue on afterwards and publish books on the history of the Bible, how it was formed, transmitted, and translated. All right, so how does that sound, Jared? Welcome to Mormon Stories.

Jared Anderson [00:02:34] Sounds good. Let's get into it.

Brian Johnston [00:02:36] Yeah. So tonight Jared is going to be talking about the New Testament. We're going to be exploring the New Testament from an academic, scholarly perspective, which is a little different than a lot of us are used to. So could you start, Jared, why don't you describe kind of what this perspective is?

Jared Anderson [00:02:54] Yeah. And one thing, I think people who appreciate the scriptures religiously are potentially a bit touchy or at least uncertain about an academic perspective. For one thing, they don't know what it means. When I tell people that I am getting a degree, getting my PhD in religious studies. They don't even know what that Means they say, does that mean you're going to be a minister or a lot of people don't even understand that you can study the Bible academically?

Brian Johnston [00:03:25] Yeah, that's a good question.

Jared Anderson [00:03:27] I appreciate the fact that this is new territory for a lot of people. And it is worth mentioning that when we are discussing any scripture, historically and academically, we are going against the grain of the document, because all scripture of any religion is primarily a faith document. So as far as the New Testament goes, this is. It is a testimony about Jesus, his role in God's plan, how to live a faithful life. The purpose of the New Testament is not so historians thousands of years later can pick it apart and figure out when what book was written.

Brian Johnston [00:04:12] So why do you go ahead and do that then?

Jared Anderson [00:04:16] Because it's still worth doing. And so I'll lay this out. One analogy that I think of is it's like making a goal of discerning the ingredients in a dish of a master cook. That's not what the cook intends. The cook just wants you to have that taste and even emotional experience of

Brian Johnston [00:04:39] eating, the gourmet experience of eating this dish that he's created.

Jared Anderson [00:04:43] But it's still valuable to say, well, how do these go together so you can have a more informed, thoughtful experience eating it. So, different things for different people. But. So what I want to do in this podcast is explain why scholars think what they do about the New Testament first, what conclusions they come to, how they understand this material historically and as literature, how it's functioning. So kind of picking apart the pieces. And one thing that I want to emphasize is that it is not my motivation to destroy anyone's faith or prevent people from appreciating the New Testament from a theological or faithful perspective, because I think that that's a very valuable approach to Scripture. I teach world religions and I discuss all sorts of different scriptures, and there's a lot of good stuff in it. But once again, I think this, the New Testament is a document that was written or really a collection of books. Not a single document. It was a collection of books that was written thousands of years ago, put together over hundreds of years in a different language, in a different culture, with different assumptions. So when the average reader sits down and reads the New Testament without realizing it, he or she is projecting assumptions onto the text. So it's valuable to know, what do scholars who spend their entire lives thinking and writing and teaching about this content? How do they understand it? And so the main purpose of this is I want to present as much as I Can, in the limited time we have, presents the outlook and the evidence of, of scholars. And then it's up to the individual listener to figure out what that means and how to incorporate the various types of reading of the New Testament, you know, so I would invite listeners to hear what we cover in our conversation and then on their own, say, okay, well, what do I think of this and what are my opinions? And is that convincing or is it not convincing? And can I think of counter arguments? Or if they want, how does that interact or relate to reading the New Testament as scripture or as a faith?

How to Read the New Testament Academically

Brian Johnston [00:07:25] But one of the aspects of approaching it this way is also understanding the environment, the context, not projecting our current one on it, but what was happening

Guest [00:07:36] at the time,

Brian Johnston [00:07:39] stuff about that, which I would think is a helpful way to inform us about the message in it. Does that make any sense?

Jared Anderson [00:07:48] Yeah. So there are a couple ways, I think, being a bit philosophical here. I think that if any sort of interpretation is uplifting, encourages you to understand the world better, treat those around you better, I think that's valid. But that does not mean it corresponds to its true historical context or meaning, as much as we can figure that out. And so one thing about academics and scholarship is it is true, and I admit freely, it is an inexact process. It is both science and art. But at the same time, one thing that I don't have much tolerance for, I understand it, but I don't think it's very mature or responsible, is when people say, well, because history is flawed and because scholarship is flawed, and you can't be certain, I don't need to pay attention to it. I don't need to take it seriously. And usually either explicit or implied, that means I can believe whatever I want.

Guest [00:08:48] Right.

Brian Johnston [00:08:49] I gotcha.

Jared Anderson [00:08:50] And granted, at the same time, it is. You need to put it in perspective. You know, you need to say, well, I can't be sure about this. I can't take this theory and run away with it and be absolutely positive. But it's a more mature view of knowledge. And if I can segue into talking about knowledge in general. Sure, yeah, let's do that for a moment. So first, there are things that we don't think about. And one thing I enjoy telling students is that everything we know has a history and is a cultural construction. So that's not saying it's not true, that's not saying it's all fiction, but that's saying we have no absolute transcendent access to history or what really happened or what things really meant.

Guest [00:09:39] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:09:40] And so here's how it worked. And I can imagine some religious people would say, well, there's the Spirit, but we can perhaps talk about, touch on that later. So our sources of knowledge are either we've been taught it, so we believe something because we heard it somewhere, our parents told it to us, or church leaders told it to us, or we have personally experienced something.

Brian Johnston [00:10:03] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:10:03] But the kicker is we are trained, we are conditioned even to filter personal experience through what we are taught.

Guest [00:10:12] Right. Yeah.

Brian Johnston [00:10:13] We kind of have a worldview. We've through our experience have come to understand the world works a certain way or we have expectations. Is that kind of what you're getting at?

Jared Anderson [00:10:23] Yes. So for example, if we read a book, well, let's say if we read the Bible and we have a good feeling when we read the Bible, different cultures. Well, you know, the Mormon culture will say, well, this is the Spirit testifying that it's true.

Brian Johnston [00:10:38] Right, sure.

Jared Anderson [00:10:39] But that, but you also have good feelings when you read other books. So I'm not going to get into that much, but just I want to raise the awareness that everything we know has a history.

Brian Johnston [00:10:54] Right. And the way we think has a history of how that all got built up.

Jared Anderson [00:10:59] Yeah. And we're not aware of it. So just one brief anecdote and then I'll touch on the history of the interpretation with the New Testament. So I taught for years, I TA'd and then taught my own class in New Testament and Hebrew Bible, Old Testament in North Carolina. And occasionally I would have students say, you know, Evangelical Baptist or what have you say. I will do what I need to to get an A in this class. But I'm not listening to anything you're saying. I'm not letting it really sink in. I'm just in one ear out the other so I can keep my faith.

Brian Johnston [00:11:37] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:11:38] And well, I encourage them to approach it differently. But what I say in some instances is I say learn the history of your ideas and learning the history of your ideas. For example, inerrancy, the idea that every punctuation point was put there by God. That's an overstatement of the position that has its own history. And so a significant minority of readers of the New Testament, evangelicals, a lot, but also LDS readers, read the Bible as historically, literally true in a post scientific way.

Guest [00:12:19] Right.

Brian Johnston [00:12:20] Which is very different than the context in which it was written and Even the last 2000 years in which it was used.

Jared Anderson [00:12:26] Yeah. So I just want to make the point. I don't want to spend too much Time on this. But I want to make the point that the people who wrote and heard the books that became the New Testament and for hundreds and even thousands of years, they would not have even conceptualized or been aware of the way that we read the New Testament. We come with expectations for accuracy that have no precedent in the ancient world. You know, because we live in a world where we really can know what is going on. We have videos and recorders and people are, you know, there's writing everywhere, there's books everywhere. Everywhere can read. We have a high expectation for accuracy.

Brian Johnston [00:13:12] Yeah, you can Google anything, you can know stuff within seconds.

Jared Anderson [00:13:17] Right. We have. We can instantly have some sort of answer to everything. And so we have an expectation that when we read something, that's pretty much how it was. And so that's not the case with the New Testament. And so a couple things. First, part of this literalism comes from a variety of sources, but one aspect of it was there was the rise of biblical scholarship, what's called a critical approach to the Bible. And by that, I don't mean negative. I don't mean you're badmouthing the Bible. I just mean a rigorous analytical sifting and consideration of the evidence.

Brian Johnston [00:14:03] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:14:05] So when that arose post Renaissance and then it really flourished in Germany in the 1800s, and it filtered over to Britain and then America, there was a religious reaction against this academic approach to the Bible that believers felt, just deconstructed it and tore it down. And it was saying it's not divine.

Brian Johnston [00:14:31] Right. Which is understandable.

Jared Anderson [00:14:32] It is understandable. And yeah, maybe we can touch on that later.

Guest [00:14:38] So.

Jared Anderson [00:14:38] But that's part of the history is faithful readers of the New Testament, including faithful scholars, tried as hard as they could to make all of the academic information coming up and historical information, make it mesh with theology and faith.

Brian Johnston [00:14:58] Right. That was kind of more of the. I don't want to say the beginning, not that it's ever happened, not ever happened before, but like a strong push to see scripture as very, very literal, like a security footage of what happened.

Jared Anderson [00:15:15] Right. And one interesting aspect of this is. So science was born out of a religious view. It was born out of the view that God created the universe in this orderly way so you can learn the laws of nature. But that makes the b questionable. But the interesting thing is that nowadays believers will try to use every scientific tool at their. Like the idea of biblical archaeology, you know, this idea. You can go out and use archeology, which is a scientific method, to. Not in the hard science sense, but yeah, you can to confirm the Bible. And I feel like believers will use the same. They'll use every and every thing at their disposal to say, well, how can I confirm this is true in the way I think it is? So you get this weird mix of faith and science. And now I personally think that I strongly encourage everyone to form a view of reality and an understanding of reality, including things like scriptures, with every knowledge and every tool at their disposal. I think that's good. Mm. But the problem. Well, it is problematic when these conservative scholars will try to make the evidence fit the theology. It's better than. It's better than ignoring the evidence. But I think it gives a false sense of security when conservative scholars will

Brian Johnston [00:16:47] say, well, do you have an example

Guest [00:16:49] of something like that?

Brian Johnston [00:16:51] Sure.

Jared Anderson [00:16:51] With the authorship of the Gospels, for example, things. So there's this tradition that the Gospel of Mark was. That Mark was Peter's secretary, basically, and Peter was busy preaching, and Mark was the one who copied down his words, and then Mark wrote his gospel.

Brian Johnston [00:17:11] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:17:12] Without that tradition, you would have no reason to think it was connected to Peter. None.

Brian Johnston [00:17:19] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:17:20] In fact, you would have counter evidence, but. Because that's what people think. People, including believing scholars, have this tendency to want to make new information conform to expectations, conform to what we already know.

Brian Johnston [00:17:38] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:17:39] So do you see what I mean? The first. And so people will look at the evidence and they'll say, well, this can still be true. You know, here's a way of looking at the evidence where we can preserve the idea that Mark was Peter's secretary.

Brian Johnston [00:17:54] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:17:55] And there are lots of other examples. But what the academic method that I recommend and that I will be modeling is even though there's uncertainty, even though we can't know anything. Responsible academics, responsible history, responsible critical thinking is what conclusion best explains all of the evidence as simply as possible with the fewest exceptions.

Guest [00:18:27] Right. That makes a lot of sense. That's a good way of putting it.

Jared Anderson [00:18:31] So, you know, no presuppositions, no expectations, look at all the evidence and say, where does the evidence lead us? And again, this is why I'm saying I don't think people should believe this. You know, I think the best way for people to be convinced is through evidence. You know, sometimes in life we need to believe things on authority. When we go to our mechanic, when we go to our doctor, we can say, yeah, this is beyond me. I don't understand. I don't know all the parts of my car, but I know they know what they're talking about. They've gone through the process, they've gone to school, they've been checked by people who know. And so, for example, this is why if you want to learn something about the New Testament, you go to what's called a pure reviewed source, either an academic book or journal article, where people who know as much as the author have said, well, what about this? And you have checked it. And okay, that sounds right. Rather than just popping it up on the jesusislord.com website.

Guest [00:19:31] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:19:33] Or, you know, Wikipedia. So that's just a little bit of background of. So let's see, Everything we know has a history. We should be aware of that history and we should, as much as possible, dispense of all of that baggage. Not in a negative sense, but we should dispense our presuppositions, our expectations when we look at the evidence. And of course, that that requires us to learn Greek and Hebrew and history. And that's why I'm here.

Guest [00:20:07] And that's your way of comparing the academic approach as opposed to the approach of reading it purely for its religious meaning.

Brian Johnston [00:20:15] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:20:15] And so one more thing on that before we move on. I just want listeners to be aware, and it's important to be aware in general, that even when we read Scripture for its faith value, if that understanding is not connected to what it originally meant, we're limiting ourselves and we're kind of just getting what we already believe. You know, we're reconfirming our beliefs. We're not allowing the documents to challenge us and to kind of tell us what, what they know. And so a better way I think is to say, okay, I understand a little bit more about the background. I understand what this meant to its original audience. Oh, I have an insight of how it applies to my life. But do you see how it can be a. Both and.

Guest [00:21:08] Right.

Brian Johnston [00:21:09] It doesn't have to be one or the other.

Guest [00:21:11] The classic false dichotomy. It doesn't have to be just those two options. You can combine them.

Jared Anderson [00:21:17] This is why I wish and I encourage anyone I talk to to get a really good study Bible. Maybe we can talk about that later, but with introductions and footnotes that give us all this information. Because the helps available in the LDS version of the Scriptures are very, very limited.

Brian Johnston [00:21:36] Yeah.

Jared Anderson [00:21:37] And on that, I'll just say a few words about a unique issue with LDS readers of the Bible.

Brian Johnston [00:21:48] Yeah, what is that?

Jared Anderson [00:21:49] And that is that. So Mormon readers of the Bible, they think that there's a little bit of a cushion between, you know, the hard hitting academic theory as far as it's

Guest [00:22:02] translated correctly, that sort of thing.

Jared Anderson [00:22:05] Right. So we're like, oh, yeah, you know, we know the Book of Mormon is solid and it has to be what it claims, but the Bible, there's a little bit of cushion. There's the idea that, yes, it's correct as far as it is translated correctly. And I would suggest Joseph Smith actually meant something closer to our word transmitted. And then there's the idea of corruption and change and so forth. And hopefully we'll have the chance to talk about that. But the point I want to make is that this is only. It's kind of an illusion, this comfortable buffer that we. That Mormons have between theology and the Bible.

Brian Johnston [00:22:46] Yeah.

Jared Anderson [00:22:47] And that is the buffer disappears once the reader realizes that the quote unquote, solid scriptures, you know, the Book of Mormon Doctrine and Covenants, the modern revealed scripture that Mormons want to take literally.

Guest [00:23:05] Yes, I see where you're going with that.

Jared Anderson [00:23:08] Presupposes the literal historicity and certain interpretations of the biblical narrative at hundreds of points.

Brian Johnston [00:23:19] Classic one is Abraham and the pearl of great price.

Guest [00:23:23] If he is not a real historical figure at all, that creates a certain problem.

Jared Anderson [00:23:29] Right. Or if comp. Certain aspects of the. Certain theories on the composition of the Sermon on the Mount would immediately come crashing into the view of Third Nephi.

Guest [00:23:45] Right.

Survey of New Testament Books and Canon

Jared Anderson [00:23:47] So one thing before we get into an overview of the New Testament books, which is how I'd like to start, is in the main body of our time together, I do not want to spend much time at all talking from a Mormon perspective because I figure that listeners can bring that to the table themselves.

Brian Johnston [00:24:09] Yeah.

Jared Anderson [00:24:09] I want to speak from a strictly academic as much as possible perspective and once again, explain why scholars who read and write and think more about the Bible than anyone ever has the luxury to do otherwise. Yes. And again, it's not. It's not a negative thing. It's just.

Guest [00:24:30] It's another way to appreciate it. Like, you know, if you want to appreciate a vehicle, you could also take it completely apart until it's just a pile of pieces. So you know how everything works.

Jared Anderson [00:24:44] Yes. And the difference between reading a cookbook, if you're really into cooking. I enjoy cooking. You can probably tell. And just enjoying a meal, you know, not knowing what's in it. So the uninformed person who eats is like, this is good, you know, where. Whereas the informed.

Brian Johnston [00:25:02] Nothing wrong with that.

Jared Anderson [00:25:04] No, the. The connoisseur of food says, I really enjoy how these spices are combined and how the contrast works and how these flavors. And I bet I know how the cook does that and you know, so it's just different ways of appreciating the same thing. So shall we get into a whirlwind overview of the New Testament?

Guest [00:25:24] Yeah. So put on your intellectual crash helmet, strap yourself in tightly to the roller coaster and get ready for the ride.

Jared Anderson [00:25:32] So what I'm going to do as a framework is I want to present an overview of the books of the New Testament. Here's the kicker. In chronological order, that's different than the

Guest [00:25:43] order they appear in the New Testament,

Jared Anderson [00:25:46] the order in which they were written. So we're going to start with first Thessalonians.

Guest [00:25:52] Whoa, we're not used to that. I'm thinking you would start with Matthew.

Jared Anderson [00:25:57] Right. So right now I am not going to touch upon the sources of the books. So we have bits and pieces of traditional that go earlier, but we're going to talk about the final forms of the books and which, what order they go in chronologically. So I mean, some, some scholars will say we cannot know anything Jesus said or did more on that when we cover the historical Jesus. But I'm more optimistic than that. And so even though we have traditions that go all the way back to Jesus's life, our earliest written source are the letters of Paul.

Guest [00:26:38] And the strange thing is Paul is somebody who didn't actually meet Jesus in real life.

Jared Anderson [00:26:44] No, he wasn't. And he knows, he talks surprisingly little about Jesus's life. If you put everything Paul says about Jesus's life, you wrote it down, you can put it on a three by five card and have room to spare. So one thing that you need to know about Paul is he was converted in. So a little bit of a background about Paul first. He was a much more controversial figure than readers of the New Testament will appreciate. And if you read carefully, suddenly it's clear as day that Paul was not accepted.

Guest [00:27:26] Whoa, whoa. How could he not be accepted like that?

Jared Anderson [00:27:30] Yeah, he's one of the apostles and he's one of the authors of the New Testament after all.

Brian Johnston [00:27:34] Yeah, a good chunk of it.

Jared Anderson [00:27:35] Yeah. Not only that, but a very influential author. But in his day he was extremely controversial. In fact, listeners would probably be surprised to know he was at odds with Jesus disciples.

Guest [00:27:50] Yeah, the Peter, James faction.

Jared Anderson [00:27:54] So, so Peter and James, people who lived with Jesus, people who knew Jesus said to Paul, what are you talking about? Where are you coming from? So Paul was a very controversial figure. So he tells us himself that he was a very devout Jew. He didn't have any problems being Jewish. Often Christians will like to paint, especially in an earlier age of scholarship, Christians would like to paint Paul as this troubled Jew that is like, oh, if only there were a way I could get rid of this tedious Judaism. Oh, Jesus.

Brian Johnston [00:28:30] Yes.

Jared Anderson [00:28:30] Just what I was waiting for. You know, that's not. In fact, I think FF Bruce wrote this book called Paul the Apostle of the Heart Set Free. But it's not like that. You know, that's Christians imposing this view that Christianity is the best and frankly, a quite negative view of Judaism. That's very troubling onto the sources. So, for example, this one very influential scholar, E.P. sanders, he revolutionized the field in a couple areas. And no joke, one of the things he emphasized was that Jesus was Jewish.

Brian Johnston [00:29:07] Imagine that. Yeah.

Jared Anderson [00:29:09] But to take it seriously. And then the other area, he revolutionized Pauline studies. I bet you can guess what I'm gonna say.

Guest [00:29:18] Yeah, go ahead.

Jared Anderson [00:29:20] Paul was Jewish, you know, and to take that.

Brian Johnston [00:29:23] How did that happen?

Jared Anderson [00:29:25] And to take that seriously, you know. So Paul himself says, I was fine as a Jew. I was happy as a Jew. If you want to talk Jew, you know, Judaism, I can out Jewish you any day of the week. And granted, as we'll see, he has reasons to fight that battle and to make that point. But one interesting thing. So a little bit more about history. History can only talk about probabilities. You can't say, well, this for sure happened, or there's no way this happened. You can just say, this is more probable, this is less probable, this is nearly certain. And this is pre. You know, even if there's an ancient document that says Jesus drove around a Portia, you know, I think we can safely say that's virtually impossible with the world as we understand it. So all that is background to say the conversion of Paul was radically improbable.

Guest [00:30:22] Oh, boy, now you're going to open up a can of worms.

Jared Anderson [00:30:27] It's interesting because we know from his own words that he. That he was converted to Christianity. Well, okay, E. Sorry, that was an anachronism. He had a spiritual experience where he believed that Jesus appeared to him.

Brian Johnston [00:30:46] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:30:47] You know, he says in Galatians, he says, you know, you know, that I was a persecutor of the Christians, the ones who followed Jesus, you know, probably for blasphemy. And yet God saw fit to reveal his son to me. And Paul would have understood this experience in a very Jewish framework. And I would imagine that Paul considered himself a Jewish till the day he died. So that's Paul. And his writings are the earliest things, the earliest books Whole books that we have in the New Testament, but we do not have anything from Paul for about 15 or so years after his conversion. So that's really interesting.

Brian Johnston [00:31:35] Yeah.

Jared Anderson [00:31:35] You know, he lived in Antioch, he preached. Most likely he tried for quite a while to convert Jews. You know, Acts will talk a lot about Paul and how he works. But anyway, that's a long way of saying our earliest book is First Thessalonians. Okay, so before I get to First Thessalonians, I'm going to go through in chronological order how I'm. So first there are the letters of Paul, but now I need to throw another wrench into it.

Paul's Authentic Letters: An Introduction

Guest [00:32:06] All right, start throwing tools.

Jared Anderson [00:32:10] So 14 books, not counting Acts, are said to be written by Paul. Only 13 of those claim to be written by Paul.

Brian Johnston [00:32:25] Interesting.

Jared Anderson [00:32:28] Hebrews is. Was later attributed to Paul, but it never claims to be by Paul. Well, very good. You're anticipating the next step. So scholars divide these letters, these 13 letters that claim to be by Paul, into three categories. So pretty much all scholars agree that seven really were written by Paul. So that's one. Thessalonians, Galatians, Philemon, Philippians, first and Second Corinthians, Romans. So, and scholarly consensus, when scholars agree, that's a big deal.

Guest [00:33:10] Well, yeah, because they like to argue about everything.

Jared Anderson [00:33:13] Well, yeah, considering that people get books published and get jobs based on saying something new. So if there can be disagreements, there will be disagreements. You know, so when scholars agree on something, it's. It's a big deal. So then you have this other category called the deutero Paulines.

Guest [00:33:33] Can you take a second to explain that term?

Brian Johnston [00:33:35] That might be interesting.

Jared Anderson [00:33:38] Deutero means secondary. And so these are letters where scholars are divided as to whether or not Paul wrote them. And so Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, second Thessalonians, Then you have what are called the Pastoral epistles, which is first and second Timothy and Titus.

Brian Johnston [00:34:05] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:34:06] And very few scholars think Paul wrote those.

Guest [00:34:09] So why are they called pastoral letters?

Jared Anderson [00:34:13] Because they are. Has to do with preaching. They are supposedly Paul's letters to individual leaders of the church, to Timothy and Titus. I gotcha Giving. Where Paul gives Timothy and Titus advice about how to lead the flock, you know, how to. How to lead the church. So that's why they're called pastorals. Okay, so we'll get more into that later. But I'm just explaining why I'm giving the books of the New Testament in the order which I am. So first I'm going to talk about the seven undisputed Letters of Paul. Those are the earliest.

Guest [00:34:47] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:34:48] And then we will talk about Second Timothy. Even though second Timothy is lumped in with the Pastorals, it has the greatest likelihood of those three books to be closely related to Paul. So either he wrote it or it has recollections from his life. So that puts it pretty early. And then we get into Gospel territories, but only three of them. So we'll be talking about Mark, Matthew, Luke and Acts.

Brian Johnston [00:35:23] Acts. That's not one of the Gospels.

Jared Anderson [00:35:26] Right. Because the same author wrote both Luke and Acts. And this is where. This is where this is. This is where listeners just have to hold on. Because of necessity, we have, you know, we only have a couple hours to talk about what literally covers libraries and thousands of pages and entire courses on any one of these books. So, you know, just have to hold on tight and listen carefully for every little bit.

Brian Johnston [00:35:53] Yeah.

Jared Anderson [00:35:53] So Mark was written, and then Matthew and Luke and Acts were in a bit after. And then we'll get into this category of the other epistles, letters that were written in the name of Paul or not. And then Revelation gets thrown in there, chronologically speaking. So we have Colossians, Hebrews, James, Revelation. And this is one thing is even though Revelation is the end of the New Testament, and very appropriately so as it describes the end of the world.

Brian Johnston [00:36:31] Sure.

Jared Anderson [00:36:32] And so I think it's a natural assumption. Oh, it's the end. And maybe I don't know if readers assume it was written last. I don't think they even think about it. You know, they don't even ask the question of when were things written.

Brian Johnston [00:36:41] I remember thinking that before, you know, that.

Guest [00:36:45] I don't know.

Brian Johnston [00:36:45] You know, I read through a book and I can hear this.

Guest [00:36:48] It was just written in the order I am reading it in.

Jared Anderson [00:36:51] Yeah, that's the order it goes in. So that's the order it's supposed to be in. And so this is interesting because there's this little curse in Revelation that says, you know, cursed is anyone who adds or takes away from this book.

Guest [00:37:03] Right. They're going to be written out of that book of life.

Jared Anderson [00:37:07] Yeah. So some people have a very high view of the Bible. Believers who have a high view of the Bible, they love that verse. And, well, speaking with Mormons, let's just call a spade a spade. So that's how they counteract this idea of more Scripture is they say, because they use this book to refer to the entire Bible. And so even understanding the Bible historically, not even bringing more scripture, open canon or anything into the question, even just Looking at Revelation or looking at the books of the New Testament historically, that throws a wrench in the works because Revelation was not the last book written. So people who believe, you know, that God put the Bible exactly together the way it is would have a problem applying that scripture in that way because otherwise it would disqualify everything written after it. So that's, that's the order. I'll mix it around a little bit, but that's the order that I'm going to give an overview for the New Testament books.

Brian Johnston [00:38:00] Okay. Okay, fair enough.

Jared Anderson [00:38:02] So just to give our bookends, first Thessalonians was written in about 4950 of the Common Era CE, which is a nice academic way of saying ad without declaring Jesus Lord anno Domini. And the very last book written in the New Testament was second Peter. Okay, probably written in the early second century, maybe even as late as like 130.

Guest [00:38:30] So somewhere around maybe 15 to 20 years afterwards, am I doing the math correctly?

Jared Anderson [00:38:38] About 20 years, 20 years after Jesus life. So basically the books of the New Testament span about 100 years. But once again, they're not at all in the order where that we read them. And so you get a different picture of things when you, when you look at the moon. Chronological order. So let's. Any thoughts or comments before we jump into first Thessalonians?

Guest [00:39:04] No, let's just jump right in.

First Thessalonians and Paul's Apocalypticism

Jared Anderson [00:39:07] Okay, so even though First Thessalonians is 13th in canonical order, it was the first one written. And this is really interesting because of the concerns that this letter has. And we can learn a lot about history and what's going on and how Christianity develops and the problems they had and the questions they have and the answers they gave given. You know, again, looking at it in this chronological, chronological order. So first Thessalonians was written about 49 from Corinth, which is southern Greece, near Athens, to Thessalonica, which is northern, modern day northern Greece in the ancient Macedonia.

Brian Johnston [00:39:50] So these aren't.

Guest [00:39:52] We're not even talking about letters that were being passed around in the area of Judea.

Jared Anderson [00:39:57] Right. We're jumping, right? You know, not even in Palestine, not even where Jesus lived. We are, right? We're in the great, you know, big bad Greco Roman world, the Roman Empire, right away. So this is very interesting. Now we need to contextualize ourselves and situate ourselves a bit. So in the time of first Thessalonians, there was no New Testament, not even a hint of it, just Paul writing down this letter.

Brian Johnston [00:40:26] So, you know, that's Kind of profound

Guest [00:40:29] to think about that this all started with Paul sitting down to write a letter.

Jared Anderson [00:40:36] No, no, there were, there were a lot of earlier traditions. We'll, we'll cover that later. But our, as far as the New Testament as we have it, finished books, it started with Paul writing down, writing down a letter. And so this is the core of Paul's message. This is a happy letter. Paul is happy with this community, which is not always the case as we'll see. He loves the community. It did not cause him any problems. In fact, that's like the exception, not the rule. And the core of Paul's message is in First Thessalonians, chapter 1, 9, 10. Again no chapters, no verses, just a letter. But that's the reference. It says for the people of those regions, report about us what kind of welcome we had among you and how you turned to God from idols to serve a living and true God and to wait for his son from heaven whom he raised from the dead. Jesus, who rescues us from the wrath that is coming. So that's a pretty dense little passage. So we understand that these are gentile converts, not Jewish, you know, because they were idol worshipers. And the main message is get ready convert, because Jesus is coming back and he's going to rescue us from the wrath of God that is coming with the coming of the kingdom.

Guest [00:41:59] So these aren't Jews being oppressed. These are people in the heart of the power center. So seems like a kind of an odd message. Am I understanding that wrong or seeing it strange?

Jared Anderson [00:42:12] You're on the right track. And it is unusual, but they must have been convinced for whatever reason that Paul had it right. So basically he said, we'll talk more about this later. But Paul had this worldview that's called apocalypticism, which Jesus also shared. Jesus shared it first. And so we'll talk more about it when we get to the nitty gritty of Jesus. But really basically apocalypticism is this worldview that life sucks.

Guest [00:42:44] Uh huh.

Jared Anderson [00:42:46] Already we're gonna have a lot of people agreeing with that.

Brian Johnston [00:42:48] Amen brother.

Jared Anderson [00:42:50] That in fact life is so bad that it must be ruled by the powers of darkness and demons. And so the world is so bad because the forces of evil are in charge right now. They're writing the rules. But what's going to happen is God is going to come crashing into history and he's going to fix it. He's going to fix everything and he is going to establish this perfect utopian existence. And so this is the worldview to which Paul Converted his listeners.

Guest [00:43:28] Yeah. And to which he was also converted.

Jared Anderson [00:43:32] He probably grew up with it.

Guest [00:43:34] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:43:35] Like, it was just. It was just the way he viewed the world. So here's the problem, and I want. I want us to think carefully about why this was a problem. So the problem was a few members of this community of three, Thessalonica, died, and they didn't know how to handle it. What does that presuppose if they freak out because members of the community are dying?

Guest [00:43:57] Well, they were expecting to be saved from all this bad stuff. So it was, you know, kind of a problem when that didn't materialize.

Jared Anderson [00:44:07] Be more specific.

Guest [00:44:09] Well, you're the expert. You're gonna have to tell me if

Jared Anderson [00:44:14] people are freaking out. If anyone dies in the community, they must have been taught. Oh, they must have been taught that every one of them would be alive when Jesus returned.

Brian Johnston [00:44:27] Sounds like a familiar message.

Jared Anderson [00:44:28] Yeah. Doesn't it?

Guest [00:44:30] This generation shall not pass away.

Jared Anderson [00:44:32] Yeah. And so this is really interesting. So as we'll talk about with when we get to Jesus, Jesus himself thought the kingdom of God was going to come in his lifetime. And so one interesting thing is that Paul only shifts this a tiny bit. So he says, don't worry about it. Jesus is going to come back. It's right around the corner. Don't worry about the dead. In the meantime, live really good lives. Live in a way that no one can make fun of Christians. No one can say we're weird. No one can say we do funky things in our. In our religious worship. I'm going to read 1st Thessalonians 4, 9, 18, because that encapsulates what's going on.

Brian Johnston [00:45:16] Okay?

Jared Anderson [00:45:17] He says, now, concerning love of the brothers and sisters, you do not need to have anyone write to you, for you yourselves have been taught by God to love one another. And indeed, you do love all the brothers and sisters throughout Mount Macedonia. But we urge you, beloved, to do so more and more and to aspire to live quietly, to mind your own affairs, and to work with your hands as we. As we directed you so that you may behave properly towards outsiders and be dependent on no one. So he's saying, don't get lazy, because Jesus is coming back. And Second Thessalonians addresses that even more. But he's saying, live beyond reproach. But. And then he addresses this death issue. He says, but we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers and sisters. The Greek only says brothers, but the NRSV is politically correct about those who have died so that you may not grieve as others who have no hope. For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have died for this. We declare to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will by no means precede those who have died. For the Lord himself with a cry of command, with the archangel's call, and with the sound of God's trumpet, will descend from heaven. And the dead in Christ will rise first. And then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up in the clouds together with them to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. Therefore encourage one another with these words.

Guest [00:46:44] Yeah. And so to start pulling this apart. The reason he's telling them this and explaining it is that maybe because that's not how they understood it was supposed to happen.

Jared Anderson [00:46:55] They were shocked when they died. Interesting to pay attention. So I would imagine that Most readers of 1 Thessalonians, for those who bother to read 1st Thessalonians, read it. That the we is them. Do you see? So they're reading it and they're like, we who alive will be caught up. And they agree. They're like, yeah, yeah. You know, the ones who are alive when Jesus returns will be caught up. But that's not what Paul's saying.

Guest [00:47:16] Yeah, he's saying that to the people he's writing the letter to.

Jared Anderson [00:47:20] And he's talking about himself. He repeats we, you know, a good three times right there. He's like, we who are alive, we who are left, we will be caught up. So he's saying we will be around when Jesus comes back.

Guest [00:47:33] The we is Paul and the people in the letter.

Jared Anderson [00:47:37] Yeah. And then the. The community at Thessalonica.

Guest [00:47:41] Yeah.

Jared Anderson [00:47:42] So that's. That's all we're gonna say about First Thessalonians, moving on to Galatians. You know, this is. Again, as I said, this is gonna be a world war. World World war. Not till Revelation. It's gonna be a whirlwind overview of the different books. So, you know, just big picture type thing. Now, Galatians is a very different type of letter than first Thessalonians is. We're not sure when it was. Scholars aren't sure when it was written. Maybe like 54, 55. From Ephesus, which is the west coast coast of Asia Minor, which is modern Turkey. We've gone from Greece to Turkey. So here's the main issue with Galatians, Paul founded the church in Galatia. And then other Christians, other missionaries, other Christian missionaries came and gave a different message.

Galatians and Paul's Break from Jewish Law

Brian Johnston [00:48:36] That could be a problem.

Jared Anderson [00:48:38] And it's interesting because one thing that becomes very apparent when you look, when you start sifting through the New Testament with a fine toothed, you know, comb or with a careful eye, is that early Christianity was very diverse. And in fact, these different Christian missionaries would pretty much consider each other enemies almost.

Guest [00:49:02] So you're saying that they would not have all considered themselves to be one cohesive group?

Jared Anderson [00:49:09] That's what I'm saying, yeah. And they wouldn't consider themselves different religions or different sects. They would just say, we have the correct way of understanding how to follow Jesus.

Brian Johnston [00:49:20] Mm.

Jared Anderson [00:49:20] And you're wrong.

Guest [00:49:22] So this whole hot mess of arguing with each other started right from the beginning,

Jared Anderson [00:49:29] as far back as we. We can tell. So Paul preached a certain thing. Now, one thing that I didn't bring up about Paul is that he considered himself an apostle to the Gentiles. And he actually talks about this in Galatians. So we'll bring. Bring it up. So the really interesting thing is, and one of his big messages was, in order to follow Jesus, you do not need to be Jewish. You do not need to follow the Jewish law. You don't need to be converted to Judaism first and then follow the way of Jesus. It's straight to Jesus, do not pass go, do not cut off your.

Guest [00:50:08] Yeah, that thing that makes you part of the Abrahamic covenant, much to the

Jared Anderson [00:50:12] relief of a lot of converts.

Guest [00:50:15] Yeah, that might have been a real popular missionary message that you don't have to do that.

Jared Anderson [00:50:22] Yeah, unlike my opponents. Right. But these other very persuasive missionaries came after Paul left. So Paul established the church of Galatia and then he moved on. Other Christians came and he said, yes, Jesus, death offers salvation to both Jews and Gentiles, but it is still necessary to keep the Jewish law. Jesus kept the law. He was circumcised, he observed the Jewish feasts. And by the way, Jesus, apostles still do all this.

Guest [00:50:55] Oh, boy, now you're starting to fight.

Jared Anderson [00:50:58] Who's this guy Paul? How does he know what he's talking about? You know, we have the way of Jesus behind us. We have the original followers of Jesus behind us. Who are you going to listen to? So that was Paul's problem. And so again, Paul is at a point of weakness. He can't play their game because their cards are better than his, you know, so he has to argue in a different way. And so basically, Paul's Opponents are saying, in order to be included in the covenant, you have to continue to keep the Jewish law, including circumcision. And by the way, there were Jewish Christians who lived this way for hundreds of years. The author of Matthew was one of them. Okay, so that's just kind of a big picture way of saying there's a lot of diversity and you get a lot of tension right from the get go, as you said. So despite the fact that Paul's opponent's message made sense, he, Paul, did not pull punches fighting against it. So Paul piles on the rhetoric. He says, now, Galatians, not a friendly letter, not a nice letter, not like Thessalonians. No. He says that he's astonished that the Galatians are such fools to be easily deceived. There can be no other gospel than the one proclaimed by Paul, even if an angel declares it. That should be familiar to listeners. So he says, anything, anyone who teaches different, anything different is cursed. And he, Paul uses all these rhetorical strategies. He was a gifted rhetorician and writer. And so he sets up this situation that's like a court case where the other preachers, they're called Judaizing because they want to make Jewish, you know, make Christians live the Jewish law. So they're called judaizers. So the Judaizers are the accusers, Paul is the defendant, and the Galatians are the judge. This is a rhetorical device in order to make his point. So first, Paul reminds his Galatians, reminds the Galatians that his gospel came directly from God without any human mediator.

Guest [00:53:07] Oh, boy. Is that him calling upon that whole vision scenario from his conversion experience?

Jared Anderson [00:53:13] Well, we're very fortunate that this is the case because. Oh, I need to say one more thing in general about Paul's letters. Paul did not systematically write down in his journal. And this is what I believe, and this is my understanding of Jesus. And this is here's the gospel according to Paul. You know, his letters were what's called occasional, which doesn't mean he occasionally wrote them. It meant they were in response to specific occasions, specific problems. And so it's a good thing that his authority was challenged in this way because that's when he tells his conversion story.

Guest [00:53:52] Yeah, see, that's what I was trying to get at. It's just, it's a very interesting parallel because here we see Paul as the leader in this church and he's under fire and his authority is being questioned. And now he has the story that he brings in of, you know, having seen an angel having Seen Jesus Christ in a miraculous vision and being converted, and now that's his authority. And the parallel I can't help but, you know, think of is Joseph Smith in Kirtland after the Kirtland Safety Society, you know, that whole banking thing fell apart. And we have all of a sudden on the scene within Mormonism is the story of the first vision, which, you know, there had only been hints at before, but now it becomes a prominent story. So just that parallel is kind of very interesting, you know, with Paul.

Jared Anderson [00:54:45] So basically, his opponents play their cards and they say, by the way, Jesus agrees with us, and Jesus's disciples agree with us. And so Paul has to trump them somehow. So he says, forget the apostles, forget human intermediary. I got this directly from God. That's where my authority comes from.

Guest [00:55:06] Oh, yeah, interesting. Yeah.

Jared Anderson [00:55:09] And in fact, we'll talk more about this with Acts, but briefly, he says, I didn't talk to no disciples. I didn't talk to the apostles. Years and years later I did. I was doing my own thing, commissioned directly from God for over a decade before I went and talked to those guys in Jerusalem. So he has to establish his authority independent of the line of Jesus and his disciples, because if he played the who was closer to Jesus game, they would win. So his rhetoric, he said, this is why the Galatians do not need to keep the Jewish law. So he says, the Galatians received the Spirit without observing the law, referring to their conversion. How is the law necessary? He's like, you've already got Jesus. Why do you need to do more? He says, and these are just rhetorical strategies. So Paul says, God's promise to Abraham that all gentiles would be blessed through him came before the law of Moses. Galatians is the idea that the law was only a temporary custodian, schoolmasters to train them until Christ's sacrifice made the law unnecessary. So, again, these are very common Christian themes. But one thing that I want listeners to appreciate is you need to forget all that. You need to forget the fact that all this makes sense, because it's what Christians accept. This was new stuff. This was radical stuff. So I would invite listeners to again, forget everything we know about Christianity and just look at these things on their own grounds and on their own merits.

Guest [00:56:48] Right?

Jared Anderson [00:56:49] And it's how academics have to look at this, because we are not looking at it anachronistically in hindsight and say, oh, yeah, well, of course Paul was right, or blah, blah, blah. It's more, Paul's ideas influenced later Christianity but in the time that we're talking about, anything can win, you know, there's no absolute right answer or wrong answer. So it's just Paul duking it out with his opponents.

Brian Johnston [00:57:13] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:57:14] So Paul says that, like, the Galatians treated Paul like an angel. Why would they now be his enemies? He uses the story of Abraham, Hagar, and Sarah in a different way that Judaizers did as well. And Paul concludes by ripping apart the other preachers. Galatians 5:12 is really nasty. You do not get the feel for it in the King James Version at all. In the King James version, Galatians 5:12, say, I would that they were cut off. That offend thee.

Guest [00:57:44] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:57:45] He's referring to their enthusiasm about circumcision. He's suggesting they castrate themselves.

Guest [00:57:50] Oh, wow.

Brian Johnston [00:57:52] Nice.

Jared Anderson [00:57:52] Yeah. So he's saying, they're so excited about that. Well, why don't they go all the way? So there's a lot of rhetoric here. You know, he pleads with the Galatians, understand that the works of the law do not help against the works of the flesh. There's some really pretty stuff at the end of Galatians about the fruits of the Spirit and to live this life of love in Jesus that does not need to live the Jewish law.

Guest [00:58:20] Well, you know, I mean, it kind of sounds like we're bashing Paul and all for doing this, but, you know, that's kind of a really nice spiritual and religious message.

Brian Johnston [00:58:28] I can't say, you know, I'd really

Guest [00:58:30] want to argue with that.

Jared Anderson [00:58:31] Oh, yeah, of course. I'm not. Yeah. You know, theologically and emotionally, and there's a lot of value in this, but we can still. Understanding the historical context adds other dimensions.

Guest [00:58:43] Yeah, I think it really adds a rich. A richness and a lot of things

Brian Johnston [00:58:48] to think about, you know.

Jared Anderson [00:58:50] Yeah. I mean, I will be honest. It adds both solutions and problems, and, you know, that can be a topic for another time. So a couple other interesting things we get from Galatians before we move on to the next book. Paul does describe his conversion, as we discussed, and he says that God himself told Paul to preach to the Gentiles.

Guest [00:59:10] Yeah.

Brian Johnston [00:59:10] In defiance of the opposite notion, which was, you know, the people he was arguing with.

Jared Anderson [00:59:17] Paul has this really interesting description of meeting the other leaders. So he talks about meeting Cephas, which is another word for Peter. Like, it's. It's the Aramaic equivalent to Peter, which

Guest [00:59:31] is Greek, which means stone or something like that. Is that the translation?

Jared Anderson [00:59:37] It's like rocky, so rock. So he says, 17 years after his conversion, he goes to Jerusalem. He meets with the leaders. They agree in secret that Paul can go to the Gentiles. They'll preach to the Jews. So it's basically a respectful, sure, you know, Paul, you do your thing. You go off and talk to those people. We'll keep things at home to the Jews. That'll be our division of labor.

Guest [00:59:59] And that's Paul's version of what happened. Right. The way he describes it.

Jared Anderson [01:00:05] And in Acts, there's something called the Jerusalem Conference that kind of tells the same story.

Brian Johnston [01:00:09] Okay.

Jared Anderson [01:00:10] And then at Antioch, Paul gets really mad at Peter because Peter was. Or Cephas he called him. He was eating with the Gentiles. But as soon as people from Jerusalem came, Peter leaves the Gentiles, and you'll only eat with the Jews.

Brian Johnston [01:00:23] And.

Jared Anderson [01:00:24] Yeah, so he calls them out, and Peter admits that he's right. So what I want to stress is that Galatians highlight, it says a lot about Paul, and it also highlights the Christian diversity that existed in our earliest layer of the New Testament.

Guest [01:00:40] Okay, excellent. Yeah, it's actually. It's kind of nice to know that there was diversity and not just one way of thinking at the beginning.

Guest [01:00:52] Thank you for joining us today on Mormon Stories Podcast. To discuss this podcast with others, please check us out@mormonstories.org to keep the podcast alive or to join our support community, please consider a tax deductible donation today@mormonstories.org music for this podcast was provided by Clayton and Sky Pixton. The Mormon Stories logo was generously provided by studiocase.com thank you for listening.

Guest [01:01:34] That we may return home to his presence to live in his sight Always, always to walk in the light Father in heaven we thank thank thee this day for loving guidance to show us the way Grateful, we praise thee with songs of delight Gladly, gladly will walk in the light.

Philemon, Philippians, and Paul on Death

Part 2 of 5 · Ep. 240

Jared Anderson [00:00:03] Mormon Stories Podcast is a production of the Open Stories Foundation. All donations to Mormon Stories are fully tax deductible and go directly towards keeping the podcast alive and towards building a community of support for Mormons like you. To support the podcast or to join the community, please become a monthly subscriber today@mormonstories.org Teach Me to Walk in the light. So, moving on to Philemon, this little tiny letter where it's a very personal letter. In fact, it's kind of impressive we have it at all. So Philemon, Paul is writing from prison. He got into trouble and he was in. He wrote several letters from prison. We know he was in prison in Ephesus, Caesarea and Rome, probably other times. So probably written. This letter was probably written from ephesus in about 55 CE. So not going to spend a lot of time on this. This letter is really cleverly worded and Paul is writing in behalf of a slave, and Onesimus means useful. And so Paul is doing a wordplay. So he's. Paul is writing to Philemon on behalf of Onesimus, who's this slave that ran away.

Brian Johnston [00:01:30] And his name happens to be useful.

Jared Anderson [00:01:34] Yeah, it means useful. And so Philemon was the head of the church. And this is an insight into how the church worked. The early Christians met in individual houses, which gave the owner of that house and his wife, so the husband and wife who owned it a lot of authority in the Christian communities. So Paul is writing to Philemon, again, who is the owner, and he mentions his wife and other people in the community, and he's encouraging Philemon to not prosecute an Isimistic, that he shouldn't be in trouble, Philemon should accept him back as a Christian brother. Now, we're not sure whether this means that he should be freed or whether he should be just treated kindly. And that's a pretty big deal as far as the role of slavery. In fact, some scholars suggest that Paul wanted Onesimus to be his slave. That's this plan useful?

Brian Johnston [00:02:42] Sure.

Jared Anderson [00:02:42] He says at the end he's been, wow, you know, I wouldn't keep him as my servant or slave, however you want to look at that without asking you, but he's really been useful. And you kind of owe me your entire spiritual existence because I converted you. So I'm not saying anything, but, you know, it'd be really nice if this slave would continue to be useful to me.

Brian Johnston [00:03:03] Yeah, that's an interesting play on words.

Jared Anderson [00:03:06] Yeah. So lots of lots going on. Anyway, little, little tiny personal letter, not going to spend more time on that. But a couple interesting things. There's some insights into slavery, some insights into how the Church worked in that time, you know, that they met in houses. Okay, so moving on to Philippians. Paul is still in prison. You know, might as well write letters if you're imprisoned. And written about 56, probably from Ephesus to Philippi, which is a Roman colony in modern northeastern Greec. And Philippians. One interesting thing about this is this is our first case where we get a letter by Paul that may actually be more than one letter.

Brian Johnston [00:03:53] You mean like a couple of letters combined?

Jared Anderson [00:03:56] Yep. A couple letters that have later been edited together into one. Into one coherent whole. So that's interesting. So how do we know this? It's because, like, just to take a minute, how scholars date the Bible when they don't have anything else to do on a Saturday, how. How they figure out when and where a book was written is. It's like imagining, where are you standing? Where are you? If I were the author, what do I know? What do I presuppose? What kind of historical condition does this fit into? Another part of looking at it is the first two chapters is to see kind of what the tone and how the text itself is working. So the first two chapters are really friendly and positive, and the situation is really clear in Philippians. So Paul's in prison. The Philippians sent one of their faithful members, Epaphroditus, to take care of him. Epaphroditus got sick. And so the Philippians ask him how he's doing. Paul writes back and says, you know, he's gotten better. He's doing well. It's a nice, happy, clear letter. And then at the beginning of chapter three, suddenly Paul is livid. He's really angry. He's talking about his opponents who seem to support the Jewish law. He calls them dogs. He calls them those who mutilate the flesh. Probably a reference to circumcision. He chastises two specific women fighting in the community. So is that clear why you'd think that might not be all part of one coherent letter.

Brian Johnston [00:05:39] Oh, yeah. All of a sudden, in the middle of this letter, the tone changes, the subject changes, and it just doesn't seem like the way somebody would write a letter.

Jared Anderson [00:05:48] Right. And so this is an important idea to scholars, and it's the idea of presuppositions. So what situation is presupposed by the letter? Paul's not saying, and now I'm writing one letter, or the editor, rather, is not saying, I have taken one letter from Paul and mixed it together with another letter of Paul. We don't have it explicitly, but that's how it looks. That's the situation that's presupposed. So that's how scholars work. Another, some other themes in Philippians, some highlights before moving on to Corinthians and is Paul is thinking a lot about death. Not surprising given that he's in his. In prison. So he's moved from first Thessalonians where he's really optimistic, thinking he's going to be around when Jesus comes back, you know, to just five or six years later. He's like, I might not make it, you know, maybe I'll die. So he's reflecting about death, its role in discipleship, living with that. So one interesting idea is he actually contemplates, well, I'll just read it. In Philippians 1, 22 and 24, he says, if I am to live in the flesh, that means fruitful labor for me. And I do not know which to choose, death or life. I am hard pressed between the two. My desire is to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better. But to remain in the flesh is more necessary for you. So pretty. What's the word? And pretty. Not depressive, depressing or morbid, but definitely contemplating his mortality. And so the interesting thing is he's either contemplating accepting his martyrdom or perhaps even killing himself.

Brian Johnston [00:07:35] Oh yeah. But isn't that kind of strange for Paul to be considering that because suicide

Jared Anderson [00:07:41] was not seen in the ancient world the way it is now, it's not seen as a sin. Just a little interesting tidbit. But no matter what, it's very clear that he's like, you know, life kind of sucks right now. I would like to return to go to Jesus, but I still want to work, I still want to preach and move forward. And Paul dies within 10 years. Traditionally, he's martyred in Rome in the, in the early 60s. So, you know, he has another good decade in him. Another interesting thing that I'm going to touch on with Philippians is Paul quotes an earlier hymn, like a song, a devotional song. So this is really cool because. And this is where it gets into. This is. This is how it all began. Remember when you said that with First Thessalonians, we have a lot of earlier stuff. First Thessalonians is just our first letter. And it's interesting when our earliest sources, the letters of Paul, quote earlier traditions.

Brian Johnston [00:08:44] Right. So there was something before that because he's, he is referencing it.

Jared Anderson [00:08:49] Yeah, that's when historians rub their hands and says, this is good stuff, you know, we can get even further back. And so this is this little hymn. It says, speaking of Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God as a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men and being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore, God has highly exalted him and has bestowed on him a name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord, Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of the Father. So you have this really. That's the English Standard version, by the way. You have this really beautiful. And there's a lot of richness in what the different words mean. You have this beautiful idea of Jesus descending kind of below all things, making himself nothing, and then he becomes exalted and is worshipped and returns. And that was likely a hymn, a song that was sung in worship. And there's more. There's more than you'd think. But it is a precious window into this, into the religious life. And in fact, one of our very earliest non Christian, non Jewish references to Jesus is that the Christians sing to Jesus as to a God, which is interesting. We have a hymn. And just one point before moving on is. So there's this idea of low Christology and high Christology.

Brian Johnston [00:10:31] Oh, you're gonna have to explain what, what those mean.

Jared Anderson [00:10:35] I know. So Christology. One fun thing about education is all the fun things you can do with words. It's great stuff. I enjoy it. Words are fun to play with. So Christology refers to the theology of Jesus, like how you view Jesus, what his role is.

Brian Johnston [00:10:51] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:10:51] And so a low Christology are Christians who say Jesus is pretty much human.

Brian Johnston [00:10:57] Okay, that makes sense.

Jared Anderson [00:10:58] I can understand that he's special, but a special human. Whereas a high Christology is that emphasizes the divine or godly aspect of Jesus. Founded multiple denominations. Big, big deal. But it's why I brought that up is it's interesting that this early, early, early hymn is a quite, quite high Christology, Just something to chew on, you know? And again, it's like there's some translation issues, like, does he mean even though he was in the form of God, he did not count equality with God to be a thing to strive for or a thing to waste? Or like that grasped word is a big deal. Anyway, I'm not going to get into it right now.

Brian Johnston [00:11:42] Sure.

Jared Anderson [00:11:42] So just. I hope that listeners are getting an appreciation for how much good stuff there is in the New Testament. I mean, it really is opening up a whole new world. And I like it, but that's why I've dedicated my life to it.

Brian Johnston [00:11:58] Oh, yeah, definitely.

The Corinthian Correspondence

Jared Anderson [00:12:00] Our next stop on this crazy roller coaster is the Corinthian correspondence. So this is First Corinthians and Second Corinthians and lots of interesting things going on. Rich issues coming up. Once again, Paul is in the ring, duking it out. Once again, he's defending his role as an apostle. In fact, in First Corinthians 9, he even says, am I not an apostle? Aren't I?

Brian Johnston [00:12:27] Oh, boy. Does he really make that statement in the form of a question.

Jared Anderson [00:12:31] Do you realize how many people say no? You know, and that's why he needs to fight for it? And there are a lot of. And once again, he has. He's dealing with other people, other Christian missionaries who are teaching different things.

Brian Johnston [00:12:46] That's a fascinating thing. And, you know, I really didn't know that before or pick up on that when I was reading the New Testament.

Jared Anderson [00:12:52] Yes. So as we read the New Testament, we. And this is, as a preview of later discussion, one of the benefits of Canon C A N O N. An authoritative collection of books. You read it in. You read all the books in light of each other. And so we don't see this wild diversity where Christian missionaries were saying, no, you know, that book's not right. This book is right. No, this isn't how you understand Jesus. This is how you understand Jesus. And where they were really trying to hash out and figure out what it means that we are saved through Jesus. How you live the Christian life, once it's all neat between two leather covers.

Brian Johnston [00:13:41] Mm.

Jared Anderson [00:13:43] It's very clear. Not only leather covers, but thousands of years of interpretation.

Brian Johnston [00:13:48] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:13:49] And so this leads to what I think is a very anachronistic and misleading phrase that all of us have heard, which is the Bible says.

Brian Johnston [00:14:01] Yeah, the Bible said it. I believe it. That settles it.

Jared Anderson [00:14:04] Right. And so you can see how the Bible says is just all sorts of problems because there's so much diversity and even contention between the different aspects. So one interesting thing about Corinthians is we have this window into Paul's ongoing relationship with a community. So first, Paul, Sylvanus and Timothy founded a Christian community at Corinth. And so one interesting thing is Paul refers to an earlier letter in First Corinthians 5, 9. He says, I wrote to you in my letter. So we have a letter even earlier than First Corinthians. Either we lost it, or it's embedded in Second Corinthians. Are you dizzy yet?

Brian Johnston [00:14:57] Right. You're saying that he's referencing a letter that we don't have in the canon as a letter.

Jared Anderson [00:15:04] Right. That's not placed before First Corinthians. At least it might be embedded in Second Corinthians, or we just don't have it. Corinthians write back to Paul. So do you see how this is advantageous, that we have this back and forth of the community? And so we get to see Paul in action. We get to see how it works, and his ongoing relationship with the community. We don't have that as clear in other instances. So the Corinthians write back and they say, we have these questions. So a Mormon parallel would be writing letters to, you know, general authorities or whatever. So one question they had is whether married couples should have sex. Pretty urgent question. And this is why it's important to understand the context of the New Testament, rhetorical devices and so forth, because we risk misreading the Bible. So in First Corinthians 7:1, Paul says, regarding what you wrote, it is good not to touch a woman. And by that, by touch, he means a very special touch.

Brian Johnston [00:16:02] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:16:03] It makes a huge difference whether he's saying, regarding what you wrote, I would recommend it's not good to have sex, or regarding what you wrote, quote, it is good not to have sex. Do you see why it's important to understand literary conventions? Because editors and translators and so forth have to know where to put quotation marks and so forth.

Brian Johnston [00:16:24] And then.

Jared Anderson [00:16:24] So First Corinthians is actually Paul's second letter. So Paul, after he writes this letter, he visits Corinth again, and it goes badly. He's insulted and humiliated by a particular individual. We don't know the details, and Paul leaves in shame. Wow, this is really interesting. And it's right there. It is right there in the New Testament. It's just people

Brian Johnston [00:16:50] know.

Jared Anderson [00:16:51] They read with so many preconceptions. They read their understanding of what is into the New Testament. They read the meaning that they know the New Testament has into the text, not even allowing themselves to say, and I'm speaking in generalities, you know, I think most readers do this. They don't even think to say, wait a minute, what does that mean? And here's what happens. So this really contrasts with the very positive view of Paul. That most people have. You know, Paul is this, like, superhero apostle, and he went through so much, and he was a true disciple of Jesus and all that. So things go from bad to worse after Paul leaves in shame. So Paul looks really bad when he leaves Corinth. Then other Christian missionaries come.

Brian Johnston [00:17:41] Those guys are tailing him everywhere. He can't seem to get rid of them.

Jared Anderson [00:17:46] Well, no, these are different groups, but, yeah, Paul, he just. He can't get any peace. So this is interesting. Paul mockingly calls them super apostles.

Brian Johnston [00:17:58] He calls them super apostles.

Jared Anderson [00:18:01] Yeah. And this is interesting because this is a backhanded way of acknowledging that they are pretty impressive.

Brian Johnston [00:18:09] Well, they've been giving him a lot of grief, so maybe he's given them, you know, given credit due where credit's due.

Jared Anderson [00:18:15] Right. But once again, just to clarify, remember that Paul was engaging with multiple groups. Probably we don't know that it was the same like, that his opponents were the same in Galatia that they were as in Corinth. I mean, it's not necessarily like to draw a modern analogy, like, you know, the Jehovah's Witnesses following around the Mormon missionaries, you know, challenging everything they say. So this is interesting, but what I will say is that it does seem that Paul's opponents keep saying similar things. So Paul has one message that made it into the New Testament. So he had. He had the last laugh.

Brian Johnston [00:18:51] He did because, you know, well, he got a big chunk of airtime there in that book.

Jared Anderson [00:18:55] Yes. But he was actually the minority, opposed, weaker position. So he was. He was the underdog. He had less legitimacy, and he had to fight for it. And I have a lot of respect for Paul. I mean, you have to admire how charismatic, how dynamic, how diligent he is. I mean, he had tremendous influence on the history of Christianity. And once again, let us just recall, it is a. It's evidence for the firmness of his conversion.

Brian Johnston [00:19:27] Yeah, there you go. I mean, you do have to credit him with that.

Jared Anderson [00:19:31] Yeah. And, you know, it's a philosophical question I'll leave to other people as to whether, like, that makes it more true or whatever, but he certainly believed in it, and he was a happy. A happy Jewish beforehand. So once again, his opponents are Jewish. They work miracles. They're not emphasizing so much their Jewish heritage like the Galatian opponents did. They are emphasizing their miracles. And here's how it works for the opponents in Corinth or the super apostles. The super apostles work miracles. They speak really eloquently, really well, and they say Paul is not an apostle because he lacks charismatic presence.

Brian Johnston [00:20:10] I don't know about that. I mean, Paul seemed to have some kind of charisma.

Jared Anderson [00:20:14] Well, he's not working miracles. And so here's one interesting thing, and this is what the Corinthians believed. So Paul teaches an apocalyptic worldview, which is life sucks. You know, the powers of darkness are in charge, but God is going to fix it right away. And we have something to look forward to, you know, and different Christians dealt with this in different ways. But there's an in breaking the kingdom of God is starting to trickle into this dark, demon ruled universe. Now Paul's opponents say something completely different.

Brian Johnston [00:20:54] Yeah, what do they say?

Jared Anderson [00:20:56] We are already saved. They say the kingdom is already here. The kingdom. We are already enjoying the fruits of being saved, of living this glorified life in Christ. And so this is why we can do miracles, because we already have Jesus superpowers. And it's interesting because Paul is mocking, in First Corinthians 4, for example, he's speaking to the Corinthians, he's like, already you are kings, already you are wealthy. You know, just, just mocking this view because he points out their problems. And Paul has, they have a lot of problems, but the problems stem from this difference of opinion. And we'll get to that in a minute. But he's like, you are such sorry bunches of supposed Christians. And you say you're saved. You say you're living this glorified, perfected existence. I don't think so. But that was the message of his opponents, right?

Brian Johnston [00:22:01] And he's got something to say about that.

Jared Anderson [00:22:05] Right? So one and then Paul. So after the super apostles, Paul argues, well, he writes another letter. He calls it a painful letter. And a lot of scholars think this is now second Corinthians 10 to 13. So do you see? So second Corinthians was multiple letters written at multiple times in this story. And then it was all put together. So they're out there, out of order. So second Corinthians 10:13. This is interesting. Paul once again does not try to engage with his opponents on their own, playing by their rules, probably because he knows he can't win. So remember the Galatians were saying, well, we're closer to Jesus than you. And he says, well, my message comes directly from God. And in this they say, well, we work better miracles than you. And so they don't have a miracle face off, as cool as that would be. And you get some later Christian literature where that happens, like with Simon, Magus and Peter, they have this really cool. Like miracle battle. So what Paul says. Paul reverses the rhetoric. And he says, well, well, miracles aren't important anyway. He says that that isn't how you tell an apostle. You tell an apostle by how much he's beaten up.

Brian Johnston [00:23:25] Awesome. Sign me up for that.

Jared Anderson [00:23:28] And so here's his logic. He says, our example, Jesus was crucified. God saves us through weakness, through lowliness, through a crucified criminal. And so this is where you get all this rhetoric in the Corinthian correspondence, where Paul says, I did not come to you with eloquence. And, you know, he's pretty. He's pretty eloquent, but he can't lean on that because his opponents are even better.

Brian Johnston [00:24:03] Right, Gotcha.

Jared Anderson [00:24:03] So he says, I did not come to you with miracles. I did not come with this song and dance magic show. He says, what I bear are scars from being beaten because I am a missionary of Jesus Christ.

Brian Johnston [00:24:18] Yeah, that's. You know, that sometimes is a theme of the persecuted. They say, you know, see how true I am because of how much I suffer for it. So, you know, if I wasn't right, then I wouldn't be suffering.

Jared Anderson [00:24:30] Yeah. And that was very much Paul's experience. And so even though. And it does resonate, but we need to see that both positions are valid. And so this is where Paul says, I will glory in weakness. I will glory in tribulation. This is where there's a really interesting stuff about, you know, the thorn in the flesh and his visions of heaven. I mean, he says, like, anyway, really interesting stuff. But that's. That's how he argues. So do you see how interestingly interesting and clever that is rhetorically? He flips the whole game on its head and he says, well, this game of football is won by the person with the fewest goals and the person who gets tackled the most. And there is a certain logic to it because of Jesus, you know, so that's where you get the end of Second Corinthians. You know, I was beaten, I was hungry, I was shipwrecked, I was imprisoned, I nearly died. And in this way, I am like Jesus. That is how you tell an apostle. Not the magicians who, you know, superheroes, super apostles, but the ones who most look like Jesus. And that's the one who made it into the New Testament. So again, you know, just to finish. And then. So second Corinthians 1 through 9 is Paul's fourth letter. So for whatever reason, Paul convinced the Corinthians, they took his side. And so Paul writes a cautiously happy letter that Titus lets Paul know that the Corinthians are back on track and he still needs to argue for his. For his status of apostle. So that's why Second Corinthians 9 says, like, am I not also an apostle? Do I not also have rights? Do I not also have authority? So lots going on with 1st and 2nd Corinthians. To recap, we learn once again, it's reinforced that Paul has competition. And once again, I want to show how the problems the Corinthians were having were a reflection of. Of how they viewed things. So the Corinthians, even before the super apostles confirmed it, they were like, we're already saved. We already have the good stuff. So members were being divisive. They were taking each other to court. Okay, so sorry. The basic issue was some members felt superior to others. Some members really got off on this idea that we've been saved through Jesus. And so they were taking each other to court. They were disregarding sexual norms. One man was sleeping with his stepmom, and other men were visiting prostitutes.

Brian Johnston [00:27:05] Right. And they're doing all this because they see it as they're saved and it doesn't matter anymore.

Jared Anderson [00:27:11] And not in the moral way that we think, but in the way of, like, we're already living an exalted life. The rules of this realm don't matter. So lots of other things happening. There was inequality. And then on the other hand, some were saying, we shouldn't be married, shouldn't have sex. On the other extremes there. Maybe they should have met in the middle. There was inequality during celebration of the Lord's Supper. It was a whole meal. And the richer people would come and they'd pig out, and they wouldn't leave any for the poor, who probably had to work longer hours. There's this really interesting question about meat sacrificed to idols. So the enlightened were like, we can buy cheap steak at the grocery store of Zeus because we know he's not real, so let's eat steak. Whereas the less educated said, oh, but the other gods are real. We just worship them. You know, really interesting things. By the way, I love the meat sacrifice to idols issue. I think it's a wonderful lesson about, even if we see things in what could be called a more enlightened, complex way, there is an argument for meeting people at a simpler level. I really like it. I find it very useful in my own.

Brian Johnston [00:28:24] Interesting. And, yeah, still relevant so many thousand years later.

Jared Anderson [00:28:29] Yeah. So I really like that. I actually bring up that example a lot. Here's what Paul emphasizes. He says, clearly, the fact you are so messed up shows that you are not enjoying the exalted life. You know, the powers of darkness are still in charge. You are going to be saved in the future. And the answer is love. So this is the famous First Corinthians 13. You know, where he says, love is kind, love is long suffering. Love does not seek its own. Love is greater than any spiritual gift.

Brian Johnston [00:29:03] Those are the verses that are really commonly quoted in wedding ceremonies these days.

Jared Anderson [00:29:10] And really how its context was. Members of the Corinthian community were trying to outdo each other with spiritual gifts. They're like, well, I'll one up your prophecy with the gift of tongues. Ooh, the gift of tongues. You know, it was one upsmanship. And so that's why Paul says, do you know what? I spit at your gifts. You can talk in tongues all you want. He says, it's love. It's all about love. And he uses the term agape, which is the Greek term for, like this self sacrificing, selfless, altruistic, very caring.

Brian Johnston [00:29:46] That's a good message.

Jared Anderson [00:29:48] Yeah. And so that is. That is Corinthians.

Brian Johnston [00:29:52] All right, great. Those were some really good points from Corinthians there, Jared. What's. What's next?

Romans: Paul's Theological Masterwork

Jared Anderson [00:29:58] Okay, so now we're going to finish up Paul actually, and go to Romans. And Romans is the last letter that we know of that Paul wrote. And this was his magnum opus. It is his most carefully crafted letter for a couple of reasons that we'll discuss. And fittingly, it is one of the most influential works ever written. Romans played a key role in triggering the Protestant Reformation. Martin Luther was a big fan of Romans, you know, with its, you know, we are saved by faith emphasis on Jesus, and it also influences theology of other Christian thinkers. So here's how Romans is different than the other letters Paul writes. Romans is the only letter Paul wrote to a congregation he did not found.

Brian Johnston [00:30:50] Oh, interesting. That's different than all the others.

Jared Anderson [00:30:53] Right. So our other letters, he founds a community. He leaves the community. Things start hitting the fan, as it were, and then he needs to write them letters and say, well, I'll tell you this, I'll give you counsel, you know, shape up all these different things, especially with other Christians competing for these. These converts. Well, Romans is different. So Rome was not only the heart of the Roman Empire, one of the most influential cultural, political, financial centers in the world, it was also one of the early centers for Christianity. We're not sure when it was founded. But obviously, Paul is writing to an established community. And so here are the purposes. And so this is in the. You know, in the 50s still. So the purposes of Romans are interesting. First, Paul is responding to questions and concerns about Paul himself. So because Paul was a controversial figure, the Romans probably heard rumors about him, right? Including that Paul advocate. So, you know, Paul advocating this idea that we do not need to follow the Jewish law. You can see how through the game of telephone that would become. We can be lawless. You know, we don't need to live more morality at all.

Brian Johnston [00:32:22] Right?

Jared Anderson [00:32:23] And in fact, in Romans 6, Paul addresses this. Well, first, the flow of the argument of. He's using a rhetorical technique called diatribe in Romans, which is when you take both sides of an argument, which ensures that you'll win it. You know, if you're arguing both sides, you know what arguments are coming, and you can. It's a good way to tame and control opposing ideas. So in this diatribe form, he brings up this idea. He says, what are we then to say? Should we continue in sin in order that grace may abound? So it seems like this was an idea that others had. They're saying, oh, yeah, that Paul guy, you know, he's saying, oh, we're saved through Jesus. We just need to accept Jesus. We just need faith in Jesus. Well, it doesn't matter what we do. You know, if we sin more than Jesus is even a greater savior, let's go for it.

Brian Johnston [00:33:14] Yeah, let's make God really great by sinning even more so he can save us better, right?

Jared Anderson [00:33:20] And so Paul is setting up this argument. He's saying, should we continue in sin in order that grace may abound? No me agonetteoi.

Brian Johnston [00:33:27] Oh, darn it. And I was so hoping for that.

Jared Anderson [00:33:31] Egonita in Greek, he says, hell no. You know, he says, by no means. How can we who die to sin go on living in it? And then others, you know, people in Rome probably wondered what role the Jews have in the history of civil salvation. You know, they're like, oh, this Paul guy, he goes to the gentiles. He teaches that gentiles don't need the Jewish law. So what about the Jews? And there was a big Jewish influence in Rome. So these are the kind of concerns that Paul has to address in Rome. And also, one reason why Paul writes so carefully on his best behavior, as it were, is because he's asking for money from the Romans. He asks for help with his mission. And it seems, he says in Rome that he's planning on moving on to Spain, you know, that he wants, so he wants to set up as a Rome, in Rome, as a base of operations. And he needs the Roman Christians help financially and logistically to help him in his missionary efforts.

Brian Johnston [00:34:31] Interesting.

Jared Anderson [00:34:33] So basically Paul has a quandary because he needs the Romans help, but he's kind of misunderstood. And then he hasn't, he hasn't met them, he doesn't know them.

Brian Johnston [00:34:45] Yeah, that's curious. Like, does it seem like he went to that community or he's just writing them remotely.

Jared Anderson [00:34:51] He specifically says, I apologize for never visiting you yet. You know, it's not, I'm not avoiding you, I just haven't gotten to you, but I want to visit you. So he clearly has not been to this community yet. So here's, here's the flow of his argument. First, he needs to explain and Romans, better than any other letter, can be called Paul's Gospel. You know, the idea of systematic treatment of Paul's message. Because in the other letters he's just putting out fires. And so he uses information and tradition to say, oh, well, you know, let me counter this idea, let me approach this problem. Whereas Romans, because he is, one, trying to correct people of their misunderstandings about him, and two, he's never met them, this is going to be as clear as it gets with his theology. So Romans is a real treasure for Paul. So first he sets out the fact that all are condemned before God. So this is against the idea that Jews are saved through their status as a chosen people.

Brian Johnston [00:35:58] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:35:59] So he says all are condemned. So the solution is the gospel, you know, the death and message of Jesus Christ, which is given to Jews and Gentile. So he says, first, Jews and Gentiles are on the same footing, which is a really bad footing. We're all condemned and we all need Jesus. So he says, all are saved through Christ's death, which is why we can't be saved through Jewish law. So that's him responding to this Jewish Christian idea of, well, sure, we need Jesus, but we also need to keep the Jewish law. And Paul has to react against this. He says, no, if we could be saved through the Jewish law, why did Jesus have to die?

Brian Johnston [00:36:40] Good point.

Jared Anderson [00:36:41] Which theologically, that's a pretty big problem with Christianity in general is you have, it has to be, everyone needs Jesus, or else that'd be a really sucky way to have some sort of multiple choice salvation thing. You know, I'm gonna let my son die, but this is just one of many options. Back to me, you Know, So Christianity demands a universal necessity. So first Paul gives examples to show how the Gospel has a scriptural foundation. So he's playing. He has to play his cards really carefully to show how on one hand both Jew and Gentile need Jesus, but at the same time how that doesn't invalidate the promises made to the Jews. Do you see the problem? So he needs to legitimize and give credit to the Jewish heritage, the Jewish scriptures, the role of the Jews in the salvation. But at the same time he needs to say, but really the Jewish law doesn't do any good and everyone is saved through Jesus. So he needs to play it carefully. So he says Christ's death and resurrection frees free humans from the cosmic powers that oppose God. So sin and death, Christ's death and resurrection save us from sin and death. And he says the Gospel is consistent with God's dealings with Israel. And again, this is hard to unravel because I don't think there's a clear answer. And I'm. And so Paul is wrestling with this tension. So he says, Jews and Gentiles are equal, but God's dealings and promises with Israel are not in vain. Paul talks about the parts of Jewish scripture that say that God is going to bless the Gentiles through the Jews. And it's kind of interesting. So here's the conclusion that Paul comes to is Paul says, yes, the Jews have rejected Jesus, which has made God. And so God uses this opportunity to kind of move his focus over to the Gentiles. And he's. He's going to use the salvation of the Gentiles in order to save the Jews. So it's this idea of last, the first shall be last, the last shall be first. So Romans 11 talks about how the Jews will be grafted back in to the tree. You know, that's. That is the true Israel or church. So that's basically. He says that the Jews will all be saved by God. But this, you know, this is the time of the Gentiles. There will be a time of the Jews. And as you can tell, this type of all these ideas have saturated Christian theology.

Brian Johnston [00:39:20] Yeah, as you were describing all that, that's exactly what I was thinking. I was like, well, yeah, they pretty much based a lot of stuff off of that right there.

Jared Anderson [00:39:29] Yeah, so Roman's very influential. So then at the end of the letter, he discuss. He treats some other issues. You know, saying a law free gospel does not mean a lawless gospel, even though you don't need to follow the Jewish law. Christians are governed by selfless love and have to live moral lives. You know, love each other, don't judge each other, don't be offended, don't offend others. So he's saying that like love is the new law, love is the new law and sacrifice and ritual that replaces the Jewish law. So that's a nice way of balancing that. He reaffirms the fact that he, Paul has divine authority to preach to the Gentiles, says he'll visit Rome on the way to Spain. So in Romans 16, he addresses and says hi to a lot of people. So it seems that couple scholars have said this is a later edition. But it could be that these are people Paul knew of who later moved to Rome. I don't think that's a bad way of looking at it. Here's a fun little tidbit among the people Paul greets in Romans. In verse seven, he greets Junia, chief among the apostles.

Brian Johnston [00:40:38] Oh yeah, I think I've heard of this one.

Jared Anderson [00:40:39] That would be a woman.

Brian Johnston [00:40:42] Interesting.

Jared Anderson [00:40:43] That's pretty cool. So both Jesus and Paul had a very high regard for women and they used that woman had an important role in the organization of the Jesus movement and in the Pauline churches. And as we will see later, tradition tried to stop that.

Brian Johnston [00:41:07] Yeah, I mean, I'm thinking of a lot of things, at least I recall from reading the Epistles, where it doesn't seem like Paul is that, you know, rules about women not speaking in church and all that stuff. Are you saying that's later edition?

Jared Anderson [00:41:23] Here's the problem. Remember that what most readers in the New Testament consider to be from Paul is not really from Paul.

Brian Johnston [00:41:30] Okay, so there are.

Jared Anderson [00:41:32] We'll get to those. Like the first Timothy has some really anti women rhetoric in it, and that was not by Paul.

Brian Johnston [00:41:42] Okay, I get the clarification there. That makes more sense.

Jared Anderson [00:41:45] There are some interesting things in First Corinthians, for example, where he says, you know, women should be veiled in church and you know, the weird stuff about long hair, short hair, but there's a lot going on there. But the short answer is Paul. He definitely acknowledges women's right to preach, to prophesy, to have leadership positions. Whereas later people who took the name of Paul tried to put women in their place.

Brian Johnston [00:42:14] Gotcha. Interesting.

Jared Anderson [00:42:16] So we are done with Paul, the controversial, influential and interesting character. And now we're moving into the other Pauline writings. As we go chronologically, we'll will jump around with those. So just a reminder, so you know, we have the undisputed Pauline letters, the seven that we just covered. And then there are the Deutero, Pauline, second Thessalonians, Colossians, Ephesians, and then the Pastorals. So first and Second Timothy and Titus. Second Timothy feels different to scholars or rather, you know, when you examine it critically, it seems more genuine than the other two as far as fitting into Pauline thought and his life and so forth. So Second Timothy has the greatest chance of being from Paul. Like we're not sure that Paul wrote it, but it's most closely linked to him of any of the other letters.

Brian Johnston [00:43:20] Right. It's not, obviously not from him.

Jared Anderson [00:43:23] Right. So basically either Second Timothy was written by Paul or it contains memories of the end of Paul's life and was written by someone else. So no matter what has a close relationship to him. So Second Timothy is Paul's last will and testament. Basically it is Paul talking, he's in prison. He is writing to his loyal and faithful younger disciple Timothy and reflecting on his life, giving encouragement to Timothy. So interestingly, Timothy was the co sender of 4 out of 7 of the non disputed letters. So Timothy and Paul worked together really closely. Okay, so this is, you know, the last words of Paul. So he's near death. He writes, he encourages Timothy, he encourages other believers through Timothy, stand fast in the faith. He tells Timothy to follow his example of faithfulness rather than other examples of false teachers and those who abandoned Paul and Jesus. So he says, you know, follow my good example, don't follow these other examples. And you know, Second Timothy has those fantastic stirring last words of Paul where he says, as for me, I am already being poured out as a libation which is a religious, you know, liquid sacrifice. And the time of my departure has come. I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race. I have kept the faith. From now on there is reserved for me the crown of righteousness which the Lord the righteous Judge will give me on that day. And not only to me, but also to all who have longed for his appearing.

Brian Johnston [00:45:05] Yeah, very poetic.

Jared Anderson [00:45:07] So the end, you know, the curtain closes on Paul and Second Timothy is a very fitting tribute to Paul and his life.

Brian Johnston [00:45:17] Interesting.

The Gospel of Mark: Context and Themes

Jared Anderson [00:45:20] So now in our chronological caper, what comes next? The Gospels. The Gospels or three of them. So okay, it's tricky.

Brian Johnston [00:45:34] I was kind of wondering when we were going to get to this, since when I read the New Testament, that's what comes first.

Jared Anderson [00:45:41] Yeah. So again with chronological order, there's pre canonical sources of the writings we have, so stuff that's earlier than anything we have written. And then there are the epistles, of Paul, the genuine epistles of Paul, and then there are the Gospels.

Brian Johnston [00:45:56] Okay, and what, like, what's the time frame for the gospels being written?

Jared Anderson [00:46:02] So we're going to start with the Gospel of Mark, you know, shaking things up a little bit. So Matthew comes first canonically. And there is early church tradition that basically said Matthew, you know, was an apostle of Jesus. He wrote down the writings of the Lord in Aramaic and then they were translated into Greek. And Mark was the interpreter of Peter. You know, Luke was a companion of Paul. And, you know, then John, of course, was also one of the apostles. So that's early church tradition. And then as far as the relationship between the gospels, there was a tradition that developed where Matthew and Luke wrote first and then Mark kind of summed them up and finally John wrote a spiritual gospel.

Brian Johnston [00:46:55] Right, but is that the way scholars see it?

Jared Anderson [00:46:58] Short answer? No, there are. First, the first thing we need to recognize as far as the Gospels go is they are all anonymous, all anonymous.

Brian Johnston [00:47:10] Even though, I mean, we have names on the, you know, it's the Gospel of Mark, the Gospel of Matthew.

Jared Anderson [00:47:17] So the names were later editions. And the interesting thing is, so the two problems are first, the gospels are anonymous. You know, they never. If you only read the gospels, ignoring the title, at no point does the gospel say, and I Matthew, when I was talking to Jesus said, and it doesn't sound like a first person account. Now, there is an exception that we'll get to in Acts. You know, there are a couple places in Acts where the author says, we in a few places.

Brian Johnston [00:47:49] Right. And scholars lump Acts in with which book with Luke.

Jared Anderson [00:47:54] So Luke and Acts were written by the same, the same author. But let's go back to Mark. So Mark was the first gospel ever written.

Brian Johnston [00:48:04] Interesting. Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:48:06] And we know that because when you read Mark really, really closely, it's like looking at a quilt and you can see the seams where the different patches in the quilt or the different panels of the quilt were sewn together. And so in Mark, for example, the story of Jesus death, it's very coherent, but it sounds different than the rest of Mark. So Mark starts keeping time. He says in the 9th hour and the 12th hour, he calls Jesus the son of David, something he never does in any of the gosp. And then with Jesus sayings, they don't seem very coherent. They seemed lumped together based on themes. So you have all these parables grouped together or you have these sayings about salt or the needs for discipleship together. So we can see, by the way, that there are These distinct pieces of Mark's gospel that as far as we can tell, he was the first to put it all together.

Brian Johnston [00:49:04] Doesn't Mark also have like an alternate ending sort of something like that, if I remember correctly?

Jared Anderson [00:49:10] Yeah, we don't want to ruin. We don't want to ruin the surprise.

Brian Johnston [00:49:12] Oh, sorry, I didn't say that.

Jared Anderson [00:49:15] Mark also does not have a birth narrative.

Brian Johnston [00:49:18] That's right. Yeah. Jesus's birth isn't in the book of Mark or John.

Jared Anderson [00:49:23] Right, right. Which is interesting. So, you know, with good old Matthew starting off, that doesn't faze us. But it is very, very interesting that our very, our earliest gospel has neither a birth narrative nor a resurrection narrative. Yeah, that's. That's your, you know, multiple choice, choose your own ending type thing that we'll get to in, in a minute. So here is. So Mark was written about 69 CE, so, you know, a good 40 years after Jesus's death. And there are different theories about this, but one that I think is very persuasive is that Mark was writing in the context of the first Jewish war. And this was a bad time, you know, for Jews. The Romans were coming. They were. Well, they were there, you know, fighting. It was really. Things were pretty grim. And one of the things that happened was these insurrectionists, these Jewish zealots, set up camp in the Jewish temple in like, 67, 68. And there's this really interesting verse in Mark where Mark breaks character and says, when you see the desolating sacrilege, the abomination of desolation in the KJV set up where it ought not to be, let the reader understand, then those in Judea must flee to the mountains. So this whole, like, let the reader understand, wink, wink, means that this whole desolating sacrilege has a very, very clear relationship to Mark's community. Otherwise he wouldn't say, hey, look at this, you know, listen. So he's taking the words of Jesus and then the author of the gospel is saying, pay attention to this. So it could be that or, you know, one persuasive theory is that this is the desolating sacrilege, the insurrectionists setting up camp in the temple. And Mark is saying, it's time to watch out.

Brian Johnston [00:51:43] Right, right. You basically have what, some military people, and they've set up their headquarters in the temple.

Jared Anderson [00:51:51] Yeah. And so for Mark, this means that the coming of Jesus, the end of the world, the coming of the kingdom of God is right around the corner. So the basic message of Mark is be faithful in persecution Watch for the coming of Jesus. Watch is repeated a lot in the Gospel of Mark. You know, in Gethsemane, he says, could you not watch with me? And then at the end of Mark 13, he says, I want you to watch. And another thing that Mark is talking about, he emphasizes that you need to understand the proper role of Jesus as Messiah, right? So one thing that most readers of the New Testament don't understand is that. And, you know, you need to chew on this a bit. Jesus's life, ministry, and especially death did not correspond to any messianic expectation we know of.

Brian Johnston [00:52:53] Ooh, yeah, that's a problem, isn't it?

Jared Anderson [00:52:56] So basically, we'll talk more about this later. But the Christians had to. Well, so what happened was Jesus was crucified as a criminal. And there's this great story in the end of Luke, in Luke 24, where the disciples on the road to Emmaus say, you know, Jesus is walking by them, and he says, you know, why the long faces? And they say, what, have you been in a cave or something? You know, don't you know what's going on? And they say, you know, there. There was this, you know, Jesus, who was a mighty prophet among us, and he worked many miracles. We thought he was going to be the one to save Israel, but evidently not. So you have this memory of shattered expectations. So there's this memory that the early followers of Jesus expected him to redeem Israel, which meant in a political way, to overthrow the Romans and to establish this political, tangible kingdom of God. And. But then it's very significant what Luke says. He says, you know, don't you understand? And it says that he opens their eyes, and it says that he expounded the scriptures to them and he showed himself in the scriptures. So this, scholars think, is how. And all evidence suggests this, that what Christians did after Jesus died, they said, where did that come from? How are we supposed to make sense of this? And so they turned to their scriptures. And the very first layer of the story of Jesus's death was that it was according to God's plan, that God was not surprised. He didn't say, whoops, I just lost my special chosen servant. What was my plan B? You know, that that's not how it worked, that God actually planned for Jesus's death and that therefore Jesus's death had a special role in salvation.

Brian Johnston [00:55:04] And you're saying that, like, the expectation of a messiah that they were looking for wasn't somebody who was going to get killed by the Romans.

Jared Anderson [00:55:14] Correct. So the history of Messiah starts With David, there's this prophecy in 2nd Samuel 7 where Samuel says, or maybe Nathan, I'd have to look. He makes this prophecy where there will be a descendant of David on the throne forever. Well, that didn't work out so well. And even though the Davidic line was very resilient, and anyway, we won't get into Israeli history, but this idea of an eternal Davidic king. And David was the big shot, not a nice man, but he was the big shot who founded this big, you know, the biggest empire that Israel ever saw, the United Kingdom and so forth. And so this developed into this kind of cosmic figure who would be a special servant of God and would act the role of David, but in a big way. And so would re establish this Israelite kingdom for God's chosen people. So that was what the Messiah was. There are other expectations of the Messiah. For example, in the Dead Sea Scrolls, there's this idea of two Messiahs. One is kind of a Davidic Messiah who's this political revolutionary who saves the Jewish people. And then there's like this Aaron figure who's the perfect priest. And so he explains the law perfectly. So you have these ideas of this messianic figure who perfectly explains the Jewish law. And then you have these Messianic figures who, you know, redeem Israel in this dramatic way. But you do not have a Messiah who dies.

Brian Johnston [00:56:55] Yeah, right. So then they have. They have to figure out how to interpret that event.

Jared Anderson [00:57:02] Yes. So they go back to their scriptures and they look really carefully and they find all the passages that sound like what happened to Jesus. So in Isaiah, you have the servant songs, you know, the suffering servant ones, where, you know, like my. By his stripes we are healed. You know, he has suffered for many. He has poured out his life, you know, but those are not Messianic.

Brian Johnston [00:57:30] No, they're talking about. Yeah, a servant.

Jared Anderson [00:57:33] Yeah, the suffering servant probably represented Israel is not the Messiah. So Christians are again reading through all these layers of interpretation. But when we kind of rewind all of that and look at things as best we can in chronological order, we come to Mark. And Mark needs to correct this explanation of Messiah. So Mark makes one of his main points, is Jesus was not a Messiah of glory, but he was a suffering Messiah. He was the Messiah who had to die.

Brian Johnston [00:58:08] Right, okay.

Jared Anderson [00:58:10] And here's one interesting thing, is the disciples are bad examples. In Mark, we don't really catch this because we're reading all the Gospels together and they're pretty squeaky clean in Matthew, for example. But in Mark, the disciples don't understand. They're confused. Confused. Everyone runs away in Gethsemane, including that really interesting naked man, the women at the end. So we'll talk about the ending of Mark. I'll bring it up and then we'll talk about it later. So the ending of Mark, as best we can tell, originally stop with mark 16, 8. So the young, they go to. The women go to the tomb. They're ready to take care of Jesus's body because it was the Sabbath and they couldn't do it on the Sabbath. So they come really early the next day and the tomb is empty. Jesus. Jesus body isn't there. And a young man says, he's not an angel. In Mark, he's a young man. He says, why do you see the living among the dead? Jesus of Nazareth. He's not here. He is. He has been risen. You know, go tell the disciples that he will meet them in Galilee as he said he would. And Mark ends with it says the woman ran away and they said nothing to anyone because they were afraid. The end.

Brian Johnston [00:59:35] Yeah, the end. It was. It's kind of a strange ending.

Jared Anderson [00:59:41] It is, but it makes sense within the context of what Mark is trying to do.

Brian Johnston [00:59:46] So.

Jared Anderson [00:59:46] And we'll. So we'll come back to this short ending. And what happened was the Mark that we have is a later addition from a scribe who knew the other Gospels. So he read the short ending, and along with a lot of other people, he said, well, this. This doesn't make sense. This is unsatisfactory. So I'm going to help it along. I'm going to add in other things.

Brian Johnston [01:00:05] Right.

Jared Anderson [01:00:06] And if you read Mark 16, verse 8 and 16, verse 9, there's a real. It's very disjointed. The rest, if you read it really carefully, it does not flow very well. So first Mark has to establish who Jesus is. So Mark says Jesus is the authoritative son of God. So, you know, the demons obey him. He has the ability to interpret the law. You know, the other scribes say in Mark say, who is this? You know who he does? He's not. As the scribes. He casts out demons. He. He controls the weather. So he's. He's very authoritative.

Brian Johnston [01:00:50] Yeah. Isn't Mark. Mark has a lot of stories of Jesus casting out demons, right?

Jared Anderson [01:00:56] Yeah, we kind of call him Jesus. Jesus Van Helsing, you know, because he's. He's the one who casts out demons. No, no. Vampires. No vampires. But he does cast out of demons.

Brian Johnston [01:01:07] Right.

Jared Anderson [01:01:08] So he's authoritative. But even though he's authoritative. He is the opposed Son of God. So the Jewish leaders from the beginning are plotting how they can kill this man. Jesus is the misunderstood Son of God. This is significant. Even Jesus's disciples, even those closest to him, do not understand who he is. Only the demons recognize him.

Brian Johnston [01:01:32] Ooh, that's kind of. That's unusual.

Jared Anderson [01:01:35] Until he dies. So there's this story, and then Jesus eventually is the acknowledged Son of God. There's this interesting story about a blind man being healed in stages. And this is a symbol of how his disciples begin to understand his identity, but only partly so. For example, there's in mark arc 8, there's the. The confession of Peter where Jesus says, who do people say that I am? And they say, you know, some say you're a prophet. Some say you're Elijah. Some, you know, some say other things. And then Jesus says, but who do you say that I am? And Peter says, you are. You are the Messiah. And so, so far, so good. We're like, yay. You know, one of his disciple disciples gets it. But unfortunately, the story continues. And right then, Jesus makes one of his death predictions. He says the Son of Man, because he refers to himself in the third person as the Son of man in Mark, has to suffer and die, and he will be turned over to the leaders of the Jews and he will die. And Peter rebukes him.

Brian Johnston [01:02:42] That's right.

Jared Anderson [01:02:42] He says, what are you talking about? Whoa, whoa. Not acceptable. I don't want no Messiah who just dies. And this is where, in very vivid terms, Jesus has get behind me, Satan. And the Semitic word Satan means an opposer, one who opposes. And so he says. So even though Peter calls him the Messiah, it's clear from the context that it's still not enough that Peter is in rejecting Jesus's need to die, to suffer and die. He's not getting it. He's not understanding the mission.

Brian Johnston [01:03:21] Right, right. Not even then.

Jared Anderson [01:03:24] So Jesus is not acknowledged until the Roman centurion after his death says, truly this man was the Son of God.

Brian Johnston [01:03:37] Yeah, kind of interesting, you know, that it was, you know, one of the Roman centurions who sort of in that story is the first to recognize it, besides demons.

Jared Anderson [01:03:47] And one of the functions of this story is to show how the Gentiles are the one to accept the message of Jesus. It's to show how the death of Jesus has universal application. So they're interesting theological points. And so what Jesus main message was in Mark is the first words out of his mouth are repent. The kingdom of God has Come near. And so here's how it works in Mark. And as we'll see when we talk about the historical Jesus, there's a lot of correspondence. So basically, Jesus message in the Gospel of Mark is the kingdom of God is going to come really soon. In Mark 9:1, he says there are those of this generation who will not die until the kingdom of God has come in glory.

Brian Johnston [01:04:42] That's a familiar sounding promise.

Jared Anderson [01:04:44] It is for 2000 years. And then in Mark 14:62, he tells the high priest during his trial, you know, when the high priest gets fed up, and he says, you know, tell me straight, are you, are you the Messiah or not? And Jesus says, I am and you will see the Son of man coming in the clouds and glory. So he's assuming that the hype, we shall be alive when this happens. And so Jesus says the kingdom of God, Remember, an apocalyptic worldview means that this life sucks because the demons and the darkness is in control, but that really, really soon God is going to come crashing into history and fix it. So this is very much how Jesus is portrayed in Mark. And so all of his actions, all of his words, all of his parables are these symbolic actions and these teaching opportunities. Jesus says in Mark, what shall the kingdom, how shall I describe the kingdom? What is it like? It is like a man, you know, so that's where you get all the, all the parables. It is like someone who sows a seed. It is like a fisherman. It is like. So he's trying to describe what the kingdom is. And his miracles are symbolically enacting this, how the kingdom of God, even though it is not here yet, it's breaking into the current age. There are little brilliant glimmers of light from the era of light and goodness that break into this dark, this realm of darkness. And so he heals the sick because there's no sickness in the kingdom. He casts out demons because Satan has no power in the kingdom. And so you can see, you can see that pattern. And here's. And so finally, Jesus is the vindicated son of God. And so here's how the ending works. In Mark the disciple, the women are described as being in the same role as Mark's audience. So like the woman, they have heard that Jesus is resurrected, but they haven't seen it. Okay, so Mark is saying, what are you gonna do? You know, it is up to you to write the ending of this gospel. Basically, you know, are you going to be like the disciples are gonna follow the bad example? Are you going to fall asleep? Are you going to, you know, give in to persecution, or are you going to be faithful like Jesus? And Jesus in Mark is a very passionate, very human individual compared to the other gospels. So he gets angry, he gets frustrated, he weeps, he loves, he groans. And, I mean, he weeps in John as well. But it's a very, I think, approachable picture of Jesus. So just, just to sum up Mark, it's kind of rough. It has a lot of problems, as we'll see with the other gospels. But the basic message is you need to be faithful. Hold on, the kingdom of God is coming. And above all, understand what Jesus did for you. Understand that his death is a sacrifice for your sins, you know, as it was in the Last Supper, and that this is what Jesus's mission meant. And this should give you hope and courage to live until the kingdom of God comes.

Brian Johnston [01:08:23] Gotcha.

Jared Anderson [01:08:29] Thank you for joining us today on Mormon Stories Podcast. To discuss this podcast with others, please check us out@mormonstories.org to keep the podcast alive or to join our support community, please consider a tax deductible donation today@mormonstories.org music for this podcast was provided by Clayton and Sky Pixton. The Mormon Stories logo was generously provided by studiocase.com thank you for listening. Of his commandments that we may return home to his presence to live in his sight Always, always to walk in the light Father in heaven we thank Thee this day for loving guidance to show us the way Grateful, we praise Thee with songs of delight Gladly, gladly we'll walk in the light.

Matthew: The Jewish Messiah and New Moses

Part 3 of 5 · Ep. 241

Guest [00:00:03] Mormon Stories podcast is a production of the Open Stories Foundation. All donations to Mormon Stories are fully tax deductible and go directly towards keeping the podcast alive and towards building a community of support for Mormons like you. To support the podcast or to join the community, please become a monthly subscriber today@mormonstories.org

Guest [00:00:26] Teach Me to Walk in the light.

Jared Anderson [00:00:33] So now we're moving to Matthew.

Brian Johnston [00:00:36] Okay, Matthew's next.

Jared Anderson [00:00:38] And we talked about how rough and problematic Mark is in places. And Matthew and Luke, both, they respected Mark and it was their scripture for a while, but they thought they could do a better job. And so it's pretty clear that both Matthew and Luke used Mark to write a better gospel.

Brian Johnston [00:01:06] Interesting.

Jared Anderson [00:01:07] Yeah, so Matthew took over, he incorporated like 80 plus percent of Mark's gospel, and it worked. Historically, Matthew has been the favorite gospel of the church. It's the most quoted, it's the best preserved. We have the most manuscripts of Matthew. So Matthew is good stuff, very popular. Right. And so Matthew, he knew Mark. We could tell that he had a copy of Mark in front of him.

Brian Johnston [00:01:39] In fact. Now, when you say he knew Mark, you're meaning he knew the writings, not necessarily that he knew the guy named Mark.

Jared Anderson [00:01:46] Right. Okay, to clarify. So first to, to finish up Mark, just a reminder, Mark is anonymous, but you could make an interesting argument that some guy named Mark wrote the gospel. Because if there was, if the name Mark was not attached to the gospel, why on earth would someone pick that?

Brian Johnston [00:02:06] Yeah, good point.

Jared Anderson [00:02:08] In fact, Justin Martyr, like the 150s, calls it the Gospel of Peter, not

Brian Johnston [00:02:14] the Gospel of Mark.

Jared Anderson [00:02:15] He calls Mark the Gospel of Peter. So anyway, Matthew is also anonymous. And we'll talk very briefly about who wrote Matthew. But yes, when I say Matthew knew Mark, that's a shorthand of saying the author of Matthew knew the Gospel of Mark. He had the Gospel Mark in front of him.

Brian Johnston [00:02:42] As a literary work, that makes more sense.

Jared Anderson [00:02:45] In fact, my dissertation is reconstructing and analyzing the form of Mark used by Matthew.

Brian Johnston [00:02:51] Oh yeah, that's right.

Jared Anderson [00:02:53] So interesting, detailed stuff. So Matthew, as best we can tell, was probably a Jewish Christian, which means and possibly a Jewish scribe who was converted to the message of Jesus. And we know this from a variety of ways, just his presuppositions. So once again, the scholar is trying to put himself or herself in the shoes or handwriting, you know, pen of Matthew, and saying, you know, what do I know? What do I expect? What are my assumptions? And one interesting way that we can get at Matthew's grand goals and Agendas. And what he felt was important is looking at how he changed Mark. This is called redaction criticism. So obviously if Matthew changes Mark, he's going out of his way to change it. And so that lets us know what he's concerned about.

Brian Johnston [00:03:56] Yeah, okay, I see what you're saying.

Jared Anderson [00:03:58] And so one of these is our key to knowing that Matthew is a Jewish Christian. So when Mark is talking about how, you know the end of the world coming, and he says, you know, this is Jesus speaking, you know, Mark is Jesus, or Mark is transmitting the words of Jesus in whatever degree of fidelity. Jesus says, pray that your flight in these times of tribulation be not in winter, or, you know, you better hope you're not nursing or pregnant because it's harder to run away than when it's winter. And Matthew changes it from pray your flight not be in winter, he adds, or on the Sabbath.

Brian Johnston [00:04:40] Oh yeah.

Jared Anderson [00:04:43] And so here's an important thing. And again, it would only be if Matthew was observing the Jewish Sabbath, which said you could only walk a certain distance on the Sabbath, that he would have any reason to add that.

Brian Johnston [00:04:56] Yeah, it's interesting how you find small little tidbits of information from little scraps of words like that.

Jared Anderson [00:05:04] Yeah. And I don't, I don't think it's over emphasizing the significance of these tiny little scraps because they really do tell us a lot about history. You know, it's kind of like our earliest manuscript of the New Testament is this little tiny credit card sized fragment of the Gospel of John. But even though it's tiny, it tells us when John was written. So before this was found, some people said the Gospel of John was written in the second century and that is decades after this little tiny fragment was copied.

Brian Johnston [00:05:41] Oh, wow.

Jared Anderson [00:05:42] And similarly, these little tiny tidbits can tell us a lot about how things, you know, how things were.

Brian Johnston [00:05:52] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:05:53] So here's how Matthew changes Mark. He, he's a very organized, disciplined literary evangelist. So he groups together miracles, he organizes Mark better, he improves language, he adds the birth story, he adds the resurrection story, he improves the theology. So math or Matthew had, he had Mark in front of him, but he also had other sources available to him. Most significantly, lots and lots of sayings of Jesus. So words of Jesus.

Brian Johnston [00:06:26] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:06:27] And so this is one interesting brief example is in Mark 1017-18, it's the story of the rich young man who says, you know, what do I need to do to get eternal life? And they have the discussion of the commandments. And so in Mark 10:17 to 18. The young man says, good teacher. And Jesus says, why do you call me good? There's only one who is good, namely God. Now, Matthew, reading it was like, whoa, is Mark saying Jesus is not good?

Brian Johnston [00:06:59] Yeah, he just didn't like that, huh?

Jared Anderson [00:07:00] He didn't like it. And so he. He's forced to use this awkwardly, this awkward phrase. He says, why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good, namely God.

Brian Johnston [00:07:15] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:07:15] And there's.

Brian Johnston [00:07:16] Which kind of softens that previous thing that Mark said.

Jared Anderson [00:07:19] It both softens it, but at the same time it's really awkward. So that tells us, you know, again, really careful reading. There's a lot we can. We can learn. So Matthew, the author of Matthew, was virtually certain. We can be pretty sure it was not the. The apostle Matthew, not the disciple Matthew. And one of the most striking evidences for this is. So Matthew talks about the calling of the tax collector, and he's the only one to call him Matthew and Luke and Mark, he's named Levi, which is probably how the name Matthew is attributed to this gospel. But he uses Mark as a source for his own calling. That doesn't make any sense. Why wouldn't he use his own experience to write down? So backing up just a bit, it seems that all of the attributions of the Gospels are best guesses that come later. When you read all the Gospels together, you're like, now who could have written this? And it seems to be the attributions that we have.

Brian Johnston [00:08:27] So that's where that comes from. Is. Is basically somebody later coming up with that.

Jared Anderson [00:08:35] Yeah, and we can touch more on that later. So let's talk about how Matthew works. So for Matthew, Jesus is the promised Jewish Messiah. He's the fulfillment of the Jewish scriptures. And Matthew emphasizes that in so many ways. And so one interesting consequence of this is that Matthew's. Okay, wrap your head around this. Matthew's Jesus was more supportive of the Jewish law than the real Jesus probably was.

Brian Johnston [00:09:09] Oh, wow.

Jared Anderson [00:09:11] It gets a bit tricky. So there's the historical Jesus that we'll talk about in a bit. So how do. Scholar. Well, we'll leave that for later, but for now, we need to remember that we do not have Jesus in the Gospels. We have Matthew's portrayal of Jesus, we have Mark's portrayal of Jesus, we have Luke's portrayal of Jesus, and we have John's portrayal of Jesus.

Brian Johnston [00:09:37] Right, but we don't have writings from Jesus. That's the problem.

Jared Anderson [00:09:42] Well, we don't. We'll get to that with the historical Jesus. But right now we just need to remember that we are learning about Jesus through the filter of the gospel writers who all have their agendas and the points that they're trying to make. And so one part of that is that Matthew is really enthusiastic about the Jewish law. So, for example, in Mark, we have this really interesting saying where Mark says, Jesus declared that all foods were clean. And we don't know whether that's. So this is a Mark summary. The gospel writer Mark, you know, summarizing what Jesus said. But if that goes back to Jesus, that's a big deal.

Brian Johnston [00:10:25] Yeah, that would have been pretty far out, you know, for that culture.

Jared Anderson [00:10:30] He's throwing kosher out the window, which is a really big deal. Whereas Matthew, oh boy. Matthew actually says, you know, Jesus in Matthew says, you need. So in Mark, basically Jesus says, stop being like the Pharisees who have all these tiny details about how to live properly. And the Pharisees were. Their goal was noble in itself. You know, they were trying to allow the everyday person to be as pure as a priest. We unfortunately, we don't have enough time to go into the background of all this fun characterization stuff. But so in Mark, Jesus is basically saying, you stop being like the priests, live the Jewish law, live love. You need to love your neighbor, you need to love God and stop worrying about these tiny details. Whereas in Matthew, Jesus says, yes, you need to love, but you need to live the Jewish law better than the Pharisees do.

Brian Johnston [00:11:35] Yeah, Matthew wasn't digging that, that whole free thing.

Jared Anderson [00:11:40] Right. So basically Matthew says, you know, why don't you outdo the Pharisees?

Brian Johnston [00:11:47] Oh boy.

Jared Anderson [00:11:49] So here's Matthew's Jesus again. Jesus is the predictive Matthew. Matthew has what are called these predictions where he says, thus it is fulfilled. Speaking of Jesus.

Brian Johnston [00:12:05] Yeah, that's what I remember specifically from the Book of Matthew or the Gospel of Matthews. There's all these little like referencing back to something and saying how Jesus fulfilled that prophecy or something. Isn't that right?

Jared Anderson [00:12:18] Yeah. So he has like 11, 12, depending on how you count them, these places where he says, this is how Jesus fulfilled the scriptures. And so the best way to understand Matthew is to picture it like a play kind of. And he's telling the story of salvation. And so he puts it in three acts. He says, there's the time before Jesus, so the time of the Jewish scriptures and Judaism. And he says, this is how Jesus is in continuity and he is the fulfillment of everything in Act 1, everything that Jewish scriptures. And so this is why? You have the genealogy that Matthew has. You know, where he has Abraham, and it shows everything, how the Scriptures lead up to Jesus. Then you have the ministry of Jesus. And so this is how Jesus was a new Moses, among other things. So you know, how Herod sends out his soldiers to kill all the babies. That's very clearly a parallel in Exodus of when the Pharaoh kills the babies and Moses is saved. Jesus teaches from a mountain, just as Moses gave the law from Mount Sinai. There are a lot of these parallels. And then the third act is Jesus is present in the life of the church.

Brian Johnston [00:13:43] What do you mean by that?

Jared Anderson [00:13:45] Well, in first, Matthew is the only gospel that uses the word ecclesia, which is the Greek that means church. It means a gathering together of believers.

Brian Johnston [00:13:56] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:13:56] And so first, we should not equate the church. I'm making air quotes in Matthew with this word ecclesia. But at the same time, Matthew is talking about the Christian community in his time. So Matthew is the one that is the most concerned about the proper organization and running and teaching of the church.

Brian Johnston [00:14:25] Okay, I see.

Jared Anderson [00:14:26] And this is, you know, this is one reason why it was the favorite gospel of the church, because it talks all about the church, because it's the one that confirms the structure and the organization. It has the famous Matthew 16:18, you know, where Jesus says, you are Peter, and on this rock, which is a play on the word Peter, I will build my church.

Brian Johnston [00:14:49] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:14:50] So that's why Matthew, you know, was so, so beloved by the church. So a couple other interesting things about Matthew are both Jesus and the disciples come across a lot better than they did in Mark. So the disciples know what's going on. They're much more faithful. They're much more understanding. Matthew focuses a lot on doing the will of the Father, as explained by Jesus. So Jesus is the perfect interpreter of the Jewish law. And so this is where you have the idea of you have heard it said, but I say to you the antithesis in the Sermon on the Mount, you know, the law, The Scriptures say, do not commit adultery. I say, don't. You know, Jesus says, don't be lustful. You know, don't look at a woman with lust. Other points of Matthean theology. Did you catch that fun little adjective

Brian Johnston [00:15:45] I used, playing with the names again?

Jared Anderson [00:15:48] Well, no, it's legitimate. It's what scholars use.

Brian Johnston [00:15:51] Oh, no, no, I know what you're saying.

Jared Anderson [00:15:54] So who Jesus is for Matthew, we talked about how he is this new Moses. He also emphasizes his favorite titles are Son of God and Son of Man.

Brian Johnston [00:16:05] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:16:06] And so he's emphasizing Jesus as Lord and his role in salvation, and also Jesus as obedient servant to God. He also talks a lot about the kingdom of heaven. Now, this is interesting. Matthew says kingdom of heaven, where everyone else says kingdom of God. And this is a Jewish way of avoiding the repetition of the word God.

Brian Johnston [00:16:32] Oh, right, yeah. They don't like to say that out loud or write it.

Jared Anderson [00:16:37] Yeah. So Orthodox Jews, if you've ever noticed, they write God G. Hyphen. D. Mm. So kingdom of heaven is a circumlocution. It's a way of speaking around the word God and calling it. So this is really interesting, Matthew. So in Mark, we had. The kingdom of God is coming right away. You know, it's still. Look, we're looking forward to it. In Matthew, the kingdom has already come in the presence of Jesus.

Brian Johnston [00:17:09] Okay. So kind of shifting that concept a little.

Jared Anderson [00:17:13] Right. So remember, there are three periods of history. Before Jesus, during Jesus, after Jesus, and after Jesus is actually seen as the coming kingdom of God. Remember how Paul was fighting against this idea?

Brian Johnston [00:17:26] Oh, that's right. Yeah.

Jared Anderson [00:17:28] Well, I mean, it's viewed differently to different people. But as the. As time went on, that was kind of the only way you could interpret it.

Brian Johnston [00:17:39] Yeah. 100, 200 years later. You can't.

Jared Anderson [00:17:42] You can only. Or even decades, you know, because everything in the New Testament is within 100 years.

Brian Johnston [00:17:47] That's true.

Jared Anderson [00:17:48] It gets. There's only so long that you can wait. You have to reinterpret it somehow. And so this is how Matthew interprets it, and it's really creative. So Matthew portrays Jesus's death as the apocalyptic shift in eras in the present age and the age to come. So it's really awkward. So there's this big, big earthquake at the time of Jesus's death, which is only in Matthew. And it says at that moment, the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split, and the tombs broke open. Because resurrection is a sign of the changing of the air. You know, errors. The coming kingdom of God. Resurrection is a sign of that.

Brian Johnston [00:18:37] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:18:37] The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. They came out of the tombs after Jesus's resurrection and went to the holy city. Appeared to many people. So this is really weird because if you notice at Jesus's death, there's this resurrection, but they're actually not really resurrected or they hang out in their tombs until after Jesus is resurrected three days later.

Brian Johnston [00:19:01] Oh, yeah. That is kind of just, well, awkward. Yeah, like you said, that's the best way to describe it.

Jared Anderson [00:19:08] And so the scholar says, aha. Because this is so difficult, because Matthew has to do so many gymnastics to get his point across. This means it's something really important to him. Whereas if it were just easy and flowed, he doesn't need to have a special reason to write something in a certain way. But if the more he's going out of his way, the more important is to his agenda.

Brian Johnston [00:19:36] Now, you said Mark was written in 69 common era. What's the best guess on Matthew?

Jared Anderson [00:19:43] Around 85 post destruction of Jerusalem.

Brian Johnston [00:19:48] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:19:49] Which is a really big deal because the destruction of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple shifted by both Judaism and Christianity fundamentally. And that's important because that's one way we can date the traditions actually is because the way that things were viewed were so different. So on one hand, Jesus has to be the first fruits of the resurrection. He has to be resurrected first. So Matthew's playing with two traditions. Jesus has firstfruits and then Jesus death as the apocalyptic shift between eras.

Brian Johnston [00:20:29] Yeah, that's hard to mesh those two together, at least the way he wrote that story.

Jared Anderson [00:20:34] Yeah. And so Jesus's death clearly marks the kingdom of God. So after Jesus death, the kingdom of God is here. And that's what Jesus Sundays. In Matthew 1:23, Matthew calls Jesus Emmanuel, which in Hebrew means God with us, Im anuel. And in 2810, Jesus says to his disciples, I am with you always. So very pretty, appealing way of looking at things. You know, that in the. That Jesus is still with us. Jesus is still around in this kingdom of God era, as we live our religion, as we live in the church. And I'm speaking from the perspective of Matthew's audience. You're not just automatically jumping forward and smashing it into our day. So that is the Jewish scribe Matthew, whose name was not Matthew, who was anonymous. Now, Luke Acts is interesting because Luke is the most careful historian of pretty much everyone in the New Testament. You know, he starts off with his preface. There are all these markers that Luke understands the convention of Greco Roman history. So when he talks about when Jesus appeared, he does so in a classically, you know, a way that is, that fits really well into Greek history. So he says in Luke 3, in the 15th year of the reign of the emperor Tiberius, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea and Herod was ruler of Galilee. And he continues. So this is a classical way of establishing time where he takes all these different reigns, you know, from the emperor down to Local leaders. And he's situating the beginning of Jesus's ministry there.

Brian Johnston [00:22:41] Right. He's taking the time to pull in some other references so the reader knows when this happens.

Jared Anderson [00:22:49] So he has a kind of global outlook for his Gospel. And also the beginning of his gospel is very interesting. He has a formal preface, you know, he says, since many have undertaken to set down an orderly account of the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down, handed on to us by those who were, from the beginning, eyewitnesses and servants of the word, I too decided, after investigating everything carefully from the first, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent, Theophilus, so that you may know the truth concerning the things about which you have been instructed.

Brian Johnston [00:23:28] Wow, that's interesting. Now, I hate to break in with this, but I can't help but think of the parallel of the official version of the first vision that Joseph Smith writes down, because that sounds like almost the same language saying that there's all these rumors and stories. So I'm going to sit down and I'm going to tell you what really happened.

Jared Anderson [00:23:48] That is interesting. And he could have been influenced by this very preface. You know, Joseph was very familiar with the Bible.

Brian Johnston [00:23:55] Yeah. Anyways, sort of just a tangent. I don't want to get too sidetracked on that.

Luke and Acts as a Unified Narrative

Jared Anderson [00:24:02] So first, the first thing that we need to understand. It's unfortunate they've been separated in the New Testament, but as we discussed, Luke and Acts were written as two volumes of the same work, like Luke 1

Brian Johnston [00:24:15] and Luke Part 2, huh?

Jared Anderson [00:24:17] Yes. So first is the story of Jesus and then is the story of the disciples of Jesus, mostly Peter and Paul carrying on the work that was begun with Jesus. And Luke is writing this. Once again, this book is anonymous, you know, so we just call it Luke for convenience. And he has again, this kind of global universal vision as he writes the history. And Luke is a very appealing gospel. Are the Nativity, you know, with manger and shepherds and angels. That comes right from Luke. The parable of the Good Samaritan. Lots of really distinctive stories come only from Luke. Now, Luke also had Mark.

Brian Johnston [00:25:12] Oh, interesting. Now, isn't there a name for all three of these? Because they all seem to be using similar material.

Jared Anderson [00:25:20] Right. So Matthew, Mark and Luke are called the Synoptics, which. It's from Synopsis, which means to see together.

Brian Johnston [00:25:29] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:25:29] And so Matthew, Mark and Luke are very similar. And then John is off doing his own thing. And we'll talk about that later. So let's see how to Explain Luke and Acts as briefly as possible so he writes it within this clear historical framework. And for Luke. Well, first, Luke is a master writer. He is very, very good at what he does. He's a master of the Greek language. And for example, the story of Luke and Acts is the story of how this Christianity was born with the ministry of Jesus, with the birth and ministry of Jesus and his death. And then it moved from Judea and Jerusalem on to Rome.

Brian Johnston [00:26:19] Okay, quick question, mark. Was 69 common era Matthew 85 CE. And then how about Luke? What's the best guess on that?

Jared Anderson [00:26:29] It depends. Okay, I don't want to get too much into this, but a big question is whether or not Luke knew Matthew.

Brian Johnston [00:26:36] Okay, but what's like a consensus just for the date?

Jared Anderson [00:26:40] Once again, it's like the 80s. Sometime in the. In the 80s is when Luke enacts, is usually usually written. So if math, if Luke knew Matthew, then you need to give a couple years, you know, a couple years, 10 years for Luke to know Matthew.

Brian Johnston [00:26:56] Right, I got you.

Jared Anderson [00:26:57] Anyway, usually they're dated in the 80s, sometime after the destruction of Jerusalem, not too much closer to the end of the first century when there were a lot of other developments. So pretty early. So we're thinking sometime in the 80s.

Brian Johnston [00:27:13] Don't want to get you sidetracked just for reference. I thought that'd be good to throw in there.

Jared Anderson [00:27:18] So for Luke, Jesus is the savior of the world. He's for everyone. So whereas Matthew has a special emphasis on Jesus within Jewish tradition, Luke takes care to express Jesus role within everything. And that is why Matthew's genealogy goes back to Abraham, you know, the father of Judaism. And Luke's genealogy goes all the way back to Adam.

Brian Johnston [00:27:50] Oh yeah, I see that. That makes a difference.

Jared Anderson [00:27:54] So there's this interesting tension with Luke where on one hand he is really aware of Jewish tradition. Very. In fact, he imitates significant stories from the Jewish scriptures. And I use Jewish scriptures for Old Testament. He imitates stories like, you know, Zechariah and Elizabeth have this miraculous birth, just as there were miraculous births in the Old Testament. And Jesus actions are very much like Elijah. You know, there are these patterns of similarities between the Jewish scriptures. And in fact, Luke's skill is so refined that in the beginning of Luke there's heavy imitation of the Jewish scriptures. And as it continues toward the end and then into Acts, it becomes less and less and less and more and more and more Greek. So he's telling the salvation history like, you know, like Matthew. But Matthew sees it from A Jewish point of view. And Luke sees he's telling the story of how Christianity moved from the cradle of Jerusalem and Judea to the gentile world.

Brian Johnston [00:29:12] Oh, I see, yeah.

Jared Anderson [00:29:14] And we'll see this even more in Acts, but let's focus on Luke for a moment. So for Luke, Jesus is a prophet. He calls himself a prophet many times. And he is a prophet who very much in the spirit of the Jewish scriptures, the prophets would say, you know, you're doing this wrong, you're forgetting the poor, you're neglecting your religion, you're neglecting God. So it's a call to repentance. And Luke shows a very touching concern for the liminal, outcast, rejected members of society. So he has a particular emphasis on women, on the sick, on. On the, you know, people who, according to the standard understanding of Judaism at the time, would be rejected from having full fellowship in the religion.

Brian Johnston [00:30:17] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:30:19] And I think this is really powerful because 1. So basically in Judaism the idea was we are God's chosen people. So God gave us the Jewish law to keep and we keep it out of gratitude. And aren't we great? You know, we can keep the Jewish law and the priests and the people who officiated in the temple and the experts like the scribes who were like lawyers who were experts in the Jewish law and in the temple, they were the big shots. They were the culture and Jewish culture of the time. They were as good as they were the most holy. So one important thing to understand, a good way to understand the ancient world, ancient religion, is degrees of holiness. So you want to be as holy as possible. So the priests were the holiest priests and Levites were the holiest in the, in the society. And then the ordinary people were, eh, you know, if they did their sacrifices, they could achieve moments of holiness. And then the Pharisees were trying to make people, through their daily life and the details of their daily life, achieve priestly holiness all the time.

Brian Johnston [00:31:34] Oh, right. But without necessarily having to serve in the temple or whatever.

Jared Anderson [00:31:38] Correct. The way that they did this was meticulous falling of the Jewish law. So they had this oral tradition and they would have all these. Well, there are these rabbinic debates which seem to be aligned with the Pharisees. So in Matthew, Jesus says, you do all these tiny things, you strain out a gnat, which means that a gnat, you know, tiny little bug would make your soup or your liquid. You're drinking ritually impure and really quick. I want to make the point unclean is not talking about hygiene. It's not talking about health again. It's this idea of holiness. So you need to be ritually pure in order to have a degree of holiness that's pleasing to God.

Brian Johnston [00:32:25] Right. And that may or may not have anything to do with physical or medical hygiene.

Jared Anderson [00:32:31] Correct. So the idea is that there's a bug in your soup. It's not. Oh, that's gross. There's a bug in my soup. Now my soup has germs, which is why we would understand it. But it's ritual uncleanliness. If there's a bug in the soup.

Brian Johnston [00:32:45] Right. The soup is now magically tainted or something like that.

Jared Anderson [00:32:49] Religiously tainted.

Brian Johnston [00:32:50] Okay, I'm sorry. Religiously tainted.

Jared Anderson [00:32:52] But so what Jesus says in Matthew is the Pharisee, and he's ripping them a new one. They strain out a gnat to achieve this purity. And they swallow a camel, which is also an impure animal. And he's making the point where he says, you are forgetting the most important aspects of it.

Brian Johnston [00:33:14] Yeah.

Jared Anderson [00:33:16] So the way that Luke sees it is Luke says in a very striking way, the people you reject, oh, holy ones of Judaism, are holier than your most elite, holy, sacred members of society.

Brian Johnston [00:33:36] Oh, boy, now he's going to start a fight.

Jared Anderson [00:33:39] And the Good Samaritan is a really good example of this because people do not understand. Do not understand it. So I think how most people understand the Good Samaritan is the priests and Levites. Oh, they're jerks, you know, because they don't take care of the dying person.

Brian Johnston [00:33:57] Right. They're just insensitive.

Jared Anderson [00:33:58] Yeah. The Samaritan, that's the good guy. And we don't think beyond, goodbye, good guy, bad guy. But that's not the point of the parable.

Brian Johnston [00:34:07] So what is the point of the parable?

Jared Anderson [00:34:10] The point is that the priest and the Levite, because of their holiness, were forbidden by law, by Jewish law from touching any dead body beyond their immediate family.

Brian Johnston [00:34:26] Right. Okay. Which could cause them to become religiously impure.

Jared Anderson [00:34:31] Ritually impure. So they could take care of their dad or mom if they died. But if they saw someone that could. Something that could be a dead body on the street, their thought would not be, according to Jewish law. Who knows individual variation? Their thought would not be, oh, my gosh, is that guy alive? They would think that guy could be dead. Therefore, I cannot touch a dead body. I need to go to the other side of the road.

Brian Johnston [00:34:57] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:34:57] The Samaritan, on the other hand, the Samaritans, they claimed to worship the God of Israel. They had different Variations, but they were seen as impure, of pagan ancestry, half breeds. They were seen as the lowest of below. And so in Luke, Jesus is making this striking point that the most rejected, the most impure member in the Jewish worldview is actually more holy and closer to God than the holiest members of. Of Jewish society.

Brian Johnston [00:35:35] Right. Because the other two people that went by were these paragons of holiness in their society.

Jared Anderson [00:35:43] And I personally think that most, if not all, religious people can learn a tremendous amount from this parable and this outlook, which. Which is. So the simplistic reading of the Good Samaritan in Luke is don't be a jerk. The scholarly, academic way of reading. It says, do not let the details of your religion get in the way of loving each other.

Brian Johnston [00:36:07] Right. That's a really powerful message.

Jared Anderson [00:36:11] Yeah, that's some serious firepower. The other part of Luke that goes along with Jesus being a prophet is Luke does not believe in the atonement.

Brian Johnston [00:36:23] Wait, what? You're talking about a gospel writer that doesn't believe in the atonement?

Jared Anderson [00:36:28] Yeah, we won't have pretty striking stuff. We don't have a lot of time to talk about it. So Mark clearly teaches atonement theology, which is that Jesus's death has a salvific, that's another fancy word for you, but has a saving effect for all of us that through his death, we, you know, we're forgiven or we're saved. Matthew takes that over. He's like, this is my stamp of approval. I agree. We're good. Luke goes out of his way to take out references in Mark to the vicarious atonement, the saving effect of Jesus's death.

Brian Johnston [00:37:14] Wow. I mean, why would he do that?

Jared Anderson [00:37:17] Because that's not how Jesus death worked for Luke. So remember Jesus. And we get this really explicitly from Acts, like the. The message in Peter in, like, Acts 2 very clearly sets out how Luke sees it so really quickly in the Last Supper, Jesus says, this is my body, which is given for you. This is my blood, which is, you know, the new. The new covenant. This is the new covenant in my blood. Drink of this cup. And the interesting thing is that is a scribal addition.

Brian Johnston [00:37:55] Oh, okay.

Jared Anderson [00:37:56] Taken over from First Corinthians 11.

Brian Johnston [00:38:00] So you're saying, like, when you're reading it maybe in Greek or whatever, it appears more like that wasn't organic to the original Gospel.

Jared Anderson [00:38:10] Well, you're going to draw me into technical arguments, and we don't want to get to that.

Brian Johnston [00:38:14] It's more. You could just. Yeah, just explain it Real briefly.

Jared Anderson [00:38:18] It's more that it's not in all the manuscripts. Yes. You can make arguments from style. For example, this. Huper Humon, this for you, my body is for you, is not anywhere in all of Luke or Acts. And then there's the idea that Luke goes out of his way to take out the Son of Man, has to suffer and die for you. Take it out of Mark. So those are internal arguments. Okay, but I don't know that you'd. It depends on how carefully you're reading. But.

Brian Johnston [00:38:47] Yeah, but that's one idea that scholars come up with, is that that was added back in. And other than that.

Jared Anderson [00:38:56] Not added back in. Added in. It was not originally there.

Brian Johnston [00:39:01] Very good point.

Jared Anderson [00:39:02] Oh, I get it. You're speaking from a canonical point of view, which is like. Which is a. No, no.

Brian Johnston [00:39:08] Okay, you caught me on that. But it was a problem when later people were reading that and they're like, this can't be left this way. So somebody added it in.

Jared Anderson [00:39:20] Yeah, but the real evidence. I mean, I think if we had no manuscript evidence for it, some scholars would just say, hmm, that may not exactly fit in well, but we actually have manuscripts that do not have this. Do not have the longer edition.

Brian Johnston [00:39:34] Okay, that makes a lot of sense. I see what you're saying.

Jared Anderson [00:39:36] Greek manuscripts. So we need to explain that. So moving on to Acts. Really interesting stuff. Okay, so just as a little aside, this is an example of what's called textual criticism, which is the idea that we have thousands of manuscripts of the New Testament, all different. Which one is earlier and why were they changed?

Brian Johnston [00:39:59] Yeah, I mean, that's a good question. I remember reading from one of Dr. Ehrman's books that there's, like. There's more differences than words or something like that.

Jared Anderson [00:40:10] Well, there are hundreds of thousands of changes among the different manuscripts, but that's misleading because most of them are just dumb errors that says people could not spell any better than they can now, and you'd get careless. But there are a good hundred textual differences that are very significant. And Luke has a handful of these. And I just gave you an example of one where one textual difference of 20 odd words can change the entire meaning of a book. So you take out that one reading, and suddenly all of Luke Acts has no atonement.

Brian Johnston [00:40:48] Right. And that's very significant.

Jared Anderson [00:40:50] Yep. And another significant one is the bloody sweat, but we won't have time to talk about that.

Brian Johnston [00:40:55] I know, I know.

Jared Anderson [00:40:57] Yeah. The bloody sweat is another. Another one that was added in. So as we said, Luke also wrote Acts. It's part of a two volume thing. So here is Acts in an absolute nutshell. Acts is a story of the history of Christianity that was intended to show how Christianity was on one hand in continuity with Judaism and on the other hand no threat to the Roman Empire. Okay, so one thing I didn't have time to talk is this guy Theophilus, most excellent. First, he's a convert. We know that from what he said. You know, Luke says, I'm reminding you of the things that were taught to you. Dedications were usually to people who footed the bill, who paid for the dissemination of a literary work. So he's the patriot and he's the patron. And most excellent, not Bill and Ted. Oh, dated me. But

Brian Johnston [00:42:06] so someday when somebody listens to this recording, they'll know roughly when it was made.

Jared Anderson [00:42:11] Well, Bill, intelligence is old enough anyway.

Brian Johnston [00:42:13] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:42:15] It's referring to a governor of a Roman province. So we have no reason to. I mean it's on one hand what is the probability of a major Roman leader converting to Christianity. On the other hand, we do know there were some pretty high up converts. So I think a good assumption is that Luke is writing. He dedicated Luke and Acts to some sort of Roman authority figure who was acting as patron for the book. So basically Acts is written to show the Christians how their movement was again, just, you know, the next step in Judaism and no threat to the Roman Empire. So Acts is the genre. It's an apology. And by that we don't.

Brian Johnston [00:43:13] Yeah, tell, tell, tell us what apology means.

Jared Anderson [00:43:16] Yeah, we're not saying Luke is saying sorry, you know, so sorry. Sorry about that. An apology is a technical term for an intellectual defense of the faith. Okay, so FARMS is involved. For LDS listeners, you know, that's an example of apologetic or you know, the Maxwell Institute. So this functions in a lot of ways. We're not going to spend time on that. But so basically, what other tidbits about Acts? There's so much. A couple interesting things. Acts shows they're really. There are parallels between Luke and Acts and this is part of Luke literary skill, you know, so there's the Last Supper in Luke and there's this interesting like supper narrative on the ship with Paul. Stephen, who is stoned to death, says, lay not this sin to their charge. Just as Jesus says, father, forgive them for they do not know what they're doing. You know, lots of interesting parallels. And I'll conclude my. Let's see, Paul is a really good major character in the end of Acts. He's the hero of Acts. But whereas Paul, as we saw, was a really controversial figure, he is a good boy in Acts, he always visits the synagogues. He never does anything wrong. He, you know, visits. He preaches to the Jews, and then he goes to the Gentiles when he's kicked out from the Jews. And everyone agrees. Peter and Paul and the leaders, they all agree with each other. So I just want listeners to contemplate how different the portrayal in Acts is from the historical situation presupposed in the letters.

Brian Johnston [00:44:57] Right. Now, would that mean perhaps whoever wrote Luke and Acts was a follower of Paul or an associate of him?

Jared Anderson [00:45:08] That would be evidence that he wasn't.

Brian Johnston [00:45:10] Wasn't.

Jared Anderson [00:45:12] Well, because he disagrees so much with Paul.

Brian Johnston [00:45:15] Oh, okay, I see.

Jared Anderson [00:45:18] I'm gonna have to leave the authorship of Luke and X as a mystery because. Well, let me. Let me summarize it. The we passages, either the author. Well, okay, so the beginning of Luke, he says those who were eyewitnesses. So Luke himself is not an eyewitness. He's a member of a later generation. But there are a couple passages in Acts where he starts saying we. And so either he was an eyewitness, which would mean he did know Paul, or he was using a source that was an eyewitness. Or it was a literary convention to say we when you're talking about voyages.

Brian Johnston [00:45:57] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:45:58] So anyway, the short way of saying it is that no matter who he was, it does seem like he was distanced a little bit from the sources he used. But he was a careful historian.

Brian Johnston [00:46:09] Okay, fair enough.

Jared Anderson [00:46:11] As much, you know, as much as an ancient historian was. So why Luke does this is because Christianity was a threat, was seen with suspicion by the Greco Roman world because one, it was new. And in the ancient world, they did not like things that were new because they had not been proved by the test of time. You know, they were like fads. Whereas we love cutting edge new things, they did not like new ideas. And then the other problem was Christians were killed, ironically, for atheism.

Brian Johnston [00:46:48] Wait, what?

Jared Anderson [00:46:53] Because they would not worship the Jewish gods. I mean, sorry, the Roman gods. Social order was maintained by keeping the Roman gods happy. And the Christians would not worship the Roman gods because they worship Jesus. The Jews did not worship the Roman gods, but they've been weird for centuries,

Brian Johnston [00:47:18] so they're just kind of used to that weirdness.

Jared Anderson [00:47:21] Yeah, so they had kind of special permission not to worship the Jewish gods. So the Christians went along and they're like, we're really Jews. And the Romans said, what? You know, one, you're New, you know, your leader was killed a couple decades ago, was a criminal. And two, you don't keep the Jewish law. So ACTS is trying to. And plus, they were persecuted as misanthropes, as haters of other people because they were so tight with each other.

Brian Johnston [00:47:53] Very close knit, very inwardly focused on their own group.

Jared Anderson [00:47:58] Yeah, they called themselves brother and sister. And they were very, you know, and so the outer, the larger society was very suspicious about this tightly knit community that called each other brother and sister.

Brian Johnston [00:48:10] Now, once again, just going to throw this in, but can't help but see the parallel in early Mormon history.

Jared Anderson [00:48:17] Sounds familiar, doesn't it?

Brian Johnston [00:48:18] Yeah.

Jared Anderson [00:48:19] So basically, now do you see how Acts fits into this? So ACTS is saying, oh, we're not new, we are. We're just part of Judaism.

Brian Johnston [00:48:28] Yeah, we're Judaism plus.

Jared Anderson [00:48:31] Yeah, we're Judaism 2.0. And then the other thing is by portraying that all the leaders were unified, that everything was innocent, that Christianity moved from Judea to Rome in this nice unproblematic way, you know, there's nothing to worry about. So this is probably written so Christians, when they were arguing with the people around them, would have a way of conceptualizing their role in larger society and in history.

Brian Johnston [00:49:02] Yeah. Well, that makes a lot of sense then.

Jared Anderson [00:49:06] Okay, so we, that's acts. We are going to jump back into letters. You know, most of the New Testament is letters, so it makes sense. We're going to be spending time and we are moving to Colossians.

Deutero-Pauline Letters: Colossians and Ephesians

Brian Johnston [00:49:17] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:49:19] So, and this is one of the Deutero Pauline letters. So one where scholars are divided whether or not Paul wrote them. But most scholars do not think Paul wrote Colossians. Okay, so this. But it needs to be. I need to remind everyone that these are ones that claim to be written by Paul. So they are pseudonymous, otherwise they are forged.

Brian Johnston [00:49:44] Interesting.

Jared Anderson [00:49:46] It's interesting to contemplate the role of forgery in the New Testament. So there's plagiarism. I don't remember if we talked about this before yet. So there's plagiarism, which is using someone else's writing and saying it's yours. And forgery is the opposite. You know when you write something and you say it's someone else's.

Brian Johnston [00:50:04] Right. Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:50:05] And the most common reason for forgery was to get your views heard.

Brian Johnston [00:50:11] Sure. They wouldn't listen to me, but if I said that my, you know, that this letter was actually by Paul, then maybe people will pay attention. Right?

Jared Anderson [00:50:23] Yep. And the really, really interesting where it gets interesting. Well, it's already interesting for about 10 reasons is because Colossians disagrees with Paul fundamentally. So it seems that this author was using the name of Paul to change the understanding of Paul. Kind of like a double agent.

Brian Johnston [00:50:43] How cloak and dagger.

Jared Anderson [00:50:46] Yep. I'm going to pretend to be Paul in order to correct Paul. So this is probably written in the 80s, maybe from Ephesus. The same people in Philemon were figure in the letter. The author speaks out against false teachers who spread philosophy and false deceit. Pseudo Paul's opponents maybe were some type of Jewish mystics. They probably encouraged living a Jewish law. They experienced visions where believers were transported to heavenly realms and experienced a divine transcendent experience. So this is interesting. So the opponents in Colossians probably Jewish mystics who have these transcendent divine mystical experiences of like being in heaven or something. And it's very interesting. So we have Second Corinthians where the real Paul says first and Second Corinthians where people are arguing the same thing. We're so exalted, we're so glorified, we're living the saved life. And Paul says as if no you're not. We are still in this pre kingdom of God time when things suck and it suffers. Okay, so here's how Colossians deals with it. Colossians outdoes his opponents like how he says. He says, oh yeah, they talk about mystical experiences. They talk about communing with angels. Well, you have it better. You are more exalted, you are more divine. Jesus trumps everything. Jesus is all the divine you need. He created all the other divine beings. Jesus has already raised you up to heavenly places. You are already living the divine life through Christ. Why sign up with the angels when you are already living in the heavenly realm with Jesus? So basically that's how Paul's opponent sounded. And now Colossians is taking the same argument.

Brian Johnston [00:52:47] So could possibly it have been written by Paul's opponents trying to correct him?

Jared Anderson [00:52:54] That's a possibility. It seems that this is later because Paul would probably need to be safely dead. But it is interesting because. Oh, and then the other thing of Colossians is like the level of organization of the church seems to not fit into Paul's life. There are other reasons for thinking it was not in Paul's lifetime. But we do know, as we'll see, that people were writing letters in Paul's name even during his life. Okay, interesting stuff. He was a very definitely a firework. So another thing with Colossians is besides the fact that theology fundamentally different in Fact, the opposite of Paul, the writing style is really, really different. Greek allows for really long sentences, and Colossians has really long sentences. And then so just the writing style is very different. And then Colossians 4:18 says, I, Paul, write this greeting with my own hand. Perhaps that's protesting too much or a way of like, oh, yeah, I'm Paul. I'm really Paul. See, I'm signing it.

Brian Johnston [00:54:01] No, really, wink, wink, I'm Paul.

Jared Anderson [00:54:03] And then, as I said, there are these. In Colossians and Ephesians, there are these things that scholars called household rules. And it talks about guidelines for different members of society. So wives and husbands, slaves. And Jesus and Paul never talk about these things. They're like, why worry about social order? You know, in fact, Jesus radically reorganized social order. He's like, family, shmamily. I don't have a family. I have a new family. And so Christians had a new family, you know, of brothers and sisters of believers, whereas.

Brian Johnston [00:54:40] And then here comes this author and says, well, you know, actually, I'm going to tell you how important all these tiny little social rules are.

Jared Anderson [00:54:48] Yep. So basically what happened is the earliest layer of Christianity, of Jesus movement, was really expecting the kingdom of God to come right away. But as it didn't, they're like, huh, now how do we settle in for the long haul? How do we organize the church? Given that, you know, we need some order, we need to figure this out. We can't just shoot from the hip anymore. And so Colossians has that.

Brian Johnston [00:55:18] Interesting.

Jared Anderson [00:55:20] So one point that I want to make is this theology and this view is not any less uplifting than Paul. It's just not Paul.

Brian Johnston [00:55:29] Okay, well, yeah, that's actually something good to clarify.

Jared Anderson [00:55:33] And it reflects a later time in Christian history. And I think it's useful to see which bits and pieces of Christian faith and belief come from the different layers of history. And I would just really quickly say that legitimizing a certain practice or belief based on the fact that your religious founder held to that, it's only one rhetorical way of authorizing something. It's not the only one. And so even though people are like, oh, my gosh, I mean, one interesting question is, would Jesus have joined Paul's churches?

Brian Johnston [00:56:11] Oh, yeah. So, you know, is it. There are some movements, especially in the 19th century, where Mormonism came out of was this drive for primitive Christianity. But from this perspective, can you really find that? I mean, you're going through so many layers. Like, what layer do you stop digging into?

Jared Anderson [00:56:31] Let's leave that for later.

Brian Johnston [00:56:32] I know it's a big question. I'm throwing it out there, maybe just as a rhetorical question to point that

Jared Anderson [00:56:37] out as a thought piece. I just want to point out that even though I will admit that the complexity of Christian history does cause a lot of problems and complications for certain understandings of Christianity or different religions that appeal to these traditions, but it's not the only way to look at it.

Brian Johnston [00:57:01] Can I bring in another Mormon parallel? Is that people also often ask, if Joseph Smith appeared in our time, would he join our church?

Jared Anderson [00:57:11] Yep.

Brian Johnston [00:57:12] So same kind of touchy question because we've gone through, even in our own short history, some layers like that of change.

Jared Anderson [00:57:19] Right. And this is one reason, one way that, like continuing communication with God is really handy.

Brian Johnston [00:57:26] Yeah. Anyways, it's just an interesting parallel to what was going on in Colossians and New Testament times.

Jared Anderson [00:57:33] But that was, that was a real factor with Martin Luther, actually, and the Reformation and their leaders in the Reformation were that they said, whoa, Catholicism does not look like the New Testament.

Brian Johnston [00:57:45] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:57:46] Let's return to the Scriptures. Sola scriptura was their big rallying cry. Scripture alone. And yeah, anyway, we'll discuss the theological implications, but it certainly is fun. But now you can already see, and we haven't even hit all the hard hitting issues. You can see how the scholarly view of the Bible, it gives you a lot to wrestle with as a, as a believing reader of the Scriptures.

Brian Johnston [00:58:17] Well, wrestle in conflict wise, but also I think a lot to work with in a positive way too, you know, as far as understanding your faith or our faith.

Jared Anderson [00:58:28] Yeah, I didn't say battle with, I said wrestle.

Brian Johnston [00:58:32] Okay, okay.

Jared Anderson [00:58:34] So now we're in Ephesians, probably in the 90s. Ephesians sounds even more not like Paul. Okay, so the sentences are even longer. It's more complex. And Colossians and Ephesians are both really similar. So it seems that Ephesians was looking at Colossians and using it as a pattern for this letter. For example, like 14 verses of Ephesians are one Greek sentence. And Paul just does not write like that. So it's interesting. Ephesians was actually a circular letter written to the saints and a later scribe added in Ephesus. So just one little interesting tidbit. So Ephesians main message is there's no distinction between Jews and Gentiles. God has united both through Christ. Again, we have this idea that believers have been raised, so they're experiencing this saved, exalted existence, you know, against what Paul taught the Ephesian you know, Pseudo Paul tells the Ephesians they're living in a heavenly existence while on earth. They say, you know, all of us once lived according to the passions of the flesh, following the desires of the flesh. We were, you know, like everyone else but God. This is a quote. But God who is rich in mercy out of the great love which he loved us even when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive together through Christ by grace you have been saved and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus so that in the ages to come you might show the immeasurable riches of grace and kindness towards us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith. And so again this is good ideas and he says it's going to get even better. But there's this idea that you have been saved. So one funny little point is evangelicals will say have you been saved?

Brian Johnston [01:00:36] Right. Common question.

Jared Anderson [01:00:38] Paul would be like what are you talking about? Salvation is something future. So again it seems that this was the view of Paul people who sympathized with Paul's opponents. That kind of message that that's been put in his name. A couple memorable parts of Ephesians are put on the armor of God. That's in Ephesians the idea of husbands love your wives. And as Christ loved the church and gave himself for it, that's part of the household code in Ephesians. So good stuff. And I again I would advocate a reading of the New Testament that can both appreciate it on a literary and even theological level. Well, even I don't need to apologize. Sorry, that was my too academic head on. Primarily these are faith documents and we can keep them and take them seriously as faith documents. But I also think it adds so much more richness and so much more to deal with good and bad. Well, you know, I don't good and bad, but it just adds so many more dimensions. And I think that the responsible way to deal with the New Testament, if you have the luxury of doing so, is to deal with these issues, you know, not that reading the New Testament in complete ignorance has no value. So now we are moving on to Hebrews. So this is interesting because Hebrews, even though some Bibles say the letter of Paul to the Hebrews, it is anonymous, it is not, it is not pretend or claim to be written by Paul.

Hebrews, James, Peter, and the General Epistles

Brian Johnston [01:02:18] And there were but it was written to the Hebrews.

Jared Anderson [01:02:24] It was written to people who definitely sympathized with Judaism like that. That is for sure.

Brian Johnston [01:02:30] So it was written by somebody anonymously to somebody anonymously.

Jared Anderson [01:02:35] Well, we can.

Brian Johnston [01:02:36] I'm not.

Jared Anderson [01:02:36] I'm not going to spend time getting into the details.

Brian Johnston [01:02:38] I don't want to distract you.

Jared Anderson [01:02:40] It was probably written to people in Rome, probably in the 80s, by a Jewish Christian with really good Greek and a Greek education.

Brian Johnston [01:02:53] Okay.

Jared Anderson [01:02:54] So the rhetorical skills. So a. What's called a Hellenized Jewish Christian. So someone who lived outside Palestine partook very deeply of Greek culture, but was also Jewish and then converted to Christianity.

Brian Johnston [01:03:08] Okay.

Jared Anderson [01:03:10] And was written probably to Rome. And the audience presupposed are people who thought Judaism was pretty awesome. So Hebrews is a really impressive book. Literarily, theologically, beautifully crafted. It's impressive stuff. So the problem of Hebrews is that some in the community were retreating from their faith in light of persecution. And it seems that Judaism seemed to be appealing. So perhaps just going on a little limb, maybe people were really calling into question, you are not in continuity with Judaism, you are not Jews, and you are not worshiping the state gods either. So what are you when you are responsible for these terrible things that are happening and we're going to beat you up.

Brian Johnston [01:03:59] Okay.

Jared Anderson [01:04:00] And so you can see why people would be like, why don't we go fold you? You know, why don't we have the security of the antiquity? And so Hebrews is written against this backdrop. And the main message of Hebrews is Jesus and the new covenant are greater than anything in Judaism, which was just shadows. Judaism is just the shadow to the reality that is Jesus and Judaism was foreshadowing a new and better covenant.

Brian Johnston [01:04:31] That's very strong language and ideas.

Jared Anderson [01:04:36] It is. And I want to flag a little bit what. So one of the great paradoxes and poignant tragedies really, in Christian history. Well, I mean, it is what it is, but had a very negative effect, is that a Jewish sect, a Jewish movement, became an anti Jewish religion very quickly.

Brian Johnston [01:05:01] Right. That has been problematic over history.

Jared Anderson [01:05:04] And we all know the legacy of that, you know, so this has one little aspect of it. So Hebrews, with great rhetorical flair, tremendous knowledge of the scriptures demonstrates first how Jesus is greater than the angels in Jewish tradition. Jesus is greater than Moses. Jesus had a greater priesthood than the Jews. Priesthood Jesus sacrifice and ministry in the heavenly tabernacle, which inaugurated a better covenant, is greater than the sacrifice and ministry of priests in the earthly temple. Do you see how he does that?

Brian Johnston [01:05:43] Yeah.

Jared Anderson [01:05:44] And so he says, given all this, the role of the believer is to have faith and endure so that we can benefit From Jesus priestly work. And so this is where he says, have faith. He gives Hebrews 11, you know, fantastic. All the Old Testament examples of faith. We're supposed to follow Jesus's example of suffering and discipline, you know, says don't be disobedient. One reason why Hebrews. Some people had a problem with Hebrews is Hebrews 4 says that once you've been saved, if you go into error again, you are condemned forever. You know, this idea of being lost and not being able to repent.

Brian Johnston [01:06:24] So, like, are you talking about, like, the concept in Mormonism of sinning against the Holy Ghost or.

Jared Anderson [01:06:32] Yeah, yeah. And that each of those terms means something different in the context. But, yes, that's the idea is that you are lost forever. You cannot be redeemed again. So Hebrews kind of takes a hard line.

Brian Johnston [01:06:44] So you can be. You're saved, but if you fall after that, it's an even farther fall.

Jared Anderson [01:06:49] Yep. And perhaps an irredeemable fall. And so that compromised the canonicity of Hebrews. We were like, whoa, you know, we don't know if we want this, but it made it into the canon. It was one of the question books, but some really good stuff, you know, Hebrews 4, 14, 16. Since then, we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God. Let us hold fast to our confession, for we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who in every respect has been tested as we are, yet without sin. Let us therefore approach the throne of grace with boldness so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.

Brian Johnston [01:07:31] Right.

Jared Anderson [01:07:33] So. So good stuff, you know, in Hebrews. The next stop on a roller coaster is First Peter. So First Peter was written sometime in, like the 70s to 90s, probably from Rome to Asia Minor, which is modern Turkey. And one commentator on First Peter called it a home for the homeless.

Brian Johnston [01:07:55] Why would he call it that?

Jared Anderson [01:07:57] There's this really appealing idea. Well, first, the author First Peter, who probably wasn't Peter, like, chances are, was not Peter. It's more debated than some of the other books. Second Peter is absolutely not Peter. We'll get to that some other time. So he call. He calls the Christians exiles and aliens, you know, kind of like not space people, but, you know, those who do not belong. So you're. He says your real home is in heaven. You don't belong here. And so it's this idea that you're the Christian community is your new Home away from home, which is. Which is heaven. So one common theme that you see in First Peter, I bet by now you're getting a pattern that either there's internal division or external persecution, and sometimes internal persecution. You know, this is what the authors of the New Testament were dealing with. So First Peter, the author, is writing to an audience where former friends and associates have rejected them and it's caused local persecution. And so Peter basically says, you know, stick together, support each other, and we can get through this together. And it's interesting because sociologists say that when a group goes through persecution together, it tightly bonds the community.

Brian Johnston [01:09:31] Yeah, I can see that Peter knows

Jared Anderson [01:09:33] what he was talking about. Or the author of 1 Peter. So Peter talks about how Christians are special. They have special chosen status. This is, you know, the very memorable line. You are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God's own people, in order that you may proclaim the mighty acts of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. So the idea is, you know, stick together, support each other, but also learn, live lives beyond reproach so that outsiders on one hand will have no reason to persecute you, and on the other hand might be impressed by your good example, you know, so the basic idea of, like, have such good, clean living that others will be interested and want to know what you know. It's kind of like missionary work, you know, live lives. And so he's one like, you shall have a reason for the hope that's within you.

Brian Johnston [01:10:27] Gotcha.

Jared Anderson [01:10:30] And he, interestingly now, Peter, in opposition to other letters, he is apocalyptic again. So he says God is coming to fix things soon. In the meantime, live ideal moral lives. So it's interesting, it's an interesting categorization to say who in the New Testament believes that we're living in a really crappy fallen world and God is going to fix it versus we are living the saved, exalted heaven, enthronement, kind of, you know, heavenly existence through Jesus.

Brian Johnston [01:11:00] Yeah, both of those themes are running through there kind of at the same time. Well, at least in the same body of work, the New Testament. Right.

Jared Anderson [01:11:10] Which again, I would challenge a little bit and say that's anachronistic. And I think that we need to a couple things. I would encourage listeners to really allow each other, each book to have its own message and point of view. And even reading the Gospels and other books in one sitting is a really cool experience and I would recommend it to anyone.

Brian Johnston [01:11:31] Oh, just like starting at the beginning and getting all the way through one of the books in the New Testament.

Jared Anderson [01:11:37] Yes. And try to ignore what other books have. And there's kind of that you get the flavor of the individual book, you know, without. So instead of saying there's this theme mixed throughout the New Testament, I would say some books have it, some books don't.

Brian Johnston [01:11:53] Oh, yeah, that's an interesting distinction. I see what you're saying.

Jared Anderson [01:11:56] There's a mixing. First, Peter also has the very interesting idea of the harrowing of hell, which is where Jesus visited the imprisoned spirits. So that's where that comes from. Moving on. Next stop is James. So the Epistle of James, of course, has special significance for LDS readers. You know, where Joseph's. According to Joseph's account, it triggered his prayer that led to the founding of the church, ultimately.

Brian Johnston [01:12:28] Very familiar.

Jared Anderson [01:12:29] James 1:5. So the pseudepigraphy of James is subtle.

Brian Johnston [01:12:35] What's a pseudepigraphy?

Jared Anderson [01:12:37] Oh, sorry. Pseudepigraphy is writing in a false name. So the letter of James claims to be written by, like, James, a servant of the Lord. But most likely the author is drawing on the tradition of James, the brother of the Lord, who is the head of Jerusalem. Okay, so Jesus's family came to be, or James especially became to be, came to be, influential in the history of the Jerusalem church. Again, scholars are divided whether James could have dictated this or not. Like, as a Galilean peasant, he probably wouldn't be literate. But it is interesting that the Epistle of James presupposes a Jewish Christian worldview, so we at least have the Judaism on the side. So, and one really, another interesting thing about the Epistle of James is, again, it's pretty subtle, but it is clearly opposed. I just said subtle. Clearly, it seems that it's opposed to Paul, like James. Without calling Paul out, he mentions specific examples and ideas that Paul talks about and then confronts them. Okay, so this is a scriptural sermon in the form of a letter. Like, it's not a real letter. And the message of James is to live well over half the verses with a command. So live like this, do this, urges the audience to hold, have a firm faith that will enable them to deal with trials and result in moral integrity and loving actions. So James is one of the most socially conscious works in the New Testament. So this is James. You know, faith without works is dead. And so this is why Luther did not like James. He didn't really want it in the New Testament. He called it an epistle of straw, but it's not. Paul and James are not as Opposed as we think. It seems that James was addressing people's misunderstanding of Paul rather than Paul's message himself.

Brian Johnston [01:14:46] Okay, I can see that.

Jared Anderson [01:14:48] Yeah. So for Paul, Paul is saying you don't need to live the Jewish law, but James is saying you really need to live moral. The moral law, you know, you need to live moral lives. But Paul would agree with that.

Brian Johnston [01:15:02] Right?

Jared Anderson [01:15:03] You know, so it's a false, it's a false tension. But James has some good stuff, you know, James 1, 26, 27. If any think they are religious and do not bridle their tongues, but deceive their hearts, their religion is worthless. Religion that is pure and undefiled before God the Father. Is this to care for orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself unstained by the world. So really good moral social implications that all of us can learn from a

Brian Johnston [01:15:29] code of morality, but not specifically Jewish law.

Jared Anderson [01:15:34] Right? Well, not keeping the Jewish law like circumcision, dietary code and so forth. But again, it does seem that James presupposes a Jewish Christian worldview. He's just emphasizing the moral aspect of it. Okay, next stop, the end of the world.

Revelation and Apocalyptic Literature

Brian Johnston [01:15:52] Revelation.

Jared Anderson [01:15:52] We're at Revelation. Revelation was written about 95 CE. So as we said, very interestingly, not the end, you know, not the last book written in the New Testament. So Revelation is called either Revelation or the Apocalypse of John. It comes from the same word in Greek, which means an unveiling. Like when you draw a curtain back and reveal what's behind it.

Brian Johnston [01:16:17] Okay.

Jared Anderson [01:16:19] The thing that you cannot call this book is Revelations.

Brian Johnston [01:16:23] Revelations with an S. With an S.

Jared Anderson [01:16:26] It's one of my pet peeves. It stopped me from buying a cool Bible books tie. So Revelation, the book of Revelation has of course had a tremendous influence on the history of Christianity. People have literally died over this idea, you know, that Revelation predicts the end of the world.

Brian Johnston [01:16:50] Oh, it's huge. And I know it's been huge. Not only is it huge now, it has been huge at other points in the past where they were sure the world was going to end.

Jared Anderson [01:17:01] The Left behind series, very, very popular. Hal Lindsay in the 80s had a book called the Late Great Planet earth that sold 10 million plus copies like it was crazy. It was the best selling book of like most of the 80s. So really captured. Revelation is a very influential, really captured the imagination of Christians. So it's understandable the way that it describes, you know, the way Revelation reads that most have read it as a blueprint for the end of the world. People have literally founded religions on this idea. You know, books have been written about it. People have worked out the historical correspondences with the details of Revelation in incredible detail. But here's the deal. This is not how the author intended it to be read.

Brian Johnston [01:17:53] This is not how the author intended. They were not intending this to be a blueprint for people 2000 years in the future to understand what the end of the world was. No, that's the very unexpected way of describing it.

Jared Anderson [01:18:07] And there are implications for that that I will. I will let the audience ponder on. So the apocalypse. Revelation is. Well, first, the genre of apocalypse is intended to encourage faithful believers to be faithful in the midst of tremendous opposition during a time when things can't seem like they could get any worse. And again, this reminder that God is in charge, he is going to conquer, he is going to establish a new heaven, a new earth.

Brian Johnston [01:18:38] Right. So these are written generally in a context like that, like to help people out with that sort of situation in their life.

Jared Anderson [01:18:48] Yeah. And it's really. In this sense, it's really beautiful. And so it doesn't need to be a blueprint for the end of the world in, you know, taking it on its own. If you happen to be part of a religion that's founded on that idea, you know, might cause more problems. So here are the elements of apocalypse. The genre. Apocalypse is a. It's usually pseudonymous, which means, you know, written in the name of someone else. Revelation. Revelation is not. Revelation is some prophet named John. It has bizarre symbolic visions. So Revelation seems really trippy, you know, with like, the dragons and the women and the trumpets and the seas and,

Brian Johnston [01:19:28] like, scrolls and all that stuff, you

Jared Anderson [01:19:32] know, eating scrolls and stuff. So it's supposed to have these symbolic visions that are over the top, and there are these repetitions. You know, things repeat again and again and again. And so if you read Revelation really carefully, the world gets destroyed multiple times.

Brian Johnston [01:19:49] Right.

Jared Anderson [01:19:49] Like the world is destroyed and then we keep going. So that. That's an indication that we're not intended to believe it as some, you know, very clear beginning to end story about the end of the world. And so they kind of don't allow a literal reading, if you read closely. But the apocalypse, the genre is. It's motivational, you know, keep the faith. Hang on. The Book of Daniel is an apocalypse, and it's triumphalist, which means God is in charge. He's going to win. You're on the right side. So again, the basic message is things are looking really bad now. God is in charge. He's going to overthrow the current era of darkness, and he's going to establish a new creation of perfection and peace. And. Well, I want to end on that note, but a couple interesting points.

Brian Johnston [01:20:38] Just a real quick question. Who was it written for then? And, I mean, I don't want to draw you too off track, but, yeah, I mean, if it's not written for us in our day, who do scholars think it was written for?

Jared Anderson [01:20:52] It was written for people at the time of the author, you know, because he thought the world was going to end very soon. And he said, hang in there. And this is. This is how it's going to look. And this is. So here's a real indication, the number 666. Should we talk about that for a minute? Since that's one of the most infamous, probably.

Brian Johnston [01:21:19] Well, not infamous. One of the most famous parts of

Jared Anderson [01:21:22] Revelation, and it's entered popular culture so profoundly. So this actually predicts the return of the kind of psycho Emperor Nero. So Nero was the emperor who persecuted the Christians in about 64, the year 64. It was probably during this persecution, as best we can tell, that Paul and Peter were killed. So in the. Let me know if I need to clarify this. These are Greek. Revelation is written in Greek, but in the numerical equivalent of Hebrew letters. So Aleph equals 1, Bet equals 2, Kaiser Neron. So Emperor Nero equals 666.

Brian Johnston [01:22:13] Okay.

Jared Anderson [01:22:14] If the N is left off because the N is not required. It's a Greek thing. It equals six, one, six, which, interestingly, some manuscripts have. So 666. You know, it's not the Pope. It's not George Bush, it's not Reagan, it's not Obama. It's not, you know, it's not anyone you want to make a thing. It's Nero, the Emperor Nero, who is a bad, bad emperor who severely persecuted the Christians. And so there's this fear that Nero was going to raise from the dead and come back before the end of the world and kind of persecute people again.

Brian Johnston [01:22:46] Right. And that. That makes sense for a context, you know, where the Christians were persecuted that severely. You write an apocalypse like Revelation because it just seems like the end is near.

Jared Anderson [01:22:58] Right. And to clarify, the Apocalypse was not written in 64. It was written in, like, 95, where there was other persecution. And they were just saying, maybe this is like Nero coming back from the dead.

Brian Johnston [01:23:10] Well, that's what I mean in that, that time frame, you know, I'm not talking about like a year or two, but those decades that the Christians were really severely persecuted until they finally converted the Roman Empire, right?

Jared Anderson [01:23:24] Yeah, and it got really bad right before Constantine. A couple other interesting tidbits that'll be, you know, juicy bits of information for listeners. The Mark of the Beast was a symbolic mockery of the way that saints are marked and sealed. So, for example, the phylacteries, you know, the little boxes with prayers in them, that Tefillin that Jews wear when they pray, that's why it's saying that the evil ones will be marked in the forehead and the arm, because that's where you have your prayer, your little prayer boxes. The two prophets who minister in Jerusalem in Revelation 11. Interestingly, tradition. So these are in the history of interpretation, these were two prophets and probably what Revelation meant by it. The author, two prophetic figures who were going to return before the end. And they were either Moses and Elijah or Enoch and Elijah.

Brian Johnston [01:24:24] Interesting.

Jared Anderson [01:24:26] So they would minister for 1,260 days. Okay, so basically, to sum up, predicting the end of the world does not add up. There are detailed theories about specific events. Choose and spin, spin the meaning, twist it into presuppositions. But if you read carefully, it just doesn't really work theologically. Could this be true anyway?

Brian Johnston [01:24:56] Maybe.

Jared Anderson [01:24:57] But it's useful to take it seriously for what it is. At the same time, Revelation really is beautiful. So I'm going to read one passage from the end. Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth for the first heaven. And the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. And I saw the holy city, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a voice, a loud voice from the throne, saying, see, the home of God is among mortals. He will dwell with them. They will be his peoples, and God himself will be with them. He will wipe every tear from their eyes. Death will be no more. Mourning and crying and pain will be no more. For the first things have passed away. And the one who is seated on the throne said, see, I am making all things new.

Brian Johnston [01:25:50] Yeah, that's some beautiful poetry. I mean, it's. And even if it's not a blueprint for something chronological, that's going to happen, those ideas are very profound and meaningful

Jared Anderson [01:26:04] and encouraging and sublime. So I think that we can take that. So, okay, we're going to really zip through the rest of the books of the New Testament. So next we're going to come to Jude. I would challenge any one of our listeners to name one thing from Jude. It's not. It's not a. Well, Known book. Okay, so it's an odd little book. It's possible but not likely that it was authored by another brother of Jesus. But the author is familiar with a wide range of Jewish and Christian literature. Interestingly, he quotes first Enoch and the Assumption of Moses, which are these kind of non canonical but considered sacred by some books of Jewish tradition. Most of Jude is name calling, saying nasty things about ungodly false teachers who deny our only master and Lord Jesus Christ. Hard to say. It was written probably Palestine, you know, anytime between 50 and 120 whether it was written really by Jude. So, you know, just name calling of people who disagreed with the author. Okay, Second Thessalonians. Now, Second Thessalonians is one of the deutero Paulines. So the ones that scholars are kind of divided on whether or not it could be written by Paul. So, you know, the ones against are a bit more convincing. The message is related to 1 Thessalonians. So if you remember, you know, now we're back to the beginning. So First Thessalonians people are like, oh my gosh, you know, some people from our community died. What's going to happen? And Paul's like, don't worry about it. Jesus is coming right away. And the people who are dead will be caught up, but the rest of us who are alive will, you know, go to meet Jesus. It'll be good times. Well, Second Thessalonians, the problem is the community was so certain that Jesus was coming right away. You know, they took the message of First Thessalonians to heart that many have quit their jobs. So they're waiting around on their recliners, you know, sipping whatever and saying, okay, you know, good times. Jesus is going to come back right away. And then other members of the community had to support them. So the major point of Second Thessalonians is to convince the congregation that the end was not yet and in fact, really impressive apocalyptic events would precede Jesus return. So this is where you get that idea of there needs to be a falling away. The KJV says apostasy, that there's this Antichrist figure that would come and establish a throne in the Jerusalem Temple. So lots of dramatic stuff. So basically he's saying, oh, we have plenty of time before Jesus returns.

Pastoral Epistles and Pseudonymous Writings

Brian Johnston [01:28:51] Right. So don't quit your day job. Yeah.

Jared Anderson [01:28:54] So lots is going to happen. You know, buckle in. So interestingly, whether or not Second Thessalonians is authentic, it proves that people were forging letters in Paul's name because Second Thessalonians, which might in itself be a forgery. Says in 2nd Thessalonians 2. 2 that someone shared a letter claiming to be from him. Do you see how that kind of spins you around in circles?

Brian Johnston [01:29:18] Oh, right.

Jared Anderson [01:29:20] But like there's this. There's this forgery that we know is a forgery that's called the teachings of the 12 apostles. That says within it, be careful about writings that say they're written by the 12APost, but they're not because ours is the real one. Yeah, it's kind of a way to throw the dogs off the scent, as it were. So it says, you know, do not be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either in spirit, by word or letter, as though from us to the effect the day of the Lord is already here. So here. So the main point, you know, is lots of interesting things are going to happen before Jesus returns. Don't quit your day job. Other suspicious points about Second Thessalonians are, Pseudo, Paul says that he taught the Thessalonians about all these dramatic things that are going to happen when he was with them. But First Thessalonians seems really different. Another thing is there are a lot of parallels between 1st and 2nd Thessalonians. And it's easier to explain if 2nd Thessalonians was using 1st as a template rather than Paul writing both.

Brian Johnston [01:30:17] Right, that makes sense.

Jared Anderson [01:30:18] Finally, in Second Thessalonians, Paul says, you know, Paul in quotes says that he ends the letter with a greeting written by himself instead of through a scribe. This is the mark of every letter of mine. This is the way I write. But it's not including First Thessalonians.

Brian Johnston [01:30:35] Mm.

Jared Anderson [01:30:36] So you can just see, you know, this is kind of like CSI New Testament, you know, where.

Brian Johnston [01:30:43] So do you scholars have one of those like holographic sand, three dimensional things that. Where you can turn everything around in

Jared Anderson [01:30:50] your laboratory, like smart boards and stuff?

Brian Johnston [01:30:53] Yeah.

Jared Anderson [01:30:53] Don't get me on a tangent. There actually are really cool technology, like digitized manuscripts and testing on their caves. But yeah, it's like the detective work of New Testament scholarship.

Brian Johnston [01:31:04] Yeah.

Jared Anderson [01:31:06] Jumping to first Timothy, and we're in the late near 100 with these different books that we're talking about right now. So the end of the first century, First Timothy, pretty much all scholars agree Paul didn't write it, but the presupposed situation is very explicit. And again, remember, these are forgeries. These are books that say, I, Paul wrote this letter. And in fact, they protest that. Sometimes they're like, no, really, I'm Paul. Which is interesting with that being in The New Testament. So first Timothy and Titus gonna put those together. Basically they are at Paul's advice on how to run the church. So Paul tells Timothy to get false teachers under control. Perhaps another Jewish based Gnosticism. So Gnosticism is a worldview. It was popular as a form of early Christianity where they thought they were already saved through correct knowledge of how things really were. Sometimes I joke that LDS intellectuals, perhaps like the Mormon stories audience are really like Gnostics because some of them go to church but they really know that it means something different and they believe different things. But that's what the Gnostics were. They went to church, they read the same scriptures, but they had this whole other system of myth and belief. So there's, and then there's lots of counsel with the church. And the interesting thing is both Timothy and Titus presuppose a much more developed church structure than existed in Paul's time. If you'll notice in Paul's genuine letters, he never addresses a leader. I mean there's Philemon, who was the dude who owned the house, you know, where the church met. But other than that he has to appeal to the entire congregation. You know, if there was a bishop of Corinth, don't you think he would write to the bishop at Corinth and say get your saints in line?

Brian Johnston [01:33:06] You would think so, but he doesn't

Jared Anderson [01:33:09] because there were no leaders. It was a spirit led environment where Paul just says, you know, go by the Spirit and let the Spirit dictate who says what, when and how you lead and who's in charge. And that way of doing things does not survive very long.

Brian Johnston [01:33:28] No, not for making an enduring, long lasting, you know, religious organization.

Jared Anderson [01:33:35] Yes. So in Timothy and Titus you have bishops, deacons, other leaders. You have more oppression of women. You know, it's okay for women to speak up when the world is ending, but better shut them up. So first Timothy is the one that perhaps you were thinking of that has the infamous, I quote, let a woman learn silence in full submission. I permit no woman to teach or have authority over a man. She is to keep silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet she will be saved through childbearing, provided they continue in faith and love and holiness with modesty.

Brian Johnston [01:34:14] Ouch.

Jared Anderson [01:34:15] Yeah, so you have.

Brian Johnston [01:34:17] Which doesn't really jive with a female apostle that you talked about earlier.

Jared Anderson [01:34:21] Yeah. And Phoebe, Phoebe's another big shot woman in Paul's community you know, Junia and Phoebe and women prophesying. And now you have, you know, shut up and maybe ask your husband when he gets home.

Brian Johnston [01:34:34] Change Titus.

Jared Anderson [01:34:35] We're not going to spend a lot of time on it. Reads like a shortened summary of first Timothy. Kind of same thing, you know, proper social order. Here's my advice to widows, to old men, young, old women, young men, young women, slaves, Be moral, be good. Basically like that. Okay, deep breath.

Guest [01:35:00] Thank you for joining us today on Mormon Stories Podcast. To discuss this podcast with others, please check us out@mormonstories.org to keep the podcast alive or to join our support community, please consider a tax deductible donation today@mormonstories.org music for this podcast was provided by Clayton and Sky Pixton. The Mormon Stories logo was generously provided by studiocase.com thank you for listening.

Guest [01:35:30] Come, little child and together we'll learn of his commandments that we may return home to his presence to live in his sight Always, always to walk in the light Father in heaven, we thank thee this day for loving guidance to show us the way Grateful, we praise thee with songs of delight Gladly, gladly we'll walk in the light.

The Gospel of John and High Christology

Part 4 of 5 · Ep. 242

John Dehlin [00:00:03] Mormon Stories Podcast is a production of the Open Stories Foundation. All donations to Mormon Stories are fully tax deductible and go directly towards keeping the podcast alive and towards building a community of support for Mormons like you. To support the podcast or to join the community, please become a monthly subscriber today@mormonstories.org

Guest [00:00:26] Teach Me to Walk in the Light

Jared Anderson [00:00:33] so, you may have noticed that we haven't talked about the Gospel of John yet.

Brian Johnston [00:00:37] You know, I was almost gonna say that we had accidentally skipped over it. So how did. How did we get to that? How did we get to John now?

Jared Anderson [00:00:48] Well, that should teach you to question the person. I'm just kidding. I love it.

Brian Johnston [00:00:54] I love it.

Jared Anderson [00:00:55] I love it when my students question me. Not that you're a student, but I love it when people question me in general.

Brian Johnston [00:00:58] Yeah. Because really, I thought I was thinking at one point that we accidentally skipped it, but how does that fit into the chronology?

Jared Anderson [00:01:06] Yeah, remember, we're going in rough chronological order, so the Gospel of John fits in. Now, after all, it's one of the latest books. It's after Revelation, which is really interesting.

Brian Johnston [00:01:17] That's right. That's right.

Jared Anderson [00:01:19] So John is written after Revelation. Not to say they were written by the same person, because they're not.

Brian Johnston [00:01:24] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:01:24] Oh, one interesting thing I forgot to say about Revelation is it is the only book in the entire New Testament where scholars think the author's native language was Aramaic.

Brian Johnston [00:01:35] Oh, interesting.

Jared Anderson [00:01:37] So that's just interesting to chew on. So whoever wrote Revelation did not write the Gospel of John. Wow. We are not going to be able to do. So we're going to do what's called the Johannine literature. Isn't that cool? Now you know how to use the adjectival form of John. It's Johannin.

Brian Johnston [00:01:53] I'll use that all the time at parties for sure.

Jared Anderson [00:01:56] Yeah. So what do you think of the Johannin sections of the New Testament?

Brian Johnston [00:02:01] Yeah.

Jared Anderson [00:02:02] So the Gospel. Gospel and Epistles of John are this closely related book of. You know, we have the Gospel of John, we have first, second, third John, the Epistles and letter or letters. And those are very broken up in the New Testament.

Brian Johnston [00:02:19] Wow.

Jared Anderson [00:02:20] The Gospel of John, we're not really going to be able to give it at all the credit it is due because John is such a theologically rich book. It has the most known and most translated verse of the entire Bible, John 3:16. So, wow. How do we approach this? First, we need to say that John is radically different from the synoptics.

Brian Johnston [00:02:46] And the synoptics are Matthew, Matthew, Mark,

Jared Anderson [00:02:49] and Luke present one picture. John produces a very different picture. And most scholars think that John is independent. Ultimately, it goes back to similar traditions about John, but they're very different. And I'm going to return to John versus the Synoptics when we cover the historical Jesus. So in John, the basic message is the most important thing to understand is Jesus's identity. Jesus is the word of God. He is the revelation of God. He. It is through Jesus that we know God. So basically, all of John is this meditation upon the identity of Jesus.

Brian Johnston [00:03:32] Interesting. Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:03:35] And John's Jesus is super Jesus. He is supremely in control of all time, at all times, and of all time. Thomas saying, my Lord and my God at the end of John is the only time Jesus is explicitly called God in any of the Gospels. Jesus says, you know where? As in the God in the Synoptics, we have, let this cup pass from me. In John, Jesus says, this cup my father gives me, shall I not drink it? Why on earth would I say something like, let this cup pass from me? As if. And then he says, that's like, valley girl Jesus.

Brian Johnston [00:04:15] Yeah. He says, give me this cup and actually make it a double.

Jared Anderson [00:04:20] Yeah, exactly. He's like, boom, you know, I am going to. And in fact, the death of Jesus, the death is not the emphasis. It is Jesus is lifted up. You know, it's just that first really hard step back to heaven, because Jesus is the man sent from heaven. He comes down, he teaches us what we need to know about his identity, and then he goes back to heaven. And that's how Jesus works.

Brian Johnston [00:04:45] One more bad pop reference. Matthew, Mark and Luke had Jesus Christ, and John has Jesus Christ Superstar.

Jared Anderson [00:04:52] Yeah. So let's see. So Jesus is just so different. And I want to just highlight the fact that John is literally very sophisticated. So he. He plays with irony. He plays with multiple meanings. And basically the idea, the trope, you know, the pattern is that someone misunderstands Jesus. And Jesus has. That gives Jesus the opportunity to wax eloquent for chapters at a time about his identity, you know? So one joke is like, his disciple says, hey, Jesus passed the bread. And Jesus says, did you know that I am the bread? And the disciples, Like, I just wanted the bread. And Jesus says, let me talk for hours about, you know, the bread of life. You get Nicodemus saying, well, born, born again. How can someone crawl back into his mother's womb and be born again? And Jesus, it's really the word anothen in Greek has a double meaning, meaning again. And from above. And so Jesus is really saying, you need to be born from above. You need to be born with a spiritual, heavenly birth in order to understand me. Whereas Nicodemus is like, I don't get it. And then the Samaritan woman at the well says, oh, you want to give me indoor plumbing? You know, when Jesus says, I have water, you don't need to come to the well. She's like, awesome, that'd be great. And he's really talking about spiritual water. So once again, there's all this misunderstanding and it leads Jesus to talk about his identity, right?

Brian Johnston [00:06:25] And that's a theme that plays out

Jared Anderson [00:06:26] over and over, over and over again. And so for John, Jesus is the pre existent word of God. And here's where it gets really dramatic is in these ox I am sayings. And the, the English translation obscures these by saying things like I am he, especially in the King James version. But if you look, the, the he is in italics, meaning it's not there in Greek. So Jesus says, you know, I am the door, I am the shepherd, I am the gate, I am the life, I am the light, I. I am everything. But he also occasionally will say these statements just like, I am. So there's this argument that he has with the Jews where he's saying, I'm greater than Abraham. And they're like, you're so young and you're saying you're greater than Abraham. And he says, before Abraham was I am. And so this goes back to Exodus 3:14, where Moses is having his burning bush moment. And he says, well, what's your name? Who should I say sent me? And it's tricky translation, but in the Greek it's ehe sha ehiyeh in Hebrew, but in Greek it's ego eimi ho on. I just pull up, bust out the other languages to show I know what I'm talking about.

Brian Johnston [00:07:46] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:07:47] In. I'm kidding. Yeah, kind of in Greek. So it means I am the one who is. I am the is one. And so this idea of I am, this proclamation I am in John is the declaration that Jesus is God.

Brian Johnston [00:08:05] Am I remembering the story wrong? But did they like pick up stones or something and then he disappeared or am I. Yep. Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:08:12] No, that's how it played out. That's how it played out. So, and you don't understand this without this background. And it's the most dramatic and wow. I mean, John just differs from the synoptics and his miracles are more dramatic. He. We'll get back to that when we talk about the Historical Jesus. I'll bring up John a little bit more, but just to finish off our discussion of John. Again, so much richness. It's also anonymous. John pretty much no chance he wrote it. There's this fantastic theory, I think, that Mary Magdalene was the authority behind the Gospel of John. Pretty cool.

Brian Johnston [00:08:48] That could be interesting.

Jared Anderson [00:08:50] So two more points before we move on. We have to move on reluctantly because John is so rich theologically. So when the people who go to arrest Jesus show up in the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus is in charge. He has the first word. He says, whom are you seeking? And they're like, jesus of Nazareth. And Jesus says, I am. And they fall to the ground.

Brian Johnston [00:09:15] Wow. Yeah.

Jared Anderson [00:09:16] And he repeats it. He says, who are you looking for? They say, jesus of Nazareth. And he says, I told you, I am. And I think this is kind of cool theologically because. And this is one of my few personal contributions to this whole thing, you get this idea that they are asking for the human Jesus, you know, Jesus of Nazareth. And the declaration is, you have found the God of Israel. Pretty cool stuff. So he declares himself God. One more fun little tidbit from the Gospel of John is. So my favorite story in all of the New Testament is Mary Magdalene's appearance to Jesus. And we don't. In John 20, and we don't get it in the English translation, because the English you get kind of the idea that it's an intimate story, you know, where she's. She's weeping, she's crying, she's distraught. She says, you know, give me his body so I can take care of him.

Brian Johnston [00:10:18] This is at the tomb at the very end.

Jared Anderson [00:10:20] Yeah.

Brian Johnston [00:10:21] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:10:21] There's the whole, like, don't touch me. And you're like, what? That doesn't seem to fit in. So I will just throw out there, as a teaser, my translation of the passage, which is stop embracing me.

Brian Johnston [00:10:36] Yeah, that's kind of a neat way of looking at it.

Jared Anderson [00:10:39] And I'll just say that the Greek backs me up, and we can talk more about that later. So, again, tearing our focus away from John, you know, we'll have another opportunity to talk about it at length. Let's get to the Epistles of John. So the letters of John were part of the same community of the person who wrote the gospel, but not the same person. Okay, so with the. With the Johannine community or tradition, you have the beloved disciple who's the authority behind the gospel. Then you have the person who wrote the gospel using other sources. Then you have the editor who edited John and tacked on chapter 21, another teaser. And then you have the person who wrote first, second, third John, which are all the same person. I mean, sorry, like the same person wrote all the letters of John.

Brian Johnston [00:11:33] Okay. The same one person. It seems like one person wrote them, but it was not John.

Jared Anderson [00:11:39] It was not the same person who wrote the gospel, but someone very closely connected. So this is interesting as far as the history, the history goes. So it's. It seems you'll notice that the Gospel of John has this really high Christology, to use a little New Testament term.

Brian Johnston [00:11:54] Just explain that real quick. High and low Christology for everyone.

Jared Anderson [00:11:58] Once again, low Christology emphasizes the human aspect of Jesus. So you could say that the Gospel of Mark emphasizes the human aspect of Jesus, whereas John emphasizes the divine aspect of Jesus. And from the letter of First John, it appears that people took that and ran with it.

Brian Johnston [00:12:17] The high Christology.

Jared Anderson [00:12:19] Yeah, there's actually a schism, a break in the community where some people were so excited about the divinity of Jesus that they denied his humanity.

Brian Johnston [00:12:32] Yeah, I've read some stuff about that. Those were like big points of contention back in the very early Christian church. How human, how divine was he? All that stuff.

Jared Anderson [00:12:45] Yep. The Council, the Council of Nicaea was a really big. Trying to figure that out. For literally hundreds and hundreds of years, Christians were bludgeoning each other and debating about what is the exact relationship. Well, first it was kind of what is the relationship of Jesus himself? You know, humanity and divinity. And then relatedly, what is the relationship between Jesus the Father? And then, of course, Trinitarian eventually came out, which is a mystery. And I can't figure it out.

Brian Johnston [00:13:13] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:13:15] So, you know, I kind of say that tongue in cheek, but it really is. It's kind of the official position. It's a mystery. We don't understand that they're like three people, one substance, that different denominations think it differently. So the interesting thing is First John is a persuasive essay saying, don't listen to those people who left us who don't believe that Jesus was human. But. But first John says the people who deny that Jesus came in the flesh. And the author is just emphasizing that Jesus really did come in the flesh, the flesh and the blood. He warns against the people who disagree with him. And there's a lot of this beautiful love language in one John where he says, beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God. Everyone who loves us is born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, for God is love. You Know, really there's no fear in love. Perfect love casts out fear. So really appealing stuff. 2nd John the Elder, the author calls himself the Elder, writes to the community this time. And Second and Third John are real letters. Whereas the first was like a persuasive essay. You know, he writes to the elect lady, a symbol of the church, encourages them to basically reject and not talk to the heretics in First John, you know, so don't even, don't even talk to them. Don't, don't let them talk to you. Don't let them try to persuade you to their opinions. Do not allow them in your house. So that's right.

Brian Johnston [00:14:41] Kind of hinting at that some kind of schism that may have happened within the community.

Jared Anderson [00:14:45] It's stronger than hinting. I mean, it presupposes it. It pretty clearly happened. That's the best explanation of the information we have. And Third John, it seems like poor Elder, you know, he's Dear John, sorry, it's pretty bad. He gets some pretty bad news. So the Elder writes, he hears the news that there's this guy Diotrephes who is refusing hospitality to anyone associated with him. And so there's this another schism in the church, you know, so people are once again trying to say, no, do not listen to this guy who's writing you letters. Do not, you know, we have another view. And so the Elder needs to write this guy named Gaius and say, you know, bolster my opinion, bolster my supporters. Jesus is God's emissary. So again, this whole idea of like listening to people's letters, listening to people sent from that. And again, support my side of the argument, not theirs, right?

Brian Johnston [00:15:49] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:15:50] So Raymond Brown, who is a fantastic New Testament scholar, he wrote this book called the Community of the Beloved Disciple that goes through the entire history of this community and really interesting window that we have through the New Testament. And one other interesting suggestion is that the people who left the Jonian community either became or combined with the people who wrote the Gnostic literature, like Nag Hammadi.

Brian Johnston [00:16:17] Oh, okay, interesting.

Jared Anderson [00:16:19] Like the gospel, Philip, because there's a lot of similarity there. We have one book to go, Brian.

Brian Johnston [00:16:25] One. Which one did we leave out?

Jared Anderson [00:16:29] You know, and then a roller coaster will have to stop. And anyone who wants to listen to this again can take the ride again. So Second Peter was the very last book written in the New Testament. You know, not quite as nice a climax as Revelation. But there were little teaser, again, there were some books included in the New Testament that were written after Second Peter, but they're not in our current New Testament. Okay, so early copies of the New Testament had different compositions. So writing style was completely different than the First Peter's. So no connection between the two other than Peter's name. A major part of Second Peter has taken over Jude. You know, the nasty little name calling letter Second Peter wasn't very popular. The first reference to it was in 220 cell. The author really goes out of his way to claim that he is Peter. He's like Simon Peter, servant, apostle of Jesus Christ. Here, let me talk about the transfiguration. Really? Really. Here's my signature credit cards. So Second Peter is primarily a warning against Gnostics again. And these people who know too much, maybe our listeners will relate. And they have creative mythologies, creation narratives. Again, knowledge saves people. And they have unusual interpretations of scripture used to support their beliefs. So the author of Second Peter says, no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation. You know, you need the official interpretation, official understanding. And one interesting thing is that this author has to apologize for Paul. There's this intriguing little passage that says, so also, our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given to him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters, there are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unsubscribe unstable twist to their own destruction as they do the other scriptures. So Second Peter is fighting over the role of scripture in these different debates in the diverse nature of Christianity. Another interesting argument. Is he. So Second Peter is kind of. He takes a middle line between, okay, future and realized eschatology, which is a fancy. So eschatology is the end times, the end of the world. So future eschatology is, you know, the kingdom of God is coming. Realized eschatology is. It's already here. So the author says the end of the world has been delayed in order to allow the wicked to repent. So that's how this author deals with the delay. And here is where we get the influential idea that a thousand years is like one day to God, which has.

Brian Johnston [00:19:10] That's where that comes from, huh?

Jared Anderson [00:19:12] Yeah. So that's, you know, people have crafted a lot of ideas from that. So any concluding thoughts or comments? That's the whirlwind introduction to the content of the New Testament from a historical perspective and rough chronological order.

Brian Johnston [00:19:28] Wow, that was a whirlwind tour. And I know it's hard to. There's so much more there. It's a huge and wonderful collection of books. I know it's hard to kind of compact it into such a small time frame for a podcast. I think we were also going to talk a little bit about the historical Jesus, like who was Jesus that scholars see. Can you talk about that a little bit?

Searching for the Historical Jesus

Jared Anderson [00:20:02] Yeah. And just want to thank listeners for hanging on with that. And I think it's definitely worth the time it took to give that overview of the New Testament because again, it's unfortunate that most of readers will not have any other access to that type of perspective on the New Testament. You know, there's a Catholic, there are study Bibles, you know, there are Catholic editions with great introductions and footnotes and so forth, but we, we don't have that. And so I thought it was very valuable to kind of give an overview of how the scholars see. How scholars see the New Testament as a whole.

Brian Johnston [00:20:40] Right. Because the only options are to buy a whole bunch of really thick books or literally take a college class from somebody like you, which a lot of people just aren't going to be able to do.

Jared Anderson [00:20:52] Yep. So this is, you know, getting a New Testament professor in a podcast. So kind of like fast food, which I don't eat anyway. The historical Jesus. This is a really controversial issue and a lot of believers have had a hard time with the historical Jesus. And you know, as a preview for my own history, when I first started grad school, I was actually threatened by the idea of the historical Jesus. I wanted to avoid classes on it. So first we need to define the terms. The historical Jesus asks what was Jesus really like during his life? Not what is theologically true about Jesus. Who is, who is Jesus today? You know, if Jesus really is Lord and Savior, how can we know him personally? This is, who is the Jesus that we can reconstruct historically using the methods of history? What can we know?

Brian Johnston [00:22:01] Right, yeah, that would be interesting, I think, for people to get a picture of.

Jared Anderson [00:22:07] Yeah. So John Meyer, who wrote this multi volume book called A Marginal Jew about Jesus, he has this fun hypothetical situation about what the historical Jesus is, where he says, imagine that you locked up a New Testament scholars, one Catholic, one Protestant, one Jewish and one atheist, and said, we are locking you with food and drink, everything you need in the Harvard library until you come out with a statement about who Jesus was while alive.

Brian Johnston [00:22:42] And all those perspectives have to be, have to agree at least on whatever points they come out with.

Jared Anderson [00:22:48] Right. And so that's a clever way of saying that doing history and an academic approach to religion, and in this case, Jesus is one that anyone can agree on. No Matter what, your individual beliefs now

Brian Johnston [00:23:02] not agree on the meaning or the religious implications or the spirituality aspects, but just historical facts, things that are probable.

Jared Anderson [00:23:14] So with, in fact, as you said, we're going to talk a little about playing the game of history. So the historical Jesus here, this is. How do you apply the rules of history to Jesus? So one problem is that history can only weigh probabilities and improbable things happen every day. I think, I'm not a big sports person, but I think about that pitcher who hit a bird when he was pitching and it like exploded or something. That's crazy. You know, that's. What are the probabilities?

Brian Johnston [00:23:45] You couldn't do it if you tried, but you hit enough baseballs and eventually it's going to happen.

Jared Anderson [00:23:50] Right? And so do you see the problem with that? That on one hand historically improbable things happen all the time, but on the other hand, history can only weigh probabilities. So that's some of the limitations. But as we talked about the conversion of Paul, on one hand it's very improbable, but on the other hand there's enough evidence, including Paul saying it himself, that we can, we can believe it. Okay, now what I want to say is that we can use the criteria and put together the most probable story that is the most likely to correspond with how things happened. Even though what really happened is forever lost. There is a bit of philosophy of history for you. So we get, you know, once something passes, we can never, you know, even what happens now, we cannot perceive anyway, but we can approximate. And the historical approximation is closer to what really happened than what people usually believe or accept. Okay, so I think I've mentioned before like one of my friends who's a lawyer and he, he's basically like, well, because of the limitations of history and scholarship, I don't need to believe it. And basically I can cling to my Sunday school approach and I would critique that. I mean we're free to do whatever we want within reason and especially as far as what we believe. But I think it's better, it is a more excellent way to understand why historians approach things the way they do.

Brian Johnston [00:25:19] So not saying that historians are the only way, but maybe including that in with faith perspectives can maybe provide a richer experience.

Jared Anderson [00:25:32] There can be a both hand approach. And you know, granted historians do also have preconceptions, views, agendas. But you know, there are better and more fair historians than others. And so, but what I want to talk about is the evidence and the game because you don't need to agree with a particular scholar in order to understand how they work. So you don't need to like a particular basketball player to understand the rules of the game. So let's talk about sources for the historical Jesus. So in order to know about Jesus, if you're not so fortunate as to have a vision of him or something, you. You need to learn about him in some way. And we've talked about how the picture that people have about Jesus is some sort of gospel soup with a healthy dose of what your parents veggietals, your religious leaders taught you. What would Jesus do? Bracelets. You know, it's a very different view of Jesus. And so we're stripping that all away and we're saying, how do we know what Jesus did and said? Yeah, and people would think, right. I mean, the logical thing is to think that this was the son of God. Many billions of people on the world would probably agree with the fact to one degree or another that the coming of Jesus was pretty much the most important event ever to happen in the history of the world.

Brian Johnston [00:26:59] Sure.

Jared Anderson [00:27:00] Believing Christians. So you would think that this had to be a big deal. You know, surely the ancient Anderson Coopers of the day would have gotten out their notepads and written it down, right? And this is how Matthew tells the story. The wise men from hundreds of miles away come to Herod and are like, is Jesus? And they look in their scriptures and like, oh, you know, let's talk about it. You know, the Gospels present Jesus as a big deal. And so it's shocking to realize that we have almost no sources about him.

Brian Johnston [00:27:34] Wait, like outside of, you know, the Gospels and the letters and all that stuff, is there, is there anybody else that even says, yeah, I met this guy, you know, I met Jesus when I was walking through the fruit market or something.

Jared Anderson [00:27:50] Not quite like that. Now, I will take. It's worth a moment to say that I think the theory that Jesus did not exist is absurd.

Brian Johnston [00:27:59] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:28:00] And it does not hold up to the historical method very well. I think it's very sensationalistic.

Brian Johnston [00:28:06] Yeah. A little bit too much of a stretch maybe, right?

Jared Anderson [00:28:10] Yeah. It just doesn't fit. But that said, it is true that taking like the first hundred years of sources, because sources after that are not, not likely to have historical basis, but just legendary basis and be dependent on other sources. So let's give ourselves 100 years after Jesus's death and say, what do people say about, you know, so Mel Gibson's passion, the Christ not valid. You know, we're not accepting that as evidence for what Jesus didn't did and said so within 100 years. First let's take pagan, so Greek and Roman sources. Roman is what they come down to. So the Roman Governor Pliny in 112 CE says Christians worship Jesus as a God, which is interesting but doesn't tell us anything about Jesus. Then Suetonius around 115 says riots in the 40s were instigated by a Chrestus. Now we don't even know whether that's really a misspelling of Christ Christus in, you know, it's the difference of one letter or it could be some due to named Chrestus. So Tacitus is the only one that we get information about Jesus himself. So Tacitus, one of the most famous Roman historians, writing again about 115, he talks about Nero's persecution of Christians. He says Christus, from whom their name is derived, was executed at the hands of the procurator Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius. And that's in his annals 1544. And then he talks about superstition. So that's good stuff. And I think just that probably confirms that Jesus existed, but not much more. No new information. So moving to Judaism, there is one Jewish historian, Josephus, who does mention Jesus.

Brian Johnston [00:29:56] Would he have been around to have actually met him or is he just hearing about him?

Jared Anderson [00:30:01] No, he was just hearing about him. He was born around when Jesus died. Interestingly, he wrote toward the end of the first century, he was involved in the Jewish war. In fact, he was a traitor in the Jewish war. And this he went over to the Romans when there was a suicide pact. So he mentions Jesus twice, once. So he writes this book called Antiquities of the Jews, which is this big long multi volume account from Adam to his day. And so in antiquities, in book 29.1 he talks about that, he's talking about James, James the brother of Jesus who was stoned to death. And so he just says he's impressed by James and he says James, who was the brother of Jesus, who is called the Messiah. So just an incidental in passing reference to Jesus, which is still closer to,

Brian Johnston [00:30:54] you know, closer in time and place.

Jared Anderson [00:30:56] Yeah, he's definitely talking about our guy. And he's closer in culture. So here's a big one. So in antiquities, 3-3-18, it says now there was at this time Jesus a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wondrous works, a teacher of such men as received the Truth. With pleasure, he drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, who for he appeared unto them alive the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold. These and 10,000 other wonderful things concerning him and the tribe of Christians so named from him, are not extinct at this day. So what's the problem of a Jewish historian writing that?

Brian Johnston [00:31:41] Yeah, I was just going to ask. This is not a Christian writing this. Right.

Jared Anderson [00:31:46] It's a Christian copying it.

Brian Johnston [00:31:49] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:31:50] Because. So the Jews did not. They weren't really excited about Josephus, but because he was a traitor. But the Christians were. So the Christians were the primary people who copied Jesus, copied Josephus's writings.

Brian Johnston [00:32:00] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:32:00] And so here's what scholars think. Some scholars want to throw out the whole thing and say, you know, this is the testimony of Jesus or Josephus.

Brian Johnston [00:32:07] And there.

Jared Anderson [00:32:08] There is this later tradition that Josephus was converted to Christianity and he became the bishop of Jerusalem and all that good stuff. But there are also traditions that Pilate converted to Christianity. In fact, he's an Ethiopian saint. Okay, I know, ironic. So. But moderate scholars say, do you know what? So most of this really interesting quote could be seen. You know, it could be understood why a Jewish scholar, Jewish historian would write this. And it could. It's also understandable why a Christian who wet his pants over the fact that a Jew talked about their Lord would help it along.

Brian Johnston [00:32:49] Sure.

Jared Anderson [00:32:49] So there's two steps to that. So most scholars think that Josephus wrote something like, at this time, there was Jesus. He was known as a wise man, kind of a technical term. He was known to work miracles. Jews and Gentiles followed him. Pilate was the one we had some involvement in that condemned him on the cross at the suggestion of the principal men among us probably would be questionable. We don't know whether it was from Josephus or Christians. And he still has followers. You can see why a Jewish historian would write something like that.

Brian Johnston [00:33:22] Right. And maybe the other stuff about how he was resurrected and appeared after the third time. He was Christ.

Jared Anderson [00:33:29] You can't call him a man. That was the Christians bulking up, you know, buffing up this testimony. Okay. And that's it. That is it outside the New Testament. The end. Now, let's go to the New Testament. Paul, surely Paul talks about. Talks about Jesus. Paul talks about Jesus all the time. Right. The Problem is he does not talk about Jesus while he was alive. He is all about Jesus, death and resurrection.

Brian Johnston [00:34:01] Yeah, Paul didn't ever know Jesus while he was alive.

Jared Anderson [00:34:04] He didn't. And unfortunately remember how we talked about that? Some of Paul's opponents were the ones who had the trump cards with knowledge of Jesus traditions. So I really wish that's unfortunate because Paul, I bet, knew quite a bit more about Jesus life. I mean, he was a Christian a good 10, you know, almost 20 years before we get his letters. And surely he learned a lot more about Jesus. But because of the limit, because of the circumstances of his letters, he didn't have the opportunity to talk a lot about it. Okay, so here's, I'm not going to give the references, maybe in another format I can, but here's what we know. Everything Paul says about Jesus's life, it can be put on a three or five card. He was born of a woman. One wonders what the alternative is.

Brian Johnston [00:34:50] I was just going to ask.

Jared Anderson [00:34:52] He was born as a Jew. He had brothers. One of his brothers was named James. He ministered to the Jews. He had 12 disciples. He instituted the Lord's Supper. Paul gives us the wording of the Lord's Supper. Someone, a scribe sticks in that wording into Luke. He was betrayed or handed over by God. He was crucified. Believers should. And then he said that believers should not get divorced and that preachers, missionaries should earn their living preaching the Gospel. So we should support missionaries. And that's it. That's what Paul says about pre death Jesus. Post death Jesus, Paul becomes an expert.

Brian Johnston [00:35:29] Okay, but we're focusing on like a person Jesus, not the religious idea.

Jared Anderson [00:35:37] What was Jesus like? What did he do during his life?

Brian Johnston [00:35:41] What did he eat for breakfast in the morning? Right.

Jared Anderson [00:35:46] So basically we are stuck with the Gospels. The Gospels that are in the New Testament are our very, very best, most valuable sources, even for the historical Jesus. So even though it's reading the Gospels against the grain to try to sift out the historical Jesus, they are our best tools. So it's kind of like dismantling a fridge or dismantling a car. You know, we're dismantling the Gospels and saying how can we put together this historical Jesus? And here's, here's something I want to emphasize. When you are playing the historical Jesus game, you have to choose either team Synoptics or team John. You cannot have it both ways.

Brian Johnston [00:36:34] Okay, I like how you said that.

Jared Anderson [00:36:36] I know another, another popular culture reference. So like John and the Synoptics are so different. So once again, as we said, in the Synoptics, Jesus talks about parables. He talks about the coming kingdom. In John, he talks about himself. He talks about how you need to accept him in John. Like, this is really interesting. For example, in the Synoptics, Jesus cleanses the temple in the beginning of his ministry. In John, he cleanses at the beginning of his ministry. In the Synoptics, he cleanses it at the end of his ministry. Yeah, why it's important, it's a bigger deal than listeners will even understand, is because in the Synoptics, it was his temple tantrum. That's not my term, but I love it. That triggered his death.

Brian Johnston [00:37:37] Right. He did that. And then people said, okay, we really got to take this guy out now.

Jared Anderson [00:37:42] Exactly. Because so Jesus getting all upset about the temple and talking about how it will be destroyed made the Sadducees mad. And the Sadducees were not only the ones who were in charge of the temple, who got their incomes from the temple, but they were the ones closest to the Romans. They were the ones who had all the power. So if you get all upset about the center of religious culture, someone is going to say, who is this guy and how can we get rid of him? Whereas in John, what triggers him being put to death is him raising Lazarus from the dead. And the leaders say, oh my gosh, you know, the entire nation is going to be converted. We got to do something about him. Can't someone kill this guy already? So, but the question is, how do we sift the material? I mean, I think that even educated and thoughtful, especially thoughtful readers in the New Testament will be like, now if they're trying to think logically and historically, you know, theologically it's all good. But, you know, now what's going on? But historians have come up with criteria and we're going to talk about the criteria of how to, how to construct the historical Jesus. So. Okay, one more comment about the Gospels. It's important to understand that all Christian literature is a mixture of pre resurrection and post resurrection understanding of Jesus. So we're going to say that the historical Jesus falls into the category of pre resurrection understanding. And so this is the way Jesus was understood while he was alive. And then there was the way Jesus was understood after he was alive. And I would submit this, that Mark and the Synoptics are the closest to the historical Jesus and John is the closest to the theological Jesus. So the last thing I'll say about this is that is John is the most theologically true, but least historically True portrait of Jesus.

Brian Johnston [00:39:55] Oh, that's a good mind bender there.

Jared Anderson [00:39:59] Yeah. So the way that I, that I would explain John is this community is writing decades after the fact. They have so much theological knowledge and understanding. And so they basically say if we knew then what we know now about Jesus's identity, what would his ministry have looked like?

Brian Johnston [00:40:21] And then they wrote the Gospel of

Jared Anderson [00:40:23] John and that's the Gospel. So that's why these things are so different. And so like, if you believe in Jesus, if Jesus really is all this stuff, and that's why John is so theologically powerful, then all that is true, right? I mean, academically, historians and scholars can't say one way or the other, but theologically it's the most rich in Christian theology, but it's the weakest in history. So let's talk about criteria, let's talk about the rules of the game. So, and I want us to imagine that we are in a court. You know, again, we have csi New Testament, and so I guess we have our cool little smart boards right now. So the issue is how do we, how do we play this game? So one of the criteria is the criterion of independent attestation. So this is like witnesses. If one person says that he or she saw something, we might believe it. But if 10 people say they saw the same thing, we can be more confident.

Brian Johnston [00:41:23] Yeah, that makes sense.

Jared Anderson [00:41:24] This is where it really gets into some fun shows, you know, if they're not colluding. But one problem is it's hard to tell if sources are independent. And an information that's only attested in one source can still be true. But that said, if we can be certain. So for example, the fact that Tacitus. We're pretty sure Tacitus did not read the Gospels. So we have Tacitus who's independent of the Gospels. The Gospels say Jesus was crucified. Tacitus said Jesus was crucified under Pilate. Paul says he's crucified. We can be pretty sure he was crucified.

Brian Johnston [00:42:01] Okay, that makes sense.

Jared Anderson [00:42:03] That's how independent attestation work. Okay, now the second criterion we're going to talk about is the criterion of embarrassment or dissimilarity. And the idea is that we tell things because either they are true. I don't like true. It's such a messy, messy, heavy word. Okay, so we say things either because they're accurate or we want them to be accurate. Yeah, I like that.

Brian Johnston [00:42:28] That's a better description.

Jared Anderson [00:42:30] So the two year old who says, I did not eat the chocolate cake is saying that because he wants it to be accurate,

Brian Johnston [00:42:40] he's got chocolate frosting all over his mouth.

Jared Anderson [00:42:43] Yeah. So one example that I use is sometimes if I forget my attendance sheet, I'll say, who was here last week? Now, when my students raise their hands and say, I was here last week, I accept their word. But when my students say, I was not here last week, I have even more reason to believe them because they are acting against their interest.

Brian Johnston [00:43:07] Yeah. And that makes for a more higher confidence than what they're saying is true.

Jared Anderson [00:43:12] Right. So the weakness of this is that obviously a lot of things that are continuous with the tradition are also true. But you definitely. So once you're reading a book and you can see the agenda of the book, there's a reason to doubt, to be suspicious of that. And so you would require even more confirmation before that. So usually if something is clearly in someone's agenda. So the way this criterion works is if a tradition or a saying is against the interest of later Christians, it is more likely to be true. So, for example, Christians had a hell of a time explaining why the Messiah got crucified.

Brian Johnston [00:44:01] Yeah, that was a little awkward.

Jared Anderson [00:44:03] Right. They also had a hard time. And by the way, the criterion of embarrassment is a really good argument for the historicity of Jesus.

Brian Johnston [00:44:13] Well, that's a big plus then.

Jared Anderson [00:44:15] Right, because otherwise Christians would need to invent traditions they don't like and then explain them away.

Brian Johnston [00:44:25] Right, Good point.

Jared Anderson [00:44:26] It's absurd. So, anyway, another tradition that later Christians did not like, and we can see how this is handled in the different books, is that Jesus was a disciple of John the Baptist. Yeah, I've heard that Jesus was a follower of John the Baptist. So usually the person doing the baptism was greater than the person who was being baptized. And so that's why, on one hand, we can trust that Jesus was baptized by John. On the other hand, we can distrust all the excuses for why Jesus was baptized by John.

Brian Johnston [00:45:06] Interesting.

Jared Anderson [00:45:07] Where in Matthew he's like, what? Oh my gosh, I am not worthy to baptize you. You should be baptizing me. So things like that, probably not historical. Another tradition that shines is Judas Iscariot. This idea that one of his closest disciples betrayed him. And similar sayings like Luke 22:30, where he says, the 12 will judge the 12 tribes. This is said before people knew. So sometimes when the Gospel writers are writing about Judas, they're like, and Judas was the one who had a demon in him. Judas is the one who betrayed him. So that's later hindsight But a saying of Jesus where He says the 12 of you will judge the 12 tribes, that is pre betrayal information. So it's interesting. Okay. And then just wacky sayings like hate your father, hate your mother in Luke 14:26, you know, things like that. Past that because again, they wouldn't, they wouldn't like it. So the final criterion that we're going to talk about is contextual credibility. So the weakness of this criterion is that we, it's a bit circular because we need to understand the context before we can understand whether it's credible in the context. You know, it would not take a sharp scholar to look at a supposed document that says Jesus was driving around in his BMW. You know, I think that pretty much anyone could say, hmm, I don't think that quite fits in.

Brian Johnston [00:46:51] But that's probably not accurate.

Jared Anderson [00:46:53] There were probably not dated to the time of Jesus. So but interestingly, the Gospel of John in an earlier time, like before the Dead Sea Scrolls, people, scholars were saying, ha, the Gospel of John could not be written in Palestine because this is a Greek way of thinking, not a Jewish Palestinian way of thinking. But then we found out the Dead Sea Scrolls or we found the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Dead Sea Scrolls from Palestine. Jews sound a lot like John. So even though it's like the circular type thing, you can still make good arguments. And so a couple examples of this are in John 9 there's this interesting passage about anyone who says that Jesus is the Messiah is going to be kicked out of the synagogue. Well, in the time of Jesus, no one would be kicked out of the synagogue for saying someone is a Messiah. In the first Jewish war, Simeon bar Kokhba was declared a Messiah by a rabbi. You could believe different things and still be a good Jew. But it was the later historical development where the tension became more and more between Jews and the followers of Jesus, the believers in Jesus and the non believers in Jesus. And so they are projecting their reality back into the time of Jesus.

Brian Johnston [00:48:12] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:48:13] And another issue with contextual credibility is we can look at things like the cause of Jesus's death, where Mark portrays Jesus as being crucified as a revolutionary. So the sign above the cross that says Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews, I think that's really historically solid. And what that would have been, and the gospels say this is it would have been the charge that was laid against him. So Jesus was crucified for claiming to be Jesus, King of the Jews.

Brian Johnston [00:48:48] Okay, I see how that makes sense.

Jared Anderson [00:48:50] It's very contextually credible. Like everything that we know about. The context fits. I mean, like the raising of Lazarus from the dead. There's a philosophical question about whether being raised from the dead is possible. We're not going to handle that. You're not going to deal with that. But it's the issue of did people understand Jesus enough to freak out about him because he raised from the dead? It's not contextually credible, or it's less contextually credible. And given the fact that we have this other nice tradition that's all packaged and says, oh, I fit within the context, it makes more sense. And so this is what I mean when I say you have to choose Team Synoptics or team John when it comes to the historical Jesus.

Brian Johnston [00:49:39] Okay, that makes sense.

Who Was Jesus? Key Historical Conclusions

Jared Anderson [00:49:41] So to finish up this discussion of the historical Jesus, let's talk about who this historical Jesus seems to be. Jesus was born in Nazareth, not Bethlehem. Not going to spend the time to back this up. Not many people knew about him. He became one of the John the Baptist disciples. So he was a follower of John the Baptist. After John was imprisoned or put to death, Jesus began his own ministry.

Brian Johnston [00:50:16] Is that where the accusation comes up that he just took over the John movement?

Jared Anderson [00:50:23] It's not even that, because the Gospels and Acts portray the followers of Jesus at tension with the followers of John. So surely John portrays some of the followers of the Baptist going over to Jesus. But there were definitely still people who believed in John for a long time and even thought he was the Messiah.

Brian Johnston [00:50:44] Okay, so what are some other things that we would know about Jesus?

Jared Anderson [00:50:48] So Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet. So Jesus was a prophet. He probably saw himself as a prophet who believed that the, that God was going to use Jesus as a special servant. He would have a special role in the kingdom. But the kingdom of God was going to come in a very real, tangible way. And that Jesus ministry showed the inbreaking of the kingdom and how it was going to be. So one of the best descriptions. This is from Bart Ehrman. I love it. So Jesus lived as if the kingdom had already come.

Brian Johnston [00:51:24] Okay. Yeah.

Jared Anderson [00:51:25] And so Jesus would, would work these amazing things and he would speak and act. He disregarded social order because there was a new social order. He hung around with the outcasts because even these outcasts would be the ones who would have special roles in the coming kingdom. He would, you know, he healed because there was no, you know, philosophical issue, but healing was very believed in in the ancient world. So we'll allow that even from an academic perspective. Let's see. Interestingly, he probably would be comfortable with the idea of the Son of God, which is not divine. In Judaism, the title Son of God means someone who's human, but who has a special relationship with God, like a king or a priest. Interestingly, we do not know if Jesus would have accepted the title Son of man, because what we have is we have Jesus talking to the high priest in Mark 14:62, where it says, you will see the Son, I am the Messiah, and you will see the Son of man coming in the clouds of glory.

Brian Johnston [00:52:38] Yeah.

Jared Anderson [00:52:40] And so basically, it could be, you know, it's hard. Definitely by the time of the gospel writers, by the time the gospel fighters come around, Son of man is definitely used for Jesus. But the question is, did Jesus call himself the Son of man? And so it seems that this idea of calling Jesus son of man and that this is a cosmic deliverer, as can be told by coming in the clouds of glory, you know, and here's. This is a bit interesting as far as self conception. It seems probable that Jesus considered himself the Messiah, which means a special servant of God, because. And here's how the argument works. Later, people who followed Jesus, they had to turn their scriptures on their head to claim to prove how Jesus was the Messiah. Okay, so if Jesus himself never claimed to be messiah, it's hard to see why people would work so hard to stick the title, to make the title fit him.

Brian Johnston [00:53:48] Oh, yeah, I see what you're saying.

Jared Anderson [00:53:49] Otherwise they'd just be like, oh, yeah, he wasn't the Messiah. You know, so that was interesting. So probably what happened was Jesus was preaching this coming kingdom, and he went to Jerusalem and enacted this symbolic prophetic action against the temple, you know, turned over a few tables, made a bit of a fuss. And again, I want to emphasize that probably no one really knew much about him. You know, he probably achieved some popularity around Galilee. Maybe he visited Jerusalem a couple times, if he was able to, you know, given his socioeconomic status. Oh, by the way, the word carpenter, it means someone who works with their hands, probably both stone and wood, maybe. But he became an entrant preacher, which means he abandoned his home, his family, everything connecting him to this era. And he preached the coming kingdom. What else? So he probably, you know, got the Sadducees mad at him. Judas was probably the one who tipped off the Jewish leaders. What happened was probably the Sadducees got angry. The Sadducees asked around, who is this guy? What's he doing? Judas tipped them off that Jesus was teaching privately at least, that he was the Messiah. The Sadducees told Pilate that there was this troublemaker who claimed to be king. And Pilate's like, okay, kill him.

Brian Johnston [00:55:14] Right? Because Pilate was just kind of matter of fact, was known for just killing people, even without a trial.

Jared Anderson [00:55:23] So any, any questions. I can think of one big glowing topic as far as the historical Jesus. But any questions that you have about the historical Jesus before we.

Brian Johnston [00:55:30] Any tidbits like, was he literate, was he wealthy, was he poor, anything like that.

Jared Anderson [00:55:37] You didn't ask the biggest one.

Brian Johnston [00:55:40] Married. Oh, was he married? Yeah. And how many wives did he have?

Jared Anderson [00:55:49] Oh, please don't even.

Brian Johnston [00:55:51] You started it.

Jared Anderson [00:55:53] No, I didn't. I was asking perfectly legitimate questions from a historical standpoint. Polygamy was not practiced by the Jews at that time. Well, never mind. King Herod is an exception. So, yes, some of the elite, for political reasons, would have had multiple wives. But that's not why you asked that question.

Brian Johnston [00:56:14] Yeah.

Jared Anderson [00:56:15] Okay, so Jesus would be. Or his father Joseph was a tradesman, you know, some sort of carpenter, stone mason or something. They would. Galilee was not. Or Nazareth, no one has heard of, was agriculture. Fishing was important in the. In that area. He would have been lower class. But, you know, one of the more. He wasn't like a fisherman or a farmer, which was like the lowest, you know, above slaves and stuff. But it was a pretty poor village. Was he literate? He probably. You can't get much into that, but. So he probably. He knew Aramaic. The issue was multiple sources agree that he knew the Scriptures quite quite well.

Brian Johnston [00:57:09] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:57:10] And it makes sense that this is the type of scripture reading that would have emerged from personal study rather than just hearing it lots and lots and lots because he's so, he can. He's so fast and quick with, you know, arguing with people who are experts in the law. So the idea is he didn't have his law degree, to use a parallel, but he probably read the law books and studied. So he probably read the Scriptures because he's arguing with lawyers on their own grounds and he knows his stuff that

Brian Johnston [00:57:40] makes a lot of sense. And if you're from some rural village and you're just listening to stories, you're not going to pick all that stuff up because.

Jared Anderson [00:57:47] Right. So, yeah. So on one hand, very few people were literate in the ancient world. You were basically only literate if it was your job. Like if you were upper class, you're at some sort of training, and then you were literate if you had. If you needed to. There are exceptions. You know, Paul obviously He's an artisan on the level of Jesus, but he was born outside Palestine, whereas Jesus being born inside Palestine, his first language would be Aramaic, which is similar to Hebrew. He probably read Hebrew. He probably knew enough Greek to get by, like, not much. Whether he knew how to write is an interesting question that we're not going to touch on. Let's see, he probably was married.

Brian Johnston [00:58:35] Maybe just explain that if you can, just for a second, why that's probable.

Jared Anderson [00:58:39] Well, most people got married young, in their teens, and as a religious, so like John Meyer talks about how the level of someone's knowledge of the Scriptures in a case like Nazareth, you know, lower class but fervent, you know, very religious, equaled their likelihood to follow, you know, traditional Jewish customs. And it would have been shocking for someone to be about 30 years old without being married.

Brian Johnston [00:59:13] If you lived that long and you were a man, you were married, you were married.

Jared Anderson [00:59:18] And also people called him rabbi and rabbis, you could not be rabbi without being married. And that's, that's a bit of a weaker argument because Jesus was not officially a rabbi. People just called him Rabbi because he. And so the final thing I can see a realistic reconstruction would be that Jesus got married sometime in Nazareth. He had a family, he got caught up in the Baptist movement and then he went.

Brian Johnston [00:59:49] Could he have ended up abandoning his family to become an itinerant preacher?

Jared Anderson [00:59:53] Yes, that's what I was just about to say. Either either he abandoned his family to become this preacher with no home, no bounds, or his family was with him still as part of the movement. And just as a fun way to end this segment, I think that Jesus was either married to Mary Magdalene or someone else. And it's kind of, it's kind of funny because that's saying nothing on one hand, but I think that you can make an argument that he was married to Mary Magdalene.

Brian Johnston [01:00:31] Sure. And, like, it could, it was possible.

Jared Anderson [01:00:34] Right. Like, Magdala was close enough to Nazareth that they could have, you know, anyway, so that's, that's fun stuff. So interesting about the historical Jesus. But that's a little bit of. And I imagine our listeners, you know, bells are going off and they want to know more, which is a good thing. But, you know, so that's a bit of how scholars approach the question of what Jesus was really like. And, you know, for fun, listeners can take these criteria, independent attestation, criterion of embarrassment or dissimilarity, contextual credibility, and start looking at the Gospels from that, from that perspective.

Brian Johnston [01:01:09] Okay, well, thanks a lot for explaining Those little bits about the historical Jesus, I think that was kind of really enlightening. Okay, so, Jared, we've had a good opportunity to talk about different aspects. We've gone through all the different books, the Gospels, the letters of Paul, all that stuff. Got a good feel for that. Maybe you could explain a little bit how we have the book that we hold in our hands today.

Jared Anderson [01:01:39] That's a great question. This is actually the one that drives my entire career. My publishing goal is to write popular books, college textbooks, everything about how the Bible came to be. Because the Bible is so popular and people, you know, a lot of people do read it, but even the people who read it have no clue where it came from. So. And I think that's ironic, to be honest. And I will try to remedy that over my career. So what I'm going to try to do is let's imagine we're looking at the modern Bible that's in front of us. And I'm going to take it from a bit of a broader perspective than the one that many of our readers would have. So I'm going to talk with about general modern translations and what is going on here. So by modern translations, I'm talking about the New Revised Standard Version, the New King James. Well, New King James doesn't really fit in the same category. The New International Version, the New American Bible, the New American Standard Version, the New Jerusalem Bible. So there are a lot of modern translations.

Brian Johnston [01:02:50] I noticed you're not including the King James Version in that.

Jared Anderson [01:02:53] No, because it's not a modern translation. Okay. So I think that enthusiasts and loyalists to the King James Version have a bit of a distrust toward more recent versions. I remember when I was on like a one week mini mission that they did for a while and Marlon Jensen was my mission presenter, which was pretty awesome. So I remember missionaries making fun of the New International Version and I was like, ha ha. You know, cave of robbers is so much less godly than den of thieves. You know, who could ever translate it that way? But I now own about 60 translations of the Bible and most English ones. So it needs to be understood that modern translations are done by committees of scholars based on a reconstructed text of the Greek New Testament using the best manuscripts we have available. There has been an explosion in the 1900s, like late 1800s, 1900s, of all of these New Testament manuscripts that are centuries older than anything we had before. And so modern scholars can approximate what the original manuscript said much, much better than we could couple hundred years ago. So each of these translations have their History. The new Revised Standard Version is the one that most academics like, edited in like 1990, which was based on the revised standard version of 1952, which in turn has its own heritage. There's a new King James version in 1982, and that was updated. Like it updates the language. It gets rid of the, the thous and all that, but at the same time, it's not based on better manuscripts. And so by better I mean older, again, closer to the originals, not late mixed together harmonizing aspects. So for example, late manuscripts would make Mark and Matthew kind of squish them together and make them sound more alike, whereas the older manuscripts would be more authentic. So it all depends on what you want. The new International version is really popular with evangelical Christians. It's 1973, been revised often. It's probably the most readable of the translations, even though it sacrifices historical accuracy sometimes for theology.

Brian Johnston [01:05:32] Okay.

Jared Anderson [01:05:35] And a lot of these translators are compromises between like a word for word versus thought for thought. Because when you're translating, you have the description or the choice between do I make something that sounds like a foreign document? Or do I make something that sounds like Paul is your next door neighbor? And so there's that continuum of is this going to sound foreign? Is this going to sound weird? How much of the original do I maintain versus how close to the target language do I maintain? And usually a really nice translation. I like the studying translation. The idea of translation is that a good translation should cause the same effect, you know, emotional and intellectual, that the original did. So like, in order to translate poetry, you need to be a poet. So perhaps to translate scripture, you should be a prophet. So we then we have Catholic translations, we have the New American Bible, the New American Standard Bible, the New Jerusalem Bible, the New Living translation. Oh, and counter to what some people think, modern Catholic translations go back to Greek and Hebrew just like all the other modern do. It's the older Catholic translations that go back to Latin.

Brian Johnston [01:06:52] Right.

Jared Anderson [01:06:53] The new Living Translation in 1989, really strict evangelical perspective. But that's a paraphrase, not a translation. So translation is where you try to. You're actually looking at the original language, however freely you choose to translate it. Whereas paraphrases quite often, I mean, sometimes people have knowledge of the older languages, but they're looking at in English and they're saying, how can we put this into really easy, catchy terminology? So like Eugene Peterson's the Message, maybe some people have heard of, that's another translation. So that's kind of the modern era of translations. And all those go back to the Revised version of 1881. I actually own one of those. I got it on 15 bucks on eBay. And I emailed this nice old lady that I got it from. I'm like, do you realize that what you have is really valuable? She's like, oh, enjoy. So that was fun. So 1881 is where these New Testament scholars reconstructed the New Testament based on the better manuscripts they had at the time. And because, like, 1800, some were found in the 1900s, but 1800s was several important finds as well. And then so everything after that, the Revised Version on, is based on these better manuscripts, a better edition of the Greek New Testament. So once we go before the Revised Version, it's not the same. And so we might as well go straight to the King James Version.

Brian Johnston [01:08:26] Okay.

Jared Anderson [01:08:27] Now, the King James Version was finished in 1611. That is a long time ago.

Brian Johnston [01:08:34] 400 years.

Jared Anderson [01:08:36] You have a couple this year, actually. I'm really bummed. I can't go to London to celebrate, but it's expensive. So we have a couple different issues. First, the English language has changed tremendously since, well, the 1500s, really, as we'll find out. And I have this theory that even when people think they understand the King James Version, they don't.

Brian Johnston [01:09:01] Yeah, I see what you're getting at. I mean, really, the language has changed a lot.

Jared Anderson [01:09:06] Yeah, like, when we read the Gospels, we can, like, fudge through it, kind of like, oh, I kind of understand what it means, that when it says virtue went forth out of Jesus, it's not talking about virtue the way we mean. They're talking about virtue, but they don't really know. But once you get into, like, some Paul or the Old Testament or Jeremiah or Ezekiel, you are lost. Like you do. We do not understand the original King James Version. So the King James Version was put together. King James championed it. There was a council that suggested it. Interestingly, he used the Geneva Bible himself. But there are committees of scholars from Oxford, Cambridge, and Westminster for the New Testament. They mostly relied on the work going back to Tyndale, William Tyndale. Awesome guy. We'll talk about him in a minute. And so, really, when we read the New Testament of the King James, we are going back to the 1500s. And once again, it is just such a different form of the language. And then beyond that, you also have corruptions and changes in the manuscripts themselves. So once again, just to clarify, when we read the New Testament in English, we are reading the translation of a committee based on a reconstructed Greek Text of other scholars. And so interpretation and personal choice is coming in. And they know what they're talking about for the most part. But you know, all these layers of interpretation. And so the King James Version is based on an even, you know, older scholars and older knowledge and later manuscripts, ironically, because they didn't have access to the other things. So pre King James version from the 1500s, we had the Coverdell Bible, which was the first complete Bible published in English ever. We have the Geneva bible in like 1560. 1535 is Coverdell 1560, which was really anti Pope. You know, all the people ran away to Geneva. We have the Reims douay, which was 1582-1610. This is the Catholic equivalent of the KJV. And this was directly from Latin. And then moving back in time, there's William Tyndale who translated the New Testament in 1526, and he was put to death for translating the Bible in English.

Brian Johnston [01:11:28] Wow.

Jared Anderson [01:11:30] Yep. So it's ironic that by 15, by, you know, within 10 years of his death, it was cool. You know, it's fine to translate the Bible into English. But when he did it, William Tyndale was the very first person to translate the entire New Testament. He did the. And the first chunk of the Bible into English using the original Greek and Hebrew.

Brian Johnston [01:11:53] Well, what do you mean by original Greek and Hebrew, though?

Jared Anderson [01:11:56] Okay, as we'll see, the New Testament was originally written in Greek. Jesus spoke Aramaic, which is a very different language, more linked to Hebrew. But up until William Tyndale, Latin was the base for all the translations. So we'll go back in time. Martin Luther did his German translation, which kind of did for German what the KJV did for English. You know, very influential on the modern form of the language. And both Martin Luther and William Tyndale used Desiderius Erasmus Greek New Testament, which was put together in 1516. And Erasmus was a very enterprising fellow who basically whipped together this New Testament. He was trying to be this other edition. He's trying to be the, you know, get the scoop, get the first one to do this edition of the Greek New Testament. So lots of errors. One interesting little example that readers might or hearers might be interested in is there's something called the Johannine comma, which is the only verse in the. It's an in the Bible that supports the Trinity. And this was in Erasmus. It's 1 John 5, 7, 8, where it says, you know, the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, the Holy Spirit are one. And this was not in any Greek manuscript, and it actually comes from the Vulgate. And one of Erasmus friends was like, you didn't have this really important passage that confirms the Trinity. You need to have it in. And he's like, you show me a Greek manuscript that has it and I'll put it in my next edition. And his friend forged a Greek manuscript and gave it to him.

Brian Johnston [01:13:48] Oh, nice.

Jared Anderson [01:13:50] And the funny thing is, Erasmus, Greek New Testament, had this footnote that said, I do not think this is authentic. It was added in, but it made it into the King James Version.

Brian Johnston [01:14:00] Right.

Jared Anderson [01:14:01] Because the third edition of Erasmus Greek New Testament is the one that led to the KJV and some of the modern translations. So just all these interesting little things that don't represent what was in the original. So before Erasmus, you know, who did the Greek New Testament, it was basically Latin, you know, for a good. For a good thousand years. And the Latin Vulgate was the Bible used and mostly ignored through all the Middle Ages.

Brian Johnston [01:14:32] What do you mean ignored? Just because nobody could read it except priests or whatever.

Jared Anderson [01:14:36] No one did read it. They just. They didn't really. You know, there was the role of the Bible in worship, but there was no emphasis on actually reading the Bible.

Brian Johnston [01:14:49] Yeah, they had tradition, they had their liturgy.

Jared Anderson [01:14:53] Yeah, they had the liturgy so that read out parts of the Bible. But as far as what we think of as Bible study, it just was not really a place. It didn't have a place even priests probably would not have read an entire Bible.

Guest [01:15:07] Interesting.

Brian Johnston [01:15:08] Yeah. Wow.

Jared Anderson [01:15:09] Little bits. So Jerome put together the Vulgate in about the, you know, the fourth century, so the three hundreds. And this had the old Latin, and before that there was the Greek New Testament that was translated into all these cool languages because the Greek was spoken in the more civilized centers of the Roman Empire, but then in the more rural areas, people spoke the older languages. So you had translations in the first couple hundred years into Syriac, which is really close to Aramaic, Latin, Coptic Gothic, Armenian, Georgian, Ethiopic, Arabic, Sogdian and so forth. And I own gospels in all of those. So that's translation. Now, going back into time, we need to think about canon. So canon, we're not talking about artillery here, we're talking about C A N O N. And this is an authoritative collection of books. So we're moving from the adventures of translation and how the Bible made it into English to how the New Testament got put together.

Formation of the New Testament Canon

Brian Johnston [01:16:22] Yeah. What were they going to even include in it in the first place?

Jared Anderson [01:16:26] Why are the books of the New Testament in our New Testament. And why are others left out? You know, perhaps readers could read some, some books and think that they could be better left out. And they're also really interesting books left out that perhaps could be argued, should be put in. So the Council of Trent was in 1546, and this is actually the first time that the entire church said, okay, this is the canon. These are the books. Anyone who doesn't accept them is cursed, you know, and not following the traditions of the church.

Brian Johnston [01:17:02] And that's as late as 1546.

Jared Anderson [01:17:05] Yes. Now, granted, the New Testament was established long before that, but that was the official, you know, stamp boom. But some books hovered on the sidelines for quite a while, like Hebrew revelation, some of the later epistles. In the New Testament, revelation wasn't fully accepted till like, the year, like the thousands, you know, before 1100, there were the councils of Hippo and Carthage, who approved our New Testament as we had them in like, the late three hundreds. And then basically for a couple hundred years, the process was that local leaders would give their opinions about which books were canonical. So this may surprise some listeners. Athanasius, the bishop of Alexandria, Egypt, in 367, was the very first person to make a list that matched our New Testament.

Brian Johnston [01:18:09] Okay.

Jared Anderson [01:18:10] So it took about 300 years for this flexible understanding of Scripture and what made up the New Testament to match what is in our New Testament.

Brian Johnston [01:18:25] Yeah, that's quite some time after these events and all these letters are circulating around before somebody decides, well, this is more or less kind of what we think is right.

Jared Anderson [01:18:39] Yep. And so before that, all we can see is how different leaders of the church and different writings, what their approach to Scripture was. So, for example, there's this really important Greek manuscript of the entire New Testament that's called Sinaiticus, which because it was at Mount Sinai. And interestingly, in addition to the books of the New Testament, it also has these books called the Epistle of Barnabas and the shepherd of Hermas. So these books that are not in our New Testament that clearly were part of this community's New Testament, factors in making canonical decisions were antiquity. It had to go back. It couldn't be written recently. Apostolicity at least had to claim, or there had to be some argument for it to be linked to the apostles, accepted widely in agreement with the rule of faith. So pretty much as one form of Christianity became dominant, they suppressed all the other texts that supported other views of Christianity. That's interesting.

Brian Johnston [01:19:43] Yeah.

Jared Anderson [01:19:44] So, for example, this interesting guy named irenaeus, in about 180 CE, he was the very first to argue for a four gospel canon that we know of. And it's really interesting how he does this. So I hope you appreciate how late this is. You know, basically when you think about Jesus, like 150 years after Jesus's death is the first time we say, oh, you should read Matthew, Mark, Luke and John alongside each other. And what's so interesting about how Irenaeus argues for it is he says the Jewish Christians only use Matthew. The Gnostics love Mark and John. The Marcionites love Luke. And so it's this idea that these quote unquote heretics, these other diverse types of Christian groups, loved these particular gospels because they supported their beliefs with it. And so Irenaeus, as a way of controlling and taming that wild diversity, said, no, you need to read it alongside each other. And in fact, the canon was a reaction against this diversity. Way to control it. And so as an example, Justin Martyr, he lived in like, or he wrote in about the 150s. So he calls the gospels the memoirs of the apostles. And he doesn't seem to know the names of the individual gospels.

Brian Johnston [01:20:59] Yeah.

Jared Anderson [01:21:01] So this is really interesting. There was this guy named Marcion and he put together the first New Testament canon. And this is like you know, 140s, 150s, so mid second century. And he came up with a really interesting theology that the Old Testament seems kind of harsh, you know, a lot. I would probably agree. And so he came up with this theology that the good God, there were two gods, a good God and a bad God. And the good God of the New Testament sent Jesus to rescue us from the bad God of the Old Testament and Judaism.

Brian Johnston [01:21:36] Whoa. Yeah.

Jared Anderson [01:21:38] So he soundly rejected the Jewish Scriptures, says that's all crap.

Brian Johnston [01:21:44] Right. Because that's all from the old bad God.

Jared Anderson [01:21:48] The bad God, he had his gospel, which was a form of Luke without the first two chapters. So it was a gospel. He had a gospel and then he had a collection of Paul. Marcion loved Paul, didn't really understand the guy, but loved him. And then Paul's letters, he edited out all of the pro Jewish references. So we have a shortened version of Luke, we have edited version of Paul's and that was the first New Testament.

Brian Johnston [01:22:16] Yeah. I was going to say, based on what you've been saying earlier about Paul, Paul was saying love is what it's all about, not the details of the Jewish law. So that would seem to fit in with Marcion.

Jared Anderson [01:22:28] Yeah. And Paul, like Paul, had to wrestle with the fact that he still considered himself Jewish. But Marcion took it, took it further. And Marcionism was really popular. And so it's interesting, some scholars think that our New Testament as we have it, was that Marcion played a role. They're like, whoa, this heretic has a New Testament we want too. So instead of just Luke, they had all four gospels. Instead of just these letters of Paul that were edited, they had their own collection. So before Marcion, you know, late. By sometime in the second century, the collection of the gospels were put together. But again, late second century, a collection of the letters of Paul were probably the beginning of the New Testament.

Brian Johnston [01:23:15] Right?

Jared Anderson [01:23:16] Those are, those are the very first. And then there were also sayings of the Lord, you know, sayings, traditions and traditions. So in our earliest new post New Testament writings, people say it is the law and the Lord. So they quote the Jewish scriptures as their Bible and then they quote the words of the Lord. And then that goes back to the fact that the earliest Christians, their scripture equaled the Jewish scriptures. So one scholar talks about how Christianity was born with a Bible in its hand.

Brian Johnston [01:23:50] Yep.

Jared Anderson [01:23:50] So that's, that's the idea. Okay, so that's collection. And so formation. We've already touched on this and I'm going to step back a minute and reverse or rather go start going forward. So instead of. It would be too confusing to keep going backwards when we talk about formation. So I'm going to start at the beginning.

Brian Johnston [01:24:11] Okay.

Jared Anderson [01:24:13] I think it could be argued that Jesus sign on the cross was the first thing ever written about him.

Brian Johnston [01:24:20] The first thing. Yeah, I see what you're saying. Okay.

Jared Anderson [01:24:23] Yeah. So Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews, was the beginning of, you know, quote unquote scripture. Obviously, you know, he taught people would repeat the teaching things, but it was pretty small. It was a very, very tiny, tiny movement at this point. So I don't think anyone would have even thought to write down his words at this point, because the world is going to end. Why write it down? You know? But oral, Oral transmission.

Brian Johnston [01:24:43] Yeah. And he, he wasn't really setting up communities and churches, so he wouldn't have been writing letters and all that stuff like Paul.

Jared Anderson [01:24:50] So all of it is oral. Then the next step was probably what's called testimonia. And these were collections of passages from the Jewish scriptures that proved Jesus was the Messiah. So it would be like proof texts, you know, these selections of passages of scripture that proved your point of view. So that was probably the earliest layer of Christian scripture. So it was Jewish scripture. But the best parts, you know, the ones that most confirmed their beliefs. Then the next step is you have. And that probably happened like right after Jesus death. So we're in the 30s right now. So 30s, 40s, we have oral traditions about Jesus's words and deeds going around, miracles, teachings, parables, controversy, narratives. And then the Passion narrative was the story about Jesus's arrest and death and so forth was probably put together pretty fast, probably influenced by liturgy. You know, the fact that they would repeat these stories in churches and then. But it's hard to date that we just know it's sometime before mark in the 60s. And it seems that Paul knows some of this too, you know, so pretty soon, like 30s, 40s, passion narrative. Then we have the sources for letters in the Gospels, hymns. There's this interesting document called Q, which is there are all these sayings, material that both Matthew and Luke have. And some scholars think this is Q. But in any case, there's some sort of like, collection of sayings of Jesus. We have this thing called the Gospel of Signs that John used. So perhaps we have other lost sources. It makes sense that Paul wrote a lot of letters we don't have. Perhaps there was literature from the Jerusalem church that got wiped out with the first Jewish war. Maybe Paul wrote to Jews or just visited them and got beat up. And then we deal with the sources we actually have. So all that was like speculation. This is what it seems is pre New Testament. So we've talked about how the letters of Paul are the very first, from like 49 to the late 50s. Paul was writing, preaching, and he was converted like 15 or so years before. Then second Timothy, Mark wrote the first gospel. Matthew and Luke both copied Mark, Luke and Acts. Now we're in the 80s, Colossians, Hebrews, James in the 80s, Revelation in the 90s, then John and the epistles, you know, 90s, 100. Then after that, toward the wrapping up the first century. Ephesians, Jude, second Thessalonians, first Timothy, Titus, second Peter, written in the first, in the beginning of the second century. Now there were a lot of Christian literature that did not make it into the New Testament. So we have the Apostolic Fathers, interesting works like the Didache, Barnabas that we talked about, the shepherd of Hermas, first Clement. Interestingly, some of the Apostolic Fathers, which is like our earliest extra canonical writings, are older than second Peter.

Brian Johnston [01:27:55] Right?

Jared Anderson [01:27:55] So it's interesting if we're only going chronology, they deserve to be in the New Testament. And then we have just tons of extra canonical literature. The Nag Hammadi Library, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Philip, the Gospel of Mary Magdalene, the Apocalypse of Peter, the Gospel of Peter. Just really a lot of rich Christian tradition and material that did not make it into the New Testament. Now that said, pretty much all of the earliest stuff is in the New Testament, you know, besides a couple examples like the Didache and First Clement that was written about the time of revelation. So, yeah, I mean, that's the wild and interesting story of how we got the New Testament. And what I want people to come away with is that it was a really complex process, you know, and I hope that my really quick overview gives that impression.

Brian Johnston [01:28:48] Yeah, I think that's a boy. I can't believe you fit that much into that small amount of time, but I think that was a really good compact summary, kind of going backwards and then going forwards again. But yeah, it's not something that just somebody wrote down. It has this whole long, rich history like you just described.

John Dehlin [01:29:11] Thank you for joining us today on Mormon Stories Podcast. To discuss this podcast with others, please check us out@mormonstories.org to keep the podcast alive or to join our support community, please consider a tax deductible donation today@mormonstories.org music for this podcast was provided by Clayton and Sky Pixton. The Mormon Stories logo was generously provided by studiocase.com thank you for listening.

Guest [01:29:41] Come little child and together we'll learn of his commandments that we may return home to his presence to live in his sight Always, always to walk in the light Father in heaven we thank Thee this day for loving guidance to show us the way Grateful, we praise Thee with songs of delight Gladly, gladly we'll walk in the light.

Jared Anderson's Personal Faith Journey

Part 5 of 5 · Ep. 243

John Dehlin [00:00:03] Mormon Stories podcast is a production of the Open Stories Foundation. All donations to Mormon Stories are fully tax deductible and go directly towards keeping the podcast alive and towards building a community of support for Mormons like you. To support the podcast or to join the community, please become a monthly subscriber today@mormonstories.org

Guest [00:00:26] Teach Me to Walk in the light.

Brian Johnston [00:00:33] All right, Jared, we've had a really good chance to get a rapid fire summary of some really excellent views from the academic world and a review of the New Testament. Now is the time where we get to finally meet, Jared, to get your personal story, which is an important part of a Mormon Stories episode. You ready for that?

Jared Anderson [00:00:58] Yeah. I mean, it's a big step because I'm someone who is very, very careful about how I present myself and who I tell what I am, very careful to adapt, you know, what I share with the audience. And so, and I, you know, with the Mormon Stories audience, I think it's a good place to open up and really share what I believe. But I have never done it in a forum like this before.

Brian Johnston [00:01:27] Well, interesting. And I know what you're talking about, but I think it's really nice, if nothing else, just to share our personal viewpoints and let other people know that there's many viewpoints out there. So anyways, let's just dive right in. So tell us a little bit about growing up. Let's just start at the beginning. Were you, did you grow up in an LDS family? What was your experience with that?

Jared Anderson [00:02:00] Yeah, I grew up with a variety, a mix of different influences. And I'll just have to tell you now things will get pretty personal because just what made me me was a variety of factors and quite an interesting life. So let's see, my mom said I grew up in upstate New York, really close to Palmyra, actually Canandaigua, New York, and so, you know, cradle of the restoration and all that. So I visited the sacred grove and my grandparents were converted to the church. So I was raised in the church, loved it my, my entire life. But where it gets a bit complicated is I'm actually surprised I'm as religious as I am because of the different influences. So on my dad's side, I have, you know, pioneer ancestry. I have like a great, great grandfather, something with a patriarchal blessing by Hyrum Smith, you know, that, that whole experience. But I met my, I met my dad, I don't know, 16, like, met him.

Brian Johnston [00:03:14] You met your dad when you were 16?

Jared Anderson [00:03:16] I met my dad when I was 16. I do have one memory of him when I was about 4 years old. And I remember sitting on his lap and asking him when he was gonna stop smoking. So that was the only memory I have of my dad. And then he would call on birthdays and stuff, so. Oh, let's see.

Brian Johnston [00:03:36] Was your mother religious? Was she a member of the church?

Jared Anderson [00:03:41] Yeah, she is definitely one of my religious anchors. And so a little bit of background. My dad is bipolar with schizoaffective disorder. Or was. He died in 2001. And so, you know, back in that day, they did not know what they were talking about. So there's a lot of self medication and he was a heroin addict and lived on the streets in California for a lot of the time. I was.

Brian Johnston [00:04:11] Yeah, that's rough.

Jared Anderson [00:04:13] I was growing up. So I did meet him when I was visiting my older brother out of byu. And I remember, you know, opening the door and saying hi. And it was interesting because my father knew Hebrew and Latin. You know, kind of an interesting thing that I never met him, but we're so similar.

Brian Johnston [00:04:32] Wow, that's interesting. I guess maybe something like that is possibly genetic or something.

Jared Anderson [00:04:39] Yeah. So he was at the University of Utah doing a master's in ancient languages and history when his life fell apart. And so he got excommunicated and, you know, left. To be honest, I'm not 100% sure of all the history. And then my mom remarried when I was 2 to a psychotic military police officer.

Brian Johnston [00:05:07] Oh, wow.

Jared Anderson [00:05:08] As in. I think he was literally a sociopath. As in he does not have a system of morality and he was a convert to the church. So the really weird thing for me growing up was being in the home of an abusive active priesthood holder. And it was really stark. For example, one, a couple of the most influential moments where there's that juxtaposition. Was he. Well, like, my first memory ever is being handcuffed to my crib because I got out.

Brian Johnston [00:05:52] Handcuffed with like, his police handcuffs.

Jared Anderson [00:05:57] Yep. To my ankle, to the bars of the crib. And remember that really clearly. But this other time, my older brother wasn't watching me closely enough. And so my stepdad decided to help us out, you know, watching each other. And so he handcuffed us together by our ankles. And the weird thing is maybe two days or something, and then he undid it to go to church.

Brian Johnston [00:06:23] Oh, wow. That's a big kind of mixture of feelings and emotions, I'm sure.

Jared Anderson [00:06:30] Yeah. So he was really abusive on one hand. And, you know, I don't think I need to go into any more detail. And then. And then he would have family home, evenings on taking the sacrament reverently. So really, that'll mess up your head.

Brian Johnston [00:06:47] Yeah, I can only imagine.

Jared Anderson [00:06:49] But surprisingly, I really love. I loved church. I loved religion growing up. And perhaps it was because there was bad influences, and that was a good place for me, a time where you

Brian Johnston [00:07:07] got some relief from that. Because he was acting out this other role.

Jared Anderson [00:07:13] Yeah. And he was definitely concerned about image at church. It's interesting. I remember sitting by him at a conference in the priesthood session where Hunter. Maybe I don't remember who it was, but where it was like a condemnation of abuse, and I was sitting by him. Like, ironic, but, yeah, I tried to confront him, but it never really worked. I told him once when I was like, seven or eight, and he's the one who baptized me. Seven or eight? You know, Dad, I don't think children should do what their parents ask them to because they fear them, because they love them. So, you know, trying to meet him on his own, you know, trying to engage with him like an adult, and because I couldn't do it physically, he could beat me up and do what he wanted to. So I tried to engage him intellectually, and he just said, I do whatever I have to.

Brian Johnston [00:08:06] Wow, that's tough. So how was your relationship? You said you enjoyed going to church. Did you have friends there? Well, maybe we can fast forward a little, too. Did you decide to go on a mission? Did you, like, how was it transitioning in your teenage years into a young adult?

Jared Anderson [00:08:27] Yeah, so my mom and stepdad split when I was, like, 13, so that wasn't an influence anymore. And we moved back up to New York. We were in Georgia at the time. We moved back up to New York to be with my grandparents, and that was a good time, you know, with high school. And I enjoyed, you know, Kenneth Cope and tennis shoes among the Nephites. And I sang in church and loved to pass the sacrament. And I had some good friends at church. And I, you know, at high school, I was one of the few Mormons, and so people would ask, you know, why. Why don't you drink? Or whatever. And so it was definitely an important part of my identity and, like, really, really religious. Like, later in high school, I plastered, like, the gospel art kit pictures in my. In my room and did that. Byu. So I went to BYU for a year, thinking maybe I'd be a doctor or something, and enjoyed it. Did a lot of dancing because I was gonna be musical dance theater, pre Med just to be interesting.

Brian Johnston [00:09:30] Musical dance theater, Pre med.

Jared Anderson [00:09:33] Yeah, that was my plan.

Brian Johnston [00:09:35] Awesome.

Jared Anderson [00:09:35] So it was. It was, you know, good and interesting and made. Made some good friendships and then I went on my mission to Madagascar.

Brian Johnston [00:09:44] Ooh, Madagascar. That's interesting.

Jared Anderson [00:09:49] It was good.

Brian Johnston [00:09:50] So

Jared Anderson [00:09:53] that's one of the things I wish I could redo, but I was on one hand. I did my best, but I was really anal.

Brian Johnston [00:10:00] As a missionary, were you one of the super obedient, super literal types?

Jared Anderson [00:10:06] Yeah. And I have a theory that the extremely rigid organization of a mission actually brings out mental illness, if you have it. And like, I don't need to be medicated or anything, but I'm on the more interesting perspective of emotional equilibrium, I think. You know, I definitely feel intensely. I'm up and down. I experience life very passionately.

Brian Johnston [00:10:33] And, you know, that may not exactly be mental illness. That just may mean that you feel emotions, right?

Jared Anderson [00:10:40] I mean, I do. Like, my. My brother and my dad are both bipolar. And so, you know, it's something that I'm very aware of.

Brian Johnston [00:10:45] Yeah, I understand. It's something that you're very conscious of and probably look out for.

Jared Anderson [00:10:52] And I've felt situational depression and I've definitely experienced the more intense emotional spectrum. So on my mission, I was so obsessive. Like, if we left, it really made a world of difference. And if we left the apartment at 9:31.01, you know, 9:31 in one second versus 9:31 and 59 seconds. It really meant a lot to me. Like, it was. I was very frustrated. And that was when they memorized the discussions. And so I would memorize them word for word and I would deliver them word for word. And I wish I had, you know, been more the spirit and kind of in a way that I now, looking at my perspective, I definitely living the lesser law. You know, I like one time when a sister needed a blessing and it was almost 9:30, so I left.

Brian Johnston [00:11:48] Right. Instead of staying and giving the blessing, it was more important to obey the

Jared Anderson [00:11:53] rule and all that and minister and serve. But it was a really great learning experience for me. And that was so even my second semester at byu, I was thinking that maybe I'd become a counselor. And my uncle, Scott Anderson is like, I think he founded EFY or something, like really influential in the church educational system. And so he teaches institute classes of like thousands of people, literally. So he both taught religion and is a counselor. And so I was thinking maybe I'll do that. You know, maybe religion is important to me. And I also it was about college when. Oh, and also as a teenager, I would, you know, again, just a very spiritual person. I would read the Book of Mormon for hours. Like once for kicks. I read from, you know, Third Nephi to the end in one sitting. And so. And then like when I was at byu, I definitely would feel the Spirit very strongly. Took a Teachings of the Living Prophets class and saw the apostles and felt a. A real burning, you know, that these were men called of God. And I prayed about the Book of Mormon and I felt a witness that was very personal, you know, a very personal connection that, you know, the people in this book are real and you have relationships with them and, you know, so very vivid spiritual experiences.

Brian Johnston [00:13:30] Sure.

Jared Anderson [00:13:30] Yeah. Went on my mission and I, as I said, I did as well as I could, and people considered me a good mission and everything, but I would have panic attacks and anxiety attacks, and I just, again, the intensity combined with the rigidity of the rules brought out not my best self, I think. And that's just part of how missions are constructed, I think.

Brian Johnston [00:13:54] Yeah. So.

Jared Anderson [00:13:56] But again, I relaxed and I felt like I got it more. And on my mission, I met my first wife.

Brian Johnston [00:14:02] Oh, really? Interesting. Was she from Madagascar or was.

Jared Anderson [00:14:06] She was a missionary, so she was from Salt Lake. And she. I want to speak very carefully about that whole situation because it's, you know, not just my story to tell.

Brian Johnston [00:14:18] Right. But I remember you. I don't know this whole story, but I know you explained this is probably part of, like a transition in your faith for you just having to confront some issues.

Jared Anderson [00:14:29] Let me think. I was pretty. I was pretty standard Mormon worldview until graduate school because I already had to deal with the hard stuff. You know, thinking about temple sealing, I needed to ask myself, do I want to be sealed to my abusive stepfather?

Brian Johnston [00:14:58] Right. So you probably, you know, you had already had to deal with that on various levels.

Jared Anderson [00:15:03] My conclusion was, well, if he is righteous enough to make into the celestial kingdom, then he'll be the type of person I want to be with.

Brian Johnston [00:15:11] Huh. That's interesting.

Jared Anderson [00:15:13] Yeah. And so. But pretty definitely, if anything, I just lived the gospel very intensely and participated and especially thought about it in a very intense way. And I would read the Book of Mormon and try to figure out relationships and connect the dots. So let's see. So I got married within three months of coming home from my mission. So my ex wife kind of pursued me. And again, it was this very intense, almost hyperbolic spiritual experience, you know, where my ex wife was like, you know, I really have a spiritual Witness. And this is, you know, what we're supposed to do. And this is I need to support you in your mission on the earth. And you know, this is kind of like hyper literal spiritual experiences combined with getting married to her and Elder Holland sealed us actually, which was quite an experience. He Talked for like 40 minutes on what the temple meant.

Brian Johnston [00:16:24] Are you part of the Saturday's warrior generation? Did you kind of have that perspective? You know, you were going to get married and you're following the plan?

Jared Anderson [00:16:33] Yeah, I would say so. Very much bought in. How to say this neutrally. That was my understanding at. I nearly said bought into the rhetoric, but that was my understanding was, you know, we made promises before and so forth, so. But things went bad in the marriage really, really fast, really. And like immediately pretty much. So basically we were married seven years and all of that was in counseling, like within from like six months in, well, like a good five plus years was in counseling. And so I was in, you know, because I had issues too from growing up. You know, I. Oh and another part of what makes me me is I was pretty. Like my mom did what she could in the situation and like we would snuggle and as I said, pray together. And I, I'm grateful for the influence she had but at the same time it's like she was watching while we were hit and everything. So that's tricky. But pretty much I was left alone to do my own thing growing up. And this will be, this will become more important later in my story. So like I was never taught to swim. I was never taught to ride a bike. I was taught, never encouraged to get a job, never. Like I was in my own world and kind of literally in my own world. I escaped into books, I escaped into fantasy. I escaped. In fact, even in like the second grade, I would tell people that I had super magical powers and lived in a mansion. So like my ability to distinguish reality and fantasy came late as part of a protective mechanism. But why that's important is because the flip side of me being neglected was I've become kind of a ferocious independent thinker. And so I went from not and also just problem solver. So I would, I went from not swimming at all when I was in eighth grade to joining the swim team in the ninth grade.

Brian Johnston [00:18:49] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:18:49] So I would just solve. I'm very much like a make it happen type of person. And I think part of that is the flip side of being neglected and abused growing up. Like, I really love being a grown up. I really, really enjoy it because growing Up. I had no power. I was powerless, and I was hurt, and I was scared. And so for me to be an adult who can shape my own life and destiny is terrifically empowering to me.

Brian Johnston [00:19:18] Yeah. Now you have control over what is going on.

Jared Anderson [00:19:22] Yeah. So back in the first marriage, not so much. You know, I was helpless and frustrated, and it really brought up my demons. I became the worst part of myself, you know, and. Wow. I don't. Let's see. So, again, we don't have to dive

Brian Johnston [00:19:48] too deep into that, but if it's an important part of your faith journey and you want to share it, that's good.

Jared Anderson [00:19:54] Yeah, there are aspects. So, again, very much seeing things into the worldview and, like, the church helped us out with counseling, and I really appreciate that. But so for the entire time in a marriage, we were working toward it, and my ex wife, too, like, she really wanted to make it work. We both did. But there was abuse that she was not aware of when we were. When we got married and ended up, you know, things came out, like, really severe abuse of all types. And the diagnosis eventually, like, years and years in that she had dissociative identity disorder, you know, multiple personality and other things. And. Yeah. I mean, I don't. Yeah.

Brian Johnston [00:20:40] So it was tough. And you both probably felt like, you can't get divorced. That's the church culture. And probably on top of it with your childhood, growing up, you probably wanted to make it all right and finally have control over everything.

Jared Anderson [00:20:54] Yeah, exactly. So I think I've said enough about that marriage. But along with what you said, that I swore up and down that I would never, ever, ever, ever, ever get divorced. I would never end the marriage, and I still. I would not have done anything to end it. I am deeply grateful that my ex wife needed to. For her own. For her own health. And also, as I said, I was not a good person in that marriage. I mean, I was doing my best. We were both doing our best, but it just. We brought up the worst in each other. But again, you know, praying, scripture, study, like, everything we could do, you know, tapping in spiritual resources to make it better. And I do think I did feel sustained and helped, you know, to a degree. But, you know, I prayed and prayed, you know, Heavenly Father to change me and change me into someone who could deal with this, what was basically a loveless marriage. Mm.

Brian Johnston [00:21:55] And that probably didn't really work out, did it?

Jared Anderson [00:22:00] No. I mean, not. Not really. Just because I never could really get past the sense of wrongness.

Brian Johnston [00:22:04] And I.

Jared Anderson [00:22:04] And again, I yeah, so.

Brian Johnston [00:22:07] And I think what's important about this, like, you know, this. This story, because I think it leads into something else that you'd explained to me once about, like, trying to get a ceiling changed or something. Did that play a part in your faith journey?

Jared Anderson [00:22:22] Very much so. So we. After a year separation, we got divorced. And North Carolina requires a year being apart, which I think is really cool because that's a very positive view of marriage. And it was really good for me because I gravitate toward relationships very easily, and it was very healthy for me to have a enforced year single. I called myself unmarried, like, undead, because I wasn't, you know, I wasn't married and I wasn't single. I was in this. In this in between state, so. But we got divorced. And a couple things happened that are important to my journey around the divorce. One was one of the most spiritual, one of the most intense spiritual experiences I've ever. I've ever felt. And it was. I. I felt the voice of God, like, in a very dramatic, not of myself way.

Brian Johnston [00:23:28] Right. So you feel like you really connected with whatever the divine is and had a very profound experience with that.

Jared Anderson [00:23:36] We don't even need to speak that generally. You know, I was praying to my heavenly Father, and I'll share it. I feel okay sharing it because it's been influential to me. So I was. I was just. And I think a lot of people will relate with, you know, these journeys. So I was praying for my children. You know, we had three children by that time, and. Because as dysfunctional as the whole situation was, we have to have kids. Right?

Brian Johnston [00:24:08] Yeah. I wasn't gonna say anything, but I mean that. I know. Yeah. You figure maybe that'll fix it or that's what you're supposed to do to fulfill the plan and everything.

Jared Anderson [00:24:21] And somehow that was the only time when she could be loving, is when she had a kid anyway. So I was praying for my kids, and I was saying, heavenly Father, please, please do not let this happen. You know, find a way, create a way. You know, I need that ram in the thicket. I need a way for my children not to have to go through what I went through. I need my children not to have to be in a broken home, be raised in, you know, children of divorce.

Brian Johnston [00:24:50] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:24:51] And I felt a voice, and it was like it was outside of me. And. And it said, jared, who are you to say that in order for your children to do what they need to do and be what they need to be, they don't need to come from A broken home.

Brian Johnston [00:25:13] Wow.

Jared Anderson [00:25:14] And that shut me up.

Brian Johnston [00:25:17] Wow. Yeah.

Jared Anderson [00:25:19] Yeah. So that was probably, probably one of the most distinct and powerful experiences of my life. So the other thing that happened is I became a divorced member of the church.

Brian Johnston [00:25:37] How was that experience?

Jared Anderson [00:25:38] It's excruciating. It is really, really hard. The church is wonderful for people in the box. It is so good for the people who follow the set path and for people who still have the luxury of following the set path. But as soon as you're out of it, it is really hard. You know, I was in singles wards as a divorced, late 20s, you know, like 27, 28. During this time with.

Brian Johnston [00:26:11] You were of the age where, according to Brigham Young, you became a menace to society. Well, now that's not fair because you had been married.

Jared Anderson [00:26:21] Yeah, I was a reject. So, you know, I had my free pass, my one free try, and now was the next step of being a second class citizen. And I say that very literally now. I'll get to that in a moment. So I, you know, dated a bit, but had some good experiences where in my dating, I'm like, wow, people can actually like me. You know, so lots of really good growing experiences and one, you know, very important developmental experiences that affected my later perspective. And one of them was, I used to be brutally honest. Like just one example, you know, being divorced and being a journal keeper. I'm like, well, anyone who I marry, I want to marry someone who could read my entire journal. Well, I was married, you know, from when I was married and be able to handle it because it's the truth.

Brian Johnston [00:27:22] And.

Jared Anderson [00:27:23] Yeah. So like, one relationship in particular broke off in part because of that.

Brian Johnston [00:27:30] Because on the second date you brought your journal and made them read it.

Jared Anderson [00:27:34] No, not exactly. Boy.

Brian Johnston [00:27:36] Wow.

Jared Anderson [00:27:37] I mean, I would, like, share my journals totally inappropriately. And, you know, I had no sense of privacy. I had no sense of boundaries. But I just had this idea of, well, if it's true, I can share it. Ah, we need to back up a bit. And we're done talking about personal life until I get remarried. But so grad school, I went to the University of Utah after my mission because I visited BYU and just did not feel like that was the place for me. And so I went to the University of Utah. I really enjoyed it. I did the honors program. I graduated honors in Hebrew. So at this point, I was still planning on doing, like, the church educational system. Like I did seminary, I was planning on a career in ces.

Brian Johnston [00:28:26] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:28:27] And I majored in Hebrew. I did my honors thesis on Joseph Smith, actually Joseph Smith's study and use of ancient languages. Study, use of languages. So that's my honors thesis. And then had really good experiences with teachers. Loved college and in fact, school was an escape for me in my marriage. Like, it, it was really good for me, you know, because I was in control, I was good at it. I won awards and I was a, you know, national finalist for a full ride to Oxford. You know, all these things that were really, really good for me. And my. My dad died right before I found out. I was accepted to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. And lots of father issues then because I was mourning what could have been. You know, I was imagining like my Professor Scott, my professor father and me and stuff. But anyway, I. So May of 2000, Noel Reynolds, who helped found farms, was giving a fireside and he was talking about visiting the Vatican library and looking at a scroll of Matthew from the Vatican library that was from like the three hundreds. And something shifted in me. There was a click and. And I said, I'm going to be a biblical scholar.

Brian Johnston [00:30:00] Nice.

Jared Anderson [00:30:01] So I went from, you know, I'm going to teach religion to I am going to be a biblical scholar. And I didn't understand completely what that entailed and how different it would be. But I knew, you know, I knew that it was not teaching seminary. And so I went down to BYU and I talked to a handful of professors down there right away because this is my like, make things happen, find out what I want type thing. So I looked at people and I talked to Dana Pike, Robert Millet, Stephen Robinson, Dana Perry, John Gee, you know, all these people saying, what do I want to do? Christian heal was very helpful. And so just like, what do I want to do? What do I want to study? What area? I read this Ensign article from like 1981 or 1983 by Jeanette Hadley, lead read on how the Bible came to be. I was like, wow, this is really cool stuff. So I applied to grad school and I got into the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill to study with Bart Ehrman. And I just knew he was a student of Bruce Metzger, who really big name. He was on a lot of translation committees and Greek New Testament committees.

Brian Johnston [00:31:12] Bruce Metzger was. Or Bart Ehrman was.

Jared Anderson [00:31:14] Well, Bart helped out, but Bruce Metzger was on all sorts of committees and translating the Bible and editing the Greek Bible and stuff. So I got into unc. And before I got into unc, I was set. I was gung ho set on reconciling and harmonizing the academic view of the Bible with the LDS view of the Bible. So by this time I had read different books, read like the Oxford History, Oxford Illustrated History of the Bible. And I was like, this is interesting. This doesn't sound like what I learned. But I was going to harmonize. I had this Word document where one column is LDS view, one column is academic view. And I was going to start with Moses 6. 6, which said Adam has a pure and perfect language and he started a record. And for me, that was the beginning of the Bible.

Brian Johnston [00:32:11] Like Moses from the Pearl of Great price.

Jared Anderson [00:32:14] Yes, because that talked about Adam writing down the records. And so that was the beginning of the Bible. Right. Adam writing down Scripture.

Graduate Study, Doubt, and Staying in the Church

Brian Johnston [00:32:22] Sure.

Jared Anderson [00:32:24] And so that is a really good window into my view going into grad school. But it only took one semester, like really quick, my first classes as a grad student to realize that. And I can unpack this. I'll probably need to. But to realize that the academic academia can explain the Sunday school stories much better than the Sunday school stories can explain academia.

Brian Johnston [00:32:55] Wow. What do you mean by that?

Jared Anderson [00:32:58] Oh, well, okay. So Sunday school, you get this rhetoric of like evil. Scholars don't think too much, looking beyond the mark. I mean, really, it's a rhetoric of a avoidance or making big kind of

Brian Johnston [00:33:12] leaps and assumptions possibly to like make the story work correctly. Is that.

Jared Anderson [00:33:18] Yeah. And then, I mean, I was never big into apologetics, you know, like farms, Maxwell Institute type stuff. I mean, I knew about the limited geography model and I knew things. But, you know, to me, I was more interested in looking at the Scriptures themselves. I can't remember if this is undergrad or grad. I think grad school. But like when it said compare Isaiah, you know, in Second Nephi, the Isaiah chapters, when it says compare Isaiah something, I'm. So like I said, okay. So I wrote into a notebook and I compared every single word and I made like my own apparatus of all the chapters. Took a couple months to do that.

Brian Johnston [00:33:58] Comparing Second Nephi and Isaiah.

Jared Anderson [00:34:01] Yeah. And wow, boy, that was illuminating. So. But the Sunday school approach cannot really explain the academic theories. But as I continued. So I got a master's and I'm working on my PhD writing my dissertation at the moment. So I started grad school in 2002. And so very quickly I started to learn about how people are religious, how Scripture works. So just one example of this academia describing, explaining the Sunday school model was I was taking a course on radical Islamic movements and my teacher was talking about that there are these two type of movements. There's traditionalist and primitivist, and traditionalist movements really want things to be the way they were in Great Grandma's time. They reject technology. So the Taliban is an example of this. They try to pull stuff. They reject modernity. And then we learned about groups like Al Qaeda, which are called primitivist. And they invent an ideal past and then have a rhetoric of return. Do you see the difference?

Brian Johnston [00:35:21] Yeah, I see what you're saying.

Jared Anderson [00:35:23] And I'm like, wow, Mormonism. Mormonism is very clearly a primitivist movement where they invented this history, starting with Adam. And so at that point, I was like, okay, well, Mormonism is truer than true.

Brian Johnston [00:35:42] Right. Because they're inventing this ideal past and then trying to connect backward in time to make that all link together.

Jared Anderson [00:35:49] Yeah. So even it wasn't. Interestingly, it was not until I started teaching world religions where it really started deconstructing for me. So between 2002 and about, you know, 2008 or 9, what I would do is I would just try to work things out as clearly as I could. So I'm like, okay, what is eternal progression? How does this work? How do the Scriptures work? What was the Book of Mormon? What is the relationship between the Book of Mormon, the golden plates? How does revelation work? But at the same time, accepting the basic foundation of the Mormon narrative, You know, So I would work Adam and Eve into the theory of evolution. I would, you know, so, okay, the golden plates do not equal what was in the Book of Mormon because the Book of Mormon was clearly filtered through Joseph Smith's worldview, expectation, language. Okay. But there were gold plates, you know, there was the angel moron. I was still accepting all of that and working within it, you know, and saying, okay. And it was very satisfying to me. It made a lot of sense.

Brian Johnston [00:36:58] It made sense. Or the process of doing that was satisfying, or both. Fair enough.

Jared Anderson [00:37:07] I had a very flexible. So it's kind of like my feet were anchored, but my mind was wherever I could be. And so I had that freedom to just try to really figure out what descriptors. So, for example, I study textual criticism, which is the science and art of looking at how scribes change manuscripts of the Bible. And so when I look at the Joseph Smith translation, I can very. I'm like, oh, yeah, of course. I can see that Joseph Smith functions on the same principles of changing things as scribes do in the New Testament manuscripts. We might want to turn to that. So just to continue the narrative.

Brian Johnston [00:37:53] Yeah. So how did this affect your Faith journey. It sounds to me like now either you have a huge tolerance for cognitive dissonance or you have the world's largest shelf to put things on.

Jared Anderson [00:38:09] No, I've never put anything on a shelf.

Brian Johnston [00:38:11] Oh, okay.

Jared Anderson [00:38:13] I always felt like I've been able to come to answers that were satisfying to me.

Brian Johnston [00:38:17] Okay, cool.

Jared Anderson [00:38:19] I've never had a crisis of faith intellectually.

Brian Johnston [00:38:26] Yeah, I'm taking a pause there. I'm trying to. I'm trying to just digest that statement.

Jared Anderson [00:38:32] The listeners should probably know that you and I know each other pretty well.

Brian Johnston [00:38:35] So.

Jared Anderson [00:38:35] Yeah, Anyway, so let's. Okay, a couple threads.

Brian Johnston [00:38:40] Okay. But I got to dig into that

Jared Anderson [00:38:45] here. Let me finish my narrative.

Brian Johnston [00:38:47] Go ahead. Yeah, you tell your story.

Jared Anderson [00:38:50] Put your finger there and return to it. So intellectually, I've never had a crisis of faith. And so I presented papers at this faith and knowledge conference that Richard Bushman put on. Really, really good. And so I would. I presented papers. Oh, okay. Sorry, I need to back up a bit. I was invited in 2003, so right after I started grad school to BYU for this mammoth New Testament commentary project that Jack Welch and company were working on. And that was important to me because the byu, for one thing. Wow. Yeah. Different experiences, you know, I got some very good answers and very, very bad answers.

Brian Johnston [00:39:31] Just a different environment than you see.

Jared Anderson [00:39:33] Yeah, so one. Yeah. In fact, I was thinking it was okay until I came back and Bart Ehrman was like, so what methods did you use? Anything I would recognize. But I was told by pretty solid professors at byu, like, but there's no light, but we have the spirit. Because I was trying to explain why I was at a PhD program in religious studies. And I said, well, I think that I'll be able to gain a lot of tools that are useful to me. And I was seriously told, well, they don't have the Holy Ghost out there. So that's all we need. You know, we don't need critical method because we have the spirit.

Brian Johnston [00:40:12] Oh, wow. Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:40:13] Yeah. And so this. Actually, I'm glad I thought back to go back to that because 2003, this summer at BYU was really important to me because I would hear things like, well, what does Moroni or Mormon9, which quotes the long ending of Mark. So remember, mark ended in 16 8, but Mormon 9 quotes the long ending. And so BYU professors, a couple, one in particular would say, well, so that should make us think differently about this whole so called long ending and what they wanted me.

Brian Johnston [00:40:50] And the point of that just jumping back is that the long ending of Mark is probably an addition by a later scribe, virtually certainly. And now Moroni is quoting that. Yeah.

Jared Anderson [00:41:02] So what the byu, the New world. What the BYU professor wanted was, well, surely the long ending is original because Mormon or Moroni is quoting it, which for one thing doesn't even make any sense. But so that really got me thinking a lot about what is the relationship between language, scripture and revelation. And I've been on that journey ever since. But even so, I felt like maybe I will give you room to ask your question. But what I mean when I say I've never had a crisis of faith intellectually is because I felt like I had the tools before I came across the problems.

Brian Johnston [00:41:45] Yeah. And actually while you were talking, I had a minute to think through that and you actually shared a couple of your essays or I guess some of your journal writings where you thought through something. I can't even remember what it was now, but I remember reading through it. And maybe this is what you're getting at is you were able to trace a line from one point to another intellectually. And so I can see how you can claim, like how you can say, I never had a crisis of faith intellectually.

Jared Anderson [00:42:16] Yeah.

Brian Johnston [00:42:18] And you had really detailed, actually kind of fascinating answers. And I remember asking you, when I got done reading, I was like, do you still believe this? Because, you know, this is from like five years ago. Because I was a little surprised. But I guess I can understand that.

Jared Anderson [00:42:37] You know, I'm actually going to take a few minutes to read something because it intersects a few points. So this is a presentation I gave in 2007. So this is quite recent. And so this is my view in 2007. And this is what one thing that you read. Let's see. While the Book of Mormon is not exactly the precise historical record many readers assume it to be, neither is it a work of fiction. It is filled with 19th century elements, but also contains a minority of intriguing details that seem ancient. If we presuppose an ancient document, we can easily explain 19th century details as divine truth being filtered through Joseph's worldview. Lacking an ancient document, the minority of ancient features becomes difficult to explain. I want to expand somewhat on the difference between the Book of Mormon being fundamentally different than most think and being completely fictional. In the first instance, the content of the golden plates would have been filtered through Joseph Smith's worldview in a way that maximized its salvific effectiveness so its ability to save. In the second, there would have been no gold plates. The first option seems to fit with what we know about human nature, revelation, historical process and common sense. For example, 2nd Nephi 10:3 and 25:19 equate Messiah with Christ in a Semitic language. This just doesn't make sense as they both mean anointed one in Hebrew, one in Greek. Yet Jesus Christ is the only thing that the 19th century readership of the Book of Mormon would have understood. So basically, you know, the Nephites got what they needed and the 19th century readers of the Book of Mormon got what they needed. In Joseph's day, it was hard enough to get the people to accept new ideas within the framework of dispensationalist Christianity. If he were to overthrow the whole schema in the interest of historical accuracy, quote unquote, people would have never gotten past it. In general, it makes sense that Joseph would have improved the Bible to make things clearer and conform to his revealed theology. This also conforms to how biblical scribes and editors have worked in the past, as well as of the historical process of theology and historiography becoming more refined and congruent over time. But the big thing is that it makes sense for God to reveal truth in the way that will maximize, that will lead the maximum number of his children to salvation. So as radical and possibly disturbing as the first option is, it makes sense. The other option not only doesn't make sense or conform to human nature, it would be ineffective. So if there were any golden plates or Nephites, what would be the point? Why wouldn't God use a different avenue to restore his church? It crosses the line for me to imagine God talking to an angel and saying, here you pretend to be Moroni and make up a thousand year history of your people and plant some plates. Or even more extreme, that there was no angel or plates, but only Joseph Smith's mental derangement used for the salvation of mankind. Where would this minimalist argument stop? Does everything go but the atonement? Even that the process easily is reduced to absurdity? Okay, so I was on fire. Even 2009 I presented a paper called Revelation according to our Expectations. So I would ask questions like this, what is the purpose of religion? What is God doing? How does this work? What is the relationship to our understanding? So like one of my anchors is second Nephi 213 where it says God speaks to us according to our language, unto our understanding. And so, so yeah, I mean with that framework I'm like of course, everything, it just made sense to me. Okay, did you ask question?

Brian Johnston [00:46:21] Yeah. Let me approach this from kind of a more basic and Gut level. So you said you don't have a crisis of faith intellectually, but what do you feel about the stories that you grew up with in Mormonism? Is the Book of Mormon a book based on an ancient record of gold plates?

Jared Anderson [00:46:46] Yeah. To finish up my intellectual story, I would like.

Brian Johnston [00:46:51] You can't get intellectualized out of it. It's just a gut answer.

Jared Anderson [00:46:54] No, but I need. No, I mean, maybe. Okay. I don't. Yeah, maybe I would think. Okay, short answer, short answer. And this is true of a lot of the literal stories in Mormonism. If it were true, I would be pleasantly surprised.

Brian Johnston [00:47:16] Okay. I love that. That was a really kind of just. I know that was hard for you to do, but it was really cool to just hear you say it, like in a one sentence sort of gut feeling response, which I know is hard to do.

Jared Anderson [00:47:33] It's. It's fine.

Brian Johnston [00:47:34] Like I.

Jared Anderson [00:47:35] So part of me. And remember that I. That I've had very personal spiritual experiences involving the literal truth of the scriptures. And like in my most recent faith and knowledge paper, I explained away John the Beloved as immortal missionary. Like, whoa. Wasn't expecting that. But the final piece in my intellectual journey interestingly happened just in 2009 and it was when I came out to Utah to teach world religions at Westminster College. And that was the final piece.

Brian Johnston [00:48:09] Yeah. That has to be an interesting environment in which to teach world religion. I would imagine that doesn't have anything

Jared Anderson [00:48:15] to do with it because I'm not really affected by environment. I do things on my own way I think the way I think, no matter where I am. And. But the issue was the actual content itself. So I. Wow. Okay, now we're going to get into deep, deep waters. I personally think that critical academic study of religion and scripture taken seriously deconstructs every specific religious claim there is.

Brian Johnston [00:48:55] Right. Not every claim within a religion. You're saying all religions everywhere, you can break them all into their chemical components, you know, so to say. Yeah. So down to the molecular level and deconstruct them all to pieces and that.

Jared Anderson [00:49:09] And especially because it just. Okay, so what you see when you study world religions is that all the different peoples are react. You see a couple things. One, all the different religions are kind of approaching things the same way. In other words, meeting the same human needs in similar ways. You see that all religion is a system of imposing control. And I say that in a very neutral way. Not like, oh, control the masses, but to control ignorance, to control helplessness. And especially once it comes to exclusivist claims, you Know, like, we are the only true church. It just seems preposterous when taken in the context of the entire history of the world, that God would wait so late in the game and reveal the absolute truth to this tiny, tiny group. And it just doesn't. Doesn't match up. And so I'll say one more thing about that. So apologists, I think, I don't feel they can really resolve concerns, you know, so the academic picture that is created so the academic theories. So as we saw in the whole New Testament explanation, the game of academics is to look at all of the evidence and come up with the clearest solution and explanation for these things. Okay, and now I read that when

Brian Johnston [00:50:46] you're living your religion, you're not necessarily doing an academic analysis. You're living a human life. And I know that you're active in the church, so how do you do that?

Jared Anderson [00:50:59] Yeah. And so with that in mind, you

Brian Johnston [00:51:03] just basically said that on some level you understand that this is all stories, but you remain faithful and active. And actually, I admire you for that.

Jared Anderson [00:51:13] You know, I am happy in the church. Like, I'm happy with activity in the church. But the reason I read that paragraph before was just recently, in the past couple months, I had a moment of loss where I was like, I wish. Part of me wishes I could still say that part to say, well, it would be absurd if there were no gold plates. It would be absurd if there were no angel. God. God would not do something like that.

Brian Johnston [00:51:46] Is that like the opposite of. Or it's like a negative way of saying that it's true, not saying that it's not true, but like, instead of saying, I know that all this is true, you're saying it would be absurd if it's not true.

Guest [00:51:59] Well,

Jared Anderson [00:52:01] I was feeling a loss that I couldn't be that person, that really educated member of the church who still believed all of the framework, because I don't anymore. So here's how I view religion, and this is probably where we should go a bit back and forth and tease out the different parts. I believe in God. I do believe in God, but I'm what I call. I define myself as an agnostic theist. So here's how it works for me. And I am very happy with my spirituality. I want to put that out first. I think it's a really beneficial worldview. I'm happy. I don't feel like there's any loss. I gave my daughter a priesthood blessing yesterday. I do understand that my position is very paradoxical. I should probably add That I don't really believe in the atonement.

Brian Johnston [00:52:55] Oh, boy.

Jared Anderson [00:52:57] It's crazy. But okay, let's see what thread to pick up. So I believe that the atonement is a reasonable belief. Like, I can see how people could believe it.

Brian Johnston [00:53:11] Okay.

Jared Anderson [00:53:12] I personally just don't have a really strong spiritual witness of it. Okay. So big picture stuff, I believe in spirituality. That is probably the firmest thing I believe in. I believe that spiritual experiences are real. I believe that there are visions and dreams and knowledge beyond our own and wisdom beyond our own. And I believe in faith healing, and I believe in transcendence. And I believe that there's something that humanity and consciousness are incredible miracles. And so. But where I'm agnostic is I don't know how to define God.

Brian Johnston [00:53:57] Right.

Jared Anderson [00:53:57] But to me, you feel more certain

Brian Johnston [00:54:00] that this being exists, but less certain what that being is.

Jared Anderson [00:54:05] Right. And here's how far it goes to me. So for on one hand, I could define God as what makes humans different than other animals. You know, I could define God as the. So what I think the purpose of life is. And this is my view of salvation as well. So first, I have a view of religion that is that both encompasses Mormonism and is bigger than Mormonism. So for me, life is about maximizing growth, freedom, love, peace, joy, and enlightenment, you know, for the back, for the lack of a better word. And so I will say very clearly that Mormonism is pretty much about the best religion that I've come across, and I enjoy it. I'm very aware of its weaknesses and flaws. And it breaks my heart, you know, the view about how the church treats homosexuals and women, to a point, and divorced people. So really, like, really brief. You know, how I kept saying I didn't have a crisis of intellectual faith. Emotional is different.

Brian Johnston [00:55:16] So I wanted to come back to that. But you're kind of coming back to it naturally. And that was going to be. My question is if you had an emotional crisis of faith.

Jared Anderson [00:55:25] Absolutely. Wow.

Brian Johnston [00:55:30] And you also were able to answer my question, because I was going to also ask why Mormonism then? If you're not that attached to.

Jared Anderson [00:55:38] I want to come back to that question too, because it's important. So emotional crisis of faith. My first marriage was really hard for me. And it's like I believed in God and I believed in Mormonism, but I was really angry at God. You know, I was just so angry that I was in this situation, especially because I felt like I had spiritual confirmation.

Brian Johnston [00:56:00] Right. He's the one that told you to

Jared Anderson [00:56:02] do that, yeah, it's like you got me into this mess, you know, and. But what really broke me is the divorce and being a divorce member and falling in love with the love of my life, my current wife, who is an angel. She is so amazing, you know, best thing that ever happened to me. And she, the Sweet, never married 24 year old, has the guts and the love and thinks I'm worth it to take on a single father of three.

Brian Johnston [00:56:38] Wow. Yeah.

Jared Anderson [00:56:39] And we applied for ceiling clearance and were turned down.

Brian Johnston [00:56:45] Oh no.

Jared Anderson [00:56:46] And that broke me because think about it, what am I supposed to believe? That the prophet was, was inspired to reject this? And it was weird because the stake president approved and first, it is a vicious, abusive process. It like I could accept it, you know, because you need to write a letter, your ex needs to write a letter. And my bishop said to me that the letter, that particular letter was just awful, you know, and not, not the same.

Brian Johnston [00:57:21] And wait, the letter in general or your particular letter?

Jared Anderson [00:57:24] X? My ex's letter, which she was just saying what her perspective was. And I understand that, but wow. Interestingly, the future spouse does not need to write a letter. Who cares what the potential of the future relationship is? And probably one of the most hurtful. A couple of the most hurtful aspects of this entire experience were. Well, I just got the feeling that divorced people were treated as second class citizens and the reversal of rhetoric was extraordinary. So our stake president, which he treated us well and it was a very good experience and he had our back for the most part. But he said to me and my fiance, don't you love each other enough to get married outside the temple?

Brian Johnston [00:58:08] Wait, I'm not sure I understand that question. Like he was encouraging you to just get married.

Jared Anderson [00:58:15] Yeah. And that, as I understand it, that is the party line. I remember how I get things done and I'm fearless. So I called this secretary of the 70, who's in charge of these things, had to tell me to stop calling because I called her. I called the temple department and the temple department was really interesting because I wanted to.

Brian Johnston [00:58:38] Well, knowing you, I'm surprised you didn't march right up to the, you know, the president of the church's office.

Jared Anderson [00:58:43] I was in North Carolina.

Brian Johnston [00:58:46] Oh, that wouldn't have. I'm still surprised that stopped you. Right.

Jared Anderson [00:58:51] So this is really interesting and I want, you know, perhaps we can reflect, you know, not in this interview, but in comments or whatever. So I called a sweet old lady in the temple department and she told me that the counsel they receive, that they pass on to local leaders is to tell divorced members not even to try to get clearance.

Brian Johnston [00:59:12] What?

Jared Anderson [00:59:13] Yep. Don't try. Just get married civilly and then try next year.

Brian Johnston [00:59:20] Oh, so just do that in advance and then you're married and then you apply after the fact because then it's even more awkward for them because you're already married.

Jared Anderson [00:59:28] Well, no, I don't know. I mean, we can think about what messages this sends, but it's horrendous.

Brian Johnston [00:59:34] Right?

Jared Anderson [00:59:34] Wow. Anyway, that pretty much removed all like that really shattered my foundation and like my testimony of priesthood authority, you know. And now I want to back up on the other side of things. I believe in revelation. I really do believe in revelation. And I believe that the vast majority of people in the church and priesthood leaders are people doing their very, very best. But I also believe that I believe in a very. I take seriously the importance of agency and I think that God will allow us to mess things up. And the only piece that I could get from that whole situation is that the leaders of the church and I feel a lot of love for leaders of the church are prejudiced against divorce, that they're from another generation. Now I am pro marriage and I'm pro, you know, I'm anti divorce. But if they really wanted to preserve the sanctity of temple marriage, I would love, love to see it applied equitably. I can just imagine the face of the father of the 19 year old Sweet girl when the stake president says, do you know what? You are worthy, but I don't think you're ready. Why don't you give it a trial run for a year and we'll see how it goes. Can you imagine people turning down. And granted, I think that there should be more oversight. I think that there should be more marriage preparation. I think that getting married in the temple just because is terrible. I think that people should have the courage to get married outside the temple if that's where they feel that that's what they need anyway, so that I've

Brian Johnston [01:01:27] been married for 20 years and I've honestly thought I love my wife and everything would do the same thing over again. But I thought to myself, looking back now as a much older person, I thought to myself, are people that young really even capable of deciding who they should be married to forever and ever and ever and ever?

Jared Anderson [01:01:46] And granted, I think that there's a lot of positive in Mormon culture and I think that the extremely high view of marriage, of sexuality, of relationships, of families, it's really good stuff. Unfortunately, that's combined with very destructive aspects. It's funny, I feel like I really love Mormonism. And one thing is I feel like it could be so, so much better than it is. I feel like it's living below its potential. And you know, with my awareness of multiple, multiple systems of theology, I think Mormonism is tremendously satisfying theologically. You know, even though I'm agnostic to a sense, because just to throw a couple of these out there, if they're really. I feel that as limited human beings we are literally unable to, to know transcendent absolute reality. So that's like philosophy for you. And then theologically, I feel like God speaks to us according to our language, according to our expectations, so he is not going to reveal us things the way they really are. One parallel that I thought of and then there's agency. So I think God, I hate the poem Footprints. I think God lets us do everything we can and that's how we grow. So I don't go to my kids school and do their homework for them. And so I really think that the idea of why they're suffering, it's absurd. You know, it's like, oh well, God would stop it. Why now? Suffering is hard. It is really, really hard. But I think Mormonism, I love the universalism of Mormonism, the fact that we have no permanent hell. The. I love, I do like the idea of atonement, but I feel like the real issue is whether we can be transformed into divine beings. That's the issue. If Jesus is the mechanism for that, I think he'll be okay with me not being sure about it. You know, if, if I am able to be transformed into and live up to my potential for divinity. Because really we are the closest to God that we know of human beings. And I kind of wish we could turn back on ourselves. The question of why do we allow suffering? Why does God allow suffering? Why do we allow suffering?

Religion, Truth, and Meaning

Brian Johnston [01:04:21] Maybe we should look in the mirror and ask that question.

Jared Anderson [01:04:24] Exactly. So we have so much potential. And so. Okay, backing up a few bits. So my quest in life kind of, or one of my missions is I really find it fulfilling to model approach to religion and spirituality that maximizes the benefits and minimizes the harm,

Brian Johnston [01:04:45] but sort of recognizing that a spectrum of all that happens and that's just the unfortunate reality of the world.

Jared Anderson [01:04:53] I don't even know unfortunate. It is what it is. Okay, so on one hand I. So that's the way I live. But I want to give other people what they need and what they want. So I think that the simple, literal, straightforward approach to religion works for a lot of people and it has problems, but I feel like messages within the religion itself. So for example, devout members of the church disowning their gay children. Yes, that's a problem with like exclusivity and so forth or treating non members like second class people. On one hand, the academic approach solves that of whoa, you're not really the only true church. Take that. But so does love, so does the message of loving everyone. And I don't think Jesus. So what I'm saying is I feel that the basic framework of religion, most religions, Mormonism for example, has within itself from just the most simple, straightforward, vanilla Mormonism point of view has the potential to be what it needs.

Brian Johnston [01:06:10] It has the tools to solve its own problems, but will people use them?

Jared Anderson [01:06:14] It works. So for example, I view religion like a car or a fridge. And so the purpose of a car is to drive you from point A to point B. The purpose of a fridge is keep your food cold. I would never want to dismantle someone's car and be like, oh, look at all these pieces, aren't they great? And then someone's like, I need to pick up my daughter from dance class. And so I see. I take a very, very practical point of view toward religion.

Brian Johnston [01:06:42] But what about true and false and right and wrong and justice and hist.

Jared Anderson [01:06:50] Like, you know, well, first the facts

Brian Johnston [01:06:53] of history are the facts of history. Right?

Jared Anderson [01:06:56] But do you think God, I almost swore. Do you think God cares? Do you think that's God's priority? No, this isn't my interview.

Brian Johnston [01:07:06] You got to answer the question.

Jared Anderson [01:07:07] I know, but what I'm saying is God wants us to drive more than God wants. Here's the risk though. The risk is, especially in this age and hello Mormon stories audience. The risk is that more than ever before, people can come across knowledge, they can come across these details, they can come across these things that shatter their faith. My advisor said something that was really poignant and I think it can be applied to Mormonism. So he spent time as an inerrantist Christian, evangelical Christian who believed that the Bible is completely without flaw or error.

Brian Johnston [01:07:51] Right? Yeah, I've read some of his story

Jared Anderson [01:07:53] and he said, and I want everyone to digest this, he said as long as I knew there were no mistakes in the Bible, I didn't see any. And this guy is brilliant.

Brian Johnston [01:08:06] Oh yeah, for sure.

Jared Anderson [01:08:07] And he was like debate team. I mean he, he knows his stuff. So he said as long as I knew there were no mistakes in the Bible, I didn't see any. But as soon as I opened my mind to the possibility there might be, they were everywhere. And that's really poignant. In fact, grad school at Princeton Theological Seminary, he wrote like this 30 page paper on a Greek prepositional phrase about why Mark could not make a mistake. And his teacher gave him an A and said, wouldn't it be easier to just say Mark was wrong? And that shattered him. So I want to tease out my approach to things a little bit because. So my approach is the way that worked for me, and I think it has both value and a very high cost. So this has to do with why I'm not a really pro intellectual prick.

Brian Johnston [01:09:10] You said it, not me.

Jared Anderson [01:09:12] Well, maybe you disagree, but this is one of my saving graces, I think. And I personally believe that I have been given gifts to build up the kingdom and to help the church. And that's one of the big reasons I stay in the church. I do see value in it. But here are a couple of the paradoxes. On one hand, I do think that if some leaders were to know my full stance, they would say, well, you're not Mormon anymore.

Brian Johnston [01:09:42] Yeah, I'm familiar with that criticism. So what is your answer to that?

Jared Anderson [01:09:51] Well, for me. But first, what I want to say is I love wrestling with these paradoxes. Well, I am supportive of Mormonism. I think that's my. I am pro Mormon.

Brian Johnston [01:10:07] But how do you justify saying that you're still Mormon to yourself? I mean, that's all you need to do.

Jared Anderson [01:10:14] Yeah, because I believe that it's inspired of God. Okay. So my view toward religion. I believe that religion is a symbolic language that points toward a reality

Brian Johnston [01:10:29] that really does exist.

Jared Anderson [01:10:31] Yes. So even. And maybe that reality is nothing more than. We are all more connected than we could ever imagine, not only to each other, but to the earth and the universe. And that's why prayers are answered and that's why miracles work and that we have the power to heal ourselves. Are these not divine? I mean, this is good stuff, and I think it needs to be acknowledged. And so, like, I have faith in the language. Does that make any sense? I understand, but at the same time, I am so aware of the fact that many, many people, Okay, I do not say one path is better than the other. They just have different costs and benefits, different risks and rewards. Do you see? So, like, I have a worldview that can handle anything. But what is the cost?

Brian Johnston [01:11:31] Yeah. What is the cost of that? It's.

Jared Anderson [01:11:34] Are you asking rhetorically or really?

Brian Johnston [01:11:37] No, no, I'm curious what you're gonna say.

Jared Anderson [01:11:40] I don't believe anymore. I can't believe in the literal story anymore. And one of my questions is, so it's one thing to say, do you

Brian Johnston [01:11:50] see that as kind of. I sometimes call it a loss of innocence, which actually, to me, sometimes I grieve over that a little bit.

Jared Anderson [01:11:59] I view it much more. I don't grieve. I just. So I don't think, I don't think of things in terms of good, bad, right, wrong, true false, or true faults. I think of things in terms of costs and benefits. So basically. But here's my biggest concern and why I'm not like, well, this is the.

Brian Johnston [01:12:25] A new way. Everybody else should do this.

Jared Anderson [01:12:27] Yeah. I don't know if I want to name names, but the idea that, like, here's the complicated story of history, everyone needs to know it, boom, let's export it. A parallel that I've thought of is that's like saying your parents sitting you down and saying, I just want to talk to you for a couple hours about every mistake I have ever made. But here's the problem. And this is where I get into, like, suggestions and how I, how I hope the church, the approach the church takes. First, it hurts me so much that the church is losing so many people when it is not necessary. It is not necessary to be losing so many people. And so on one hand, I feel like the church has taken a very protective, conservative approach where it's like, well, we're not going to, we're not going to shake your world, especially, you know, with the correlation recent approach. And if you think yourself out of the church, that's your own damn fault. You know, there you go. It wasn't our fault. Bye. See ya.

Brian Johnston [01:13:25] Right.

Jared Anderson [01:13:26] But at the same time, I want to emphasize the fact that I do not think of the vanilla way of approaching things as worse or lesser than my approach. Do you see how that's different than a lot of intellectuals? It just has a risk that's like a Google search away.

Brian Johnston [01:13:48] Yeah, that is a big problem these days.

Jared Anderson [01:13:50] So our worldviews are vulnerable to the degree they are not accurate. But again, going back, my issue is I think that there's a hierarchy of truth. And so I think that the fact. Let me give one example of the first vision. So just bring up the first vision just for kicks. So I think that Joseph Smith had a spiritual experience. Maybe he saw Jesus like a lot of people did during that time. And you know, the Book of Mormon is trinitarian. It sure seems like that's the view presupposed. I think that he later came to understand that they were distinct personages and, you know, plurality of gods. And this is good stuff. Like, I love Mormon theology. I can't say I know it's true from the pulpit, but I love it.

Brian Johnston [01:14:38] At least it's fascinating.

Jared Anderson [01:14:39] Right? And sure it can be true, just not accurate. So here. But here, let me play this out just for another minute. So what I think happened is Joseph Smith discovered. I know he was really excited about the fact that the Hebrew word Elohim was plural. And so in 1838, he was like lots of people, questioning his legitimacy. He was having a hard time. He told a story. Think about the Gospel of John. He told a story about the first vision that expressed his current theological understandings, even though it did not accurately describe the historical experience he had.

Brian Johnston [01:15:18] Right. And you see parallels like you described in the Gospel of John doing basically a similar thing with the story of Jesus.

Jared Anderson [01:15:26] Do you see why I don't have crisis of faith?

Brian Johnston [01:15:29] Right, but you're saying you're okay that he tells a story that everyone else takes literally, even though you see it that he developed this based on the need at the time.

Jared Anderson [01:15:42] But here's the question, Brian. Here's where it gets really sticky. And I think that we need to take this seriously, given all of our claims to this point. Well, first. So first I ask again, a very practical approach to religion. I ask myself, does this story work?

Brian Johnston [01:16:03] What do you mean by work?

Jared Anderson [01:16:04] Does it get you to point B? Does it keep your food cold? Does it nourish you? Does it give people the type of understanding? So, I mean, I think Joseph could have said. I think that Mormonism has the framework of continuing revelation that he could have said, I saw an angel in 1823, and then I saw Jesus, and he said he forgave my sins. And then later I received a revelation that Jesus and Heavenly Father were distinct. We wouldn't have a problem with that. Right? Yeah, I'm saying that.

Brian Johnston [01:16:39] I mean, some people may not believe it, but it would at least feel like he wasn't changing the story. I suppose he's just. He's explicitly saying, here's a new fact, here's a new fact, here's a new fact.

Jared Anderson [01:16:54] All I'm saying is he already did that all over the map, you know, with like, development of temple ordinances and all sorts of things. You know, the view of the priesthood it developed. And so why not on the Godhead? Okay, but, but, but, but that's not how it is. So my question is I want to maximize benefit, minimize harm. And so my question is, what story do we tell? Is there a narrative? And remember, I'm really philosophical toward my approach of truth and reality. Philosophically, none of us know what really happened in our own lives, let alone history.

Brian Johnston [01:17:37] Okay?

Jared Anderson [01:17:38] One, our physiology cannot interpret all the data that enter our brains. Like, we are constantly filtering. We are receiving, like, millions and billions of, you know, bits of data every second. And so we filter. We don't even see things that are really there. Do you see where I'm going? So.

Brian Johnston [01:17:54] And then.

Jared Anderson [01:17:55] And then we edit our own memories. So I take a very practical view of accuracy and truth. And so with religion, let's, you know, let's think about the purposes of religion. What are the purposes of religion? The purposes of religion are to understand your role in life, understand why things suffering, give yourself a sense of purpose, understand how you should act, understand how you should, you know, behave, treat people around you, how do you engage with your community. So do you see? These are very like practical point A, point B, eat your salad type approaches to religion.

Brian Johnston [01:18:36] They are exercises in making meaning out of life.

Jared Anderson [01:18:40] Yes.

Brian Johnston [01:18:41] And meaning out of relationships with other human beings.

Jared Anderson [01:18:44] And let's not diminish the spiritual aspect of things. So my question is, for an agnostic academic type, what kind of understanding would he have to have to heal his sick daughter? So, like, how much education and philosophy and enlightenment or whatever do you want to call it? Would it take to equal the spiritual ecstatic experiences of an illiterate Pentecostal? I think these are questions that need to be taken seriously. And so this is why I do not value one approach over the other. And so all I. And so I live in such a way that I try to be what people need me to be. So, like, when I bear my testimony, I just speak in a very precise way where people would not know what I'm talking about. So I'll say something. So I say something like. And my wife has commented on this, she's like, I think I'm the only one who understood. So here's my approach. I think that we need to talk about religion in a way that is true and simple for where people need it, but it allows people the room to show that it might be more complicated. So with the parent analogy, you don't need to know every single mistake your parent ever made, but you need to know your parents are human so that when you come across that journal, you're not shattered. So I really like the fact that the church and there are some promising signs and there are lots of not promising signs. So I really like how at like the Whitmer home, when they were reconstructing the translation of the Book of Mormon, they have the hat.

Brian Johnston [01:20:29] Oh, wow.

Jared Anderson [01:20:30] So someone would have both. And this is how I speak. So I'll say something like, I don't think I really feel that we are all in the place where we need to be. And well, maybe I wouldn't even say that. But I say things like, you know, what we're doing here is real and it's important. And I'll say things like, I really love the idea of the atonement and it is so beautiful. Do you see what I mean? I'm not saying it's true, but no one would ever pick up on it.

Brian Johnston [01:20:59] I see what you're saying.

Jared Anderson [01:21:00] Yeah. But if someone was listening and had ears to hear, someone would say, well, what did you mean by that? And that would be an invitation to learn more.

Brian Johnston [01:21:15] Then you're only speaking to people who have invited you to speak in that way about it.

Jared Anderson [01:21:20] Yeah. So in my religion classes, I'm pretty bold.

Brian Johnston [01:21:25] Well, they're paying to get a religious education.

Jared Anderson [01:21:28] Yeah, they literally signed up for it. But, but when I talk to my co religionists, I'm sure there are people. So members of my ward, they know that I teach religion, they know I'm kind of interesting. They know I know a lot. They know, but they would never know the extent of my doubt. But what I love is, and I feel like there's some New Testament parallels to this. I have all this treasury, I have this treasury of all these different aspects of my understanding of religion that are both practical and spiritual and academic. And I can give people out of that treasury what they need. So a couple quick stories. I was speaking to some elders and I was talking to one elder and we were getting into this good, interesting discussion and I was pretty true believing at this point. And his companion, I love this. His companion said, brother Anderson, if what you have is the gift of knowledge, I don't want it.

Brian Johnston [01:22:28] No, tell me what you really think.

Jared Anderson [01:22:31] No, but the question is. Here is a poignant question that I don't think is one good answer. How do we meet the needs of everyone in our religious community when what the majority needs makes the minority allergic and want to leave? The happy oatmeal that the happy Sunday school stories that most get that are so fulfilling for the majority make the doubters feel like they are alone and on the outside So I think.

Brian Johnston [01:23:05] And the other way around is that the stuff that the doubters want to talk about is poison to the majority or at least it ruins what they're experiencing.

Jared Anderson [01:23:16] Isn't it fantastic by what I mean by that? It's this incredible tension. And so what I think so first there need to be those glimmers and those invitations. A couple things I wish every priesthood leader would be trained and take it to heart to tell people it is okay to have questions. It is okay to have questions. And there is more than one way to be a good Mormon.

Brian Johnston [01:23:42] Yeah, that would be helpful because you

Jared Anderson [01:23:44] can't, you can't treat, you cannot train pre civ leaders to answer all the nitpicky questions. It would probably destroy most of them if you did. So, you know, but. And this is where resources like the Internet and Mormon story is suddenly become a godsend to people like us, you know, who do have questions. So I value an approach that gives people who seek, you know, who want the questions. And by the way, just to throw this out there, one of my friends once said doubting and questioning is a factor of personality, not intelligence. I love that. Sometimes I think doubters can get all, you know, oh, yeah, well, it's because I'm so smart, blah, blah, blah. But it's not, it's just, it's a factor of personality. And so I really. So why I'm in the church. Again, I think it's beneficial. I think it has the potential to be even better. And I want to be part of the solution. I want to. So like, I sometimes don't get tons out of the way churches, but I'm pretty independent, you know, I'm, I don't. I enjoy the church, but I'm not dependent on it. Like one of the things that I really enjoy, that's one of my more controversial things, is when I talk about ethics and morality. I am not at all dependent on the LDS worldview. So like when I talk about what's right and wrong with students and stuff, I have no Mormon knee jerk. But that's so bad I don't. And I think it's a good thing, you know, I have my own system of morality that I really believe in and that's sacred to me. Okay. Any other questions or thoughts?

Final Reflections on Scripture and Faith

Brian Johnston [01:25:37] No. I think I really appreciate you taking the time to share how your faith journey has developed and to really open up and share some of your personal stories because I feel like it really helps a lot of people whether they see.

Jared Anderson [01:25:56] Aha.

Brian Johnston [01:25:56] That's how I Think too, or if nothing else, just to see that there really is diversity and that there can be a lot of different approaches.

Jared Anderson [01:26:08] Sorry, you should talk about, just for a minute, the New Testament, because we had all that academic perspective of things. So I think that testimony is such a personal issue. And I definitely believe there is room to believe that Jesus is the savior of, you know, of the world and that he has atoned for our sins. Like, I personally, just because I'm so aware of the historical situation and I'm like, so I would be okay if perhaps, you know, because we're all connected, then this one being Jesus could, you know, in part of the entire organism that is all of us, he could be the one to digest out all of the terrible things. And I think it has very beneficial. It is a beautiful, beneficial theology where it's like, we have this God who has empathy for all of us, who does not want that, where no matter what someone has gone through, there's someone who has empathy that is beautiful and powerful. But at the same time, I think the Scriptures were written by inspired human beings. So it's a mixture of the words of God and the philosophies of men. I don't know. So it's just a mixture. Do you have more specific questions? So, like, I believe in inspiration. I believe in revelation, but I see the Scriptures as mostly human, mostly human endeavors and results with divine help, you know, whatever you want to call that. And that we should reflect upon the wisdom of the ages. But that I think that Scripture could be. Should be a catalyst for the personal relationship with the transcendent rather than a. Well, because the Bible says it. Like, if someone were to say, what does the Bible teach about X? And for one thing, that's a problem because the Bible is not one book, it's a library of books. And I would be just as likely to say, why does it matter as anything else?

Brian Johnston [01:28:16] I see. All right, Jared. Well, we had the opportunity to listen to you speak for a couple hours on the New Testament and the academic view of that. So how do you fit that, you know, the idea of the New Testament into your faith perspective?

Jared Anderson [01:28:35] Good question. Well, I already talked big picture question about putting a high value on agency. To summarize it, I think that these scriptures are the result of human action inspired by God.

Brian Johnston [01:28:51] Okay, so it's humans creating stories, but with God sort of emanating in the background.

Jared Anderson [01:28:59] Yeah. So people are speaking from their own understanding, their own worldviews, but at the same time, they're having these spiritual experiences. These transcendent experiences. I do believe in revelation and so I believe that the scriptures are inspired and inspiring. So even if the Book of Mormon is not historical at all, it's inspiring. You know, it has good theology and it would make sense, given Joseph Smith's worldview, why it would be that way. And so I think I do not. I see the Scriptures as a catalyst for our own revelation and our own relationship with the divine. So, you know, when people ask me, well, what does the Bible say about this? Part of me wants to say, why does it matter? Because yes, we should meditate and contemplate upon the scriptures of the wisdom of the ages. And I think we should read non Mormon scripture. I think we should read the. I mean, I do read other scripture in my class. We can read all the different enlightened literature. And I think that C.S. lewis and a self help book, to me, anything that is inspired, anything that increases my desire to be an ability to be a better person, to increase those attributes of love, joy, growth, freedom. M. Scott Peck, Road Less Traveled is scripture to me. So I don't. Just because something is in the Bible, I don't privilege it.

Brian Johnston [01:30:32] You don't see that as having some kind of special authoritative status beyond its utilitarian use in inspiring you?

Jared Anderson [01:30:44] No. So I think that the Scriptures were put together through historical processes and it was individuals who were inspired of God doing the best they could writing it down. But we should not privilege information just because it is in the scriptures. I think that someone telling a story or an experience or writing a book that can be more inspiring than anything in the Bible.

Brian Johnston [01:31:11] So do you see a difference between being inspired by the story of the battle of Helm's Deep in the Tolkien series compared to the battles in the Book of Mormon or.

Jared Anderson [01:31:25] Wow, that's a good question.

Brian Johnston [01:31:26] The Old Testament or the New Testament?

Jared Anderson [01:31:30] Okay. I am very grateful that we have the words of Jesus that we do. I'm grateful that we have the historical records of the Israelites. But I do not think that is any greater than reading an autobiography of someone who is, who's a very spiritual person.

Brian Johnston [01:31:52] Okay.

Jared Anderson [01:31:54] And again, it's like, if so I feel like there's. That the scriptures are a starting point, not an end point. I think that's a good, a good way to sum it up.

Brian Johnston [01:32:04] Okay, fair enough. Well, I really appreciate you spending so much time, for one thing, sharing the academic world and the view of the New Testament, which is your specialty. But I really also appreciate you kind of opening up and baring your soul a little and sharing some of your journey as a fellow Mormon and somebody from an LDS background, because I think a lot of people really appreciate either hearing that they're not alone in having some of these doubts and questions, or if nothing else, just representing that there is diversity within Mormon thought and really appreciate you spending time with us on the Mormon Stories community.

Jared Anderson [01:32:50] I really appreciate the opportunity. I'm glad I was able to do it.

Brian Johnston [01:32:53] All right, thanks.

John Dehlin [01:32:58] Thank you for joining us today on Mormon Stories Podcast. To discuss this podcast with others, please check us out@mormonstories.org to keep the podcast alive or to join our support community, please consider a tax deductible donation today@mormonstories.org music for this podcast was provided by Clayton and Sky Pixton. The Mormon Stories logo was generously provided. Started by studiocase.com thank you for listening.

Guest [01:33:39] That we may return home to his presence to live in his sight Always, always to walk in the light Father in heaven we thank Thee this day for loving guidance to show us the way Grateful we praise thee with songs of delight Gladly, gladly we'll walk in the light.

Transcript © 2026 John P. Dehlin. All rights reserved. Brief quotations are welcome with attribution and a link to mormonstories.org; all other use requires written permission.