Did Acts Lie About Paul? Bart Ehrman Exposes the Problem

追加: 2026-05-31

[00:00:11]Hundreds of videos not released, early access, >> [music] >> join the Patreon, MythVision.

[00:00:18]>> [clears throat] >> Squeezing in everything we can. Guys, we're squeezing a camel through the eye of a needle right now, so please bear with us. Does Acts contradict Paul regarding his visit to Jerusalem?

[00:00:28]McLatchie pushes back against the idea that Acts contradicts Paul by claiming that Paul simply had no reason to mention all of the events in his itinerary. McLatchie quotes Jesus Interrupted. This emphatic statement that Paul is not lying should give us pause. He is completely clear. He did not consult with any others after his conversion. Did not see any of the apostles for 3 years, and then he did not see any except Cephas, Peter, and Jesus' brother James.

[00:00:56]This makes the account found in the book of Acts very interesting indeed. For according to Acts 9, immediately after Paul converted, he spent some time in Damascus with the disciples. And when he left the city, he headed directly to Jerusalem where he met with the apostles of Jesus. On all counts, Acts seems to be at odds with Paul. Did he spend time with other Christians immediately Acts or not, Paul? Did he go straight to Jerusalem, Acts, or not, Paul? Did he meet with a group of apostles, Acts, or just with Peter and James, Paul? And so you obviously you've seen the slide.

[00:01:30]McLatchie asks, quote, "Now, how long a period of time is denoted by many days?"

[00:01:35]Get this. "Take a look at 1 Kings 2:38-39, McLatchie says, where many days in Hebrew is immediately glossed as 3 years." End quote.

[00:01:49]Dr. Ehrman?

[00:01:51]>> [laughter] >> So, okay. So, let me ask Let me ask let me ask him this. Yeah, leave that up.

[00:02:01]Let me ask him this. The Septuagint is a translation of 1 Kings 2 that was done centuries after 1 Kings 2. The translation was not written by the author of 1 Kings 2.

[00:02:15]1 Kings 2 says it was a long time.

[00:02:22]He doesn't put the Greek he doesn't put the Hebrew there so I don't know what it is.

[00:02:27]He says it's literally many days. I'm not going to bother to look it up in Hebrew right now, but but the the translation of the Septuagint centuries later says 3 years and so he says therefore many days means 3 years.

[00:02:42]And therefore um some days in Acts 9 uh sufficient days um it actually doesn't quite say many.

[00:02:53]It's sufficient some days.

[00:02:56]Um therefore that might might mean 3 years.

[00:03:01]Um if I if I just let me put it like this.

[00:03:05]Suppose suppose I take a Greek verse in the New Testament um and for example suppose I um uh I don't know. Suppose I take a Greek verse that says some days and the in Greek and I translate that into English with the phrase 3 years.

[00:03:26]Would you be able to use my English translation of the phrase my translation is 3 years even though the original said many days. Would you be able to use my translation to prove that the author meant 3 years?

[00:03:41]>> Right.

[00:03:42]You know this >> The Septuagint translation has no bearing on what 1 Kings said.

[00:03:48]>> This is also another interesting fact.

[00:03:50]My buddy Steven threw this in there and I love Steven for this cuz he's so anal about particulars. In Acts 27, in the same book later, you have um Paul saying we sailed or it says we sailed slowly for many days. Are we going to now interpret that to mean 3 years? Did he sail for 3 years? I mean, like when do you stop? And it's the same Greek word.

[00:04:10]So, in the same book, but he wants to run to the 1 Kings Old Testament narrative to find a way to squeeze 3 year 3 years into many days. That's what he's trying to do.

[00:04:21]>> My view on this is, you know, you can as I was saying earlier, you can reconcile anything. I mean, I was, you know, if you if that's your goal, there there you can literally anything, not just in the Bible, just anything.

[00:04:33]You can do it if you work hard enough.

[00:04:35]And the question is, you know, why you want to do that? Um so, when I when I was a fundamentalist, that's what that was my goal because I I was sure the Bible was inerrant, and since there were no mistakes, there could not be mistakes. Literally, there could not So, there weren't mistakes. And so, the goal was to figure out why it's not a mistake. And if that's what you want to do, that's fine. If you want to understand the Bible though, you should let these authors speak for themselves instead of forcing your meaning onto them.

[00:05:01]Um when Acts says after some days, if it means 3 years, for one thing, the chronology of Acts doesn't work anymore.

[00:05:12]But moreover, it misses the point of Acts, which is right away, the first thing Paul did, he said went to Jerusalem to meet with the apostles. So, that's consistent with with Acts narrative because he wants the apostles and Paul to agree on everything.

[00:05:26]You also misunderstand Galatians because Galatians 1, the whole point Paul wants to make is I did not get my message from them. I wasn't even there for 3 years.

[00:05:37]By God, I'm not lying.

[00:05:40]So, yeah, okay. If you want to mean, make him say, "Well, actually, I did go there right away." You know, right after right after Damascus that's where I went. You know, well, that was 3 years later but so I no, he was in Arabia and then so you know, so you completely misunderstand what he's saying. You really want to misunderstand somebody so he doesn't contradict somebody else.

[00:06:02]You're misunderstanding both of them for the sole reason of supporting your view instead of letting them speak for themselves. Is that really how you want to interpret texts?

[00:06:11]>> I think you know how it is, Dr. Ehrman.

[00:06:13]You know, when you're when you when you're coming at it, you say this in every book you write and I love that about you. You just lay it out there and say this was everything to me. And so it's like like uh the cognitive dissonance knowing your wife's cheating on you but you love her to death or something and you just can't admit that there's possibly infidelity taking place. It's emotional. So I tried to feel compassion and empathy and you do too. You do it all the time in your lectures but there comes a time when reality has to set in and sometimes you just got to say guys, figure out a way of Christianity that will work and comply with the evidence that will work with the reality of the world we see and not magical thinking. And so that's just my thoughts but uh he he ends this and concludes by pointing out Luke's omission in Paul's itinerary. Quote, "But what about the trip to Arabia? Luke is silent on it. But does Luke contradict Paul's claim that he went to Arabia? I would place Paul's trip to Arabia within the many days of Acts 9:23. Paul also informs us in Galatians 1:17 that he returned again to Damascus.

[00:07:17]So it isn't surprising uh then that he that his subsequent trip to Jerusalem is from Damascus." End quote. What do you think about the possibility that Paul took a trip to Arabia while the Jews in Damascus were plotting to kill him?

[00:07:34]>> Uh well, I what do you say? I mean, just anybody just read just read it yourself. Acts 9 verses 22 and 23.

[00:07:43]does this seem likely to you that when he says that Saul was in Damascus talking to Jews and that after a few after some days went by, does that does that that the Jews were plotting does that suggest that between 22 and 23 he spent 3 years in Arabia?

[00:08:06]Does that does that make sense? Okay.

[00:08:11]>> Interesting.

[00:08:13]Does Paul contradict Acts on the number of Jerusalem visits? This is the final graph and then what I'd like to do is ask you really down-to-earth funny, I think it's it's just amazing what you've done with your book forged to counter forgery.

[00:08:27]All your literature is just wonderful and I ask everyone to go in the description. If you have not read Dr. Ehrman's works, I you have blasphemed the Holy Spirit, okay? I'm just saying. Like literally, this is just Yeah, I would not say that.

[00:08:42]I'm just teasing, I know. I'm just saying your audiobooks are fantastic too, like on Audible. Any trip I take, I listen to it. I can listen to them again and I learn something new every time.

[00:08:51]So, final graph and then my excitement on recent stuff I read from you and then I have to let you go because you obviously have an another agenda here that's taking place here soon.

[00:09:02]Um does Paul contradict Acts on the number of Jerusalem visits? According to Paul, and I think he's quoting you here cuz the way we have a color According to Paul's account, the Jerusalem Council was only was only the second time he had been to Jerusalem. According to Acts, it was his third prolonged trip there. Once again, it appears that the author of Acts has confused some of Paul's itinerary, possibly intentionally for his own purposes. McClatchy asks a rhetorical question.

[00:09:30]Where does the text say that this was only Paul's second visit to Jerusalem?

[00:09:34]McClatchy continues, "In fact, we learn from Acts 11 that between those two journeys Paul had gone to Jerusalem to bring aid to the saints affected by a famine famine. There would have been no purpose in Galatians for Paul to have mentioned this trip as it did not relate to conferring with the apostles about the gospel he was preaching." End quote.

[00:09:54]It seems like McClatchy's rhetorical question could be asked about his own assertion. Where does the text say that Paul's trip to send aid to Judea was between those two journeys? The one that Paul Paul actually takes care to mention. What do you think about his apologetic strategy for harmonizing Paul and Acts?

[00:10:14]>> Well, I think it's very common. I mean, people do this. And um you know, Paul's goal in talking about the I mean, you have you have to read these books. You have to read them and study and see them in the context. When you do that, Paul is trying to explain that he did not spend much time in Jerusalem. He's trying to tell the And it's probably we it looks like he has opponents who are accusing him in Galatia. And it looks like they're saying, "Look, he's getting all this stuff from the apostles and he's changing it. You know, he's claiming you you Gentiles don't have to be circumcised, but he got his gospel from these Jerusalem people and they say you do." So, you know, he's changed. Paul's trying to say, "No, look, I haven't changed it. This is what Christ told me when he appeared to me.

[00:10:55]And I did not consult with them. I went there once after 3 years and then I went back 14 years later.

[00:11:02]I didn't consult with them. So, McClatchy wants us to think that Paul delivered this offering to Jerusalem and like he didn't look up the apostles?

[00:11:13]Really?

[00:11:14]And it's very hard to fit that collection, by the way, this early in Paul's minute This is in Acts. This is after his first missionary journey.

[00:11:26]It's quite clear when you read Paul the Pauline letters.

[00:11:29]He's his last letter uh Romans is talking about when he's going to be going to Jerusalem. And so it's at the end of his life. It's not right at the very beginning of his ministry. So there are all sorts of problems with it.

[00:11:40]But again, look, if you what you if your goal in life is to make sure there are no contradictions in the Bible, you can do that. You can do that with the Quran.

[00:11:48]You can do that with the Old Testament.

[00:11:50]You can do that with any biography of Abraham Lincoln, if that's that really is your goal in life. If on the other hand your goal in life is to understand these books, then I suggest you read them carefully and let each author say what he wants to say instead of pretending that he's saying what some other author said.

[00:12:12]>> [music]