Peter, Paul, and Mary Magdalene: The Followers of Jesus in History and Legend

Peter Paul & Mary Magdalene Bart Ehrmann is not just re-chewing old cabbage from previous books here, though he is forced by his subject matter to reexamine old ground from a new point of view. The rationale for his title, which he obviously found just too pawkishly juicy to resist, is the way in which the sixties folk pop trio, like the Biblical one, came on the scene in an apocalyptic time bearing a pop-countercultural message, the latter as expressed in what became the Gospels, the latter-day one in such a song as "If I Had A Hammer." In the Biblical case, unlike the sixties case, this book's central question is who were these people? Modern Christians seem to be pretty sure they know, for all that their opinions may vary all over the map. By way of illustrating the real problem, Ehrmann would ask, for example, who was Jesus? For all that modern Christians may think they know that one, the reality is that the four different gospels portray four different Jesuses, with radically different personalities. For modern Christians, of course, who read the Bible "as a little child," if at all, this is not necessarily a crisis of faith. They just go with the Jesus they like best, most usually the rather Buddhistic "cool guy in sandals" Jesus of Matthew, and let it go at that. Obviously for a serious scholar like Ehrmann, that's not good enough, for understanding either the real Jesus or other such lesser players as Peter, Paul and Mary. Simon-called-Peter, for a start, is particularly problematical, in that, important as he must have been, we only know him from the accounts of others. By all accounts, he was an illiterate Aramaic-speaking blue-collar fisherman, a strange choice for what Jesus called "The rock upon which I will build my church..." especially since Peter seems, by temperament, anything but a rock. As both the apostle who cut off the ear of one of Jesus' adversaries and who denied Jesus thrice, Peter always seems rather a volatile, constantly doubting, vacillating hothead, to a degree that occasions Ehrmann to suggest that Jesus may have simply been being sarcastic. The writings attributed to Peter, in highly literate Koine Greek, are obviously not really his, nor do we know for sure what he actually may have gone on to do, all accounts being variously unreliable and contradictory. To the Catholic church, he was the first patriarch of Rome, where he was eventually martyred, though alas there is no verifiable record of Peter's ever actually having visited Rome, and significant reason to suppose that he wouldn't have in any case, so who was this masked man anyway? For Ehrmann, though, this is just where it gets interesting. Just as important as who Peter really was is the issue of who people, from then to now, have thought he was, as expressed through legendry and literary forgeries about him down through Christian history, which have had such a profound effect on that history and on church doctrine. This is even truer of Saul-called

Professor Bart Ehrman has written another engaging and insightful book on early Christianity. He examines three of Jesus's most influential followers through the lens of historical perspective, the bible, and early external writings. He shows great insight in the influence each of these figures had on the history of the Western world. Did you ever think about the fact that the historical Peter had to have been an illiterate peasant who spoke Aramaic and it is impossible that he wrote perfect Greek Epistles that applied more to the later church than the 1st century? We must understand that Paul never met the historical Jesus and barely mentions any history of the real man, instead evidence points to the fact that he was the one who began the "Christ" myth. All the gospels and outside sources agree that Mary Magdalene was the first to witness the empty tomb or the risen Jesus, that makes her the first Christian and the pivot point that began the Christian religion. Buy this book for an education on these three figures and what we can really know about them and their impact on Christianity and Western Civilization. Curious minds will not be disappointed.

Bart Ehrman has written a number of analyses of early Christian church writings, trying to help the reader to understand historical context and how this shaped what was included, and excluded, from scripture. In Peter, Paul and Mary Madalene, he keeps up this tradition. His discussions of reading the books of the New Testament horizontally, as opposed to vertically, to show the contrasts between them, should be required reading. Such highlighting may offend literalists, but that is the nature of religious discourse if questioning is not allowed. Finally, Ehrman's writing style makes such reading easy to do. On top of being easy to read and well-informed, Ehrman is genuinely funny. Comments regarding, for example, the six people in the English speaking world who have not yet read The Da Vinci Code come at you from nowhere and help to keep everything moving and entertaining as well as enlightening.

This is my first Bart Ehrman book, but it won't be my last. Although he is head of the religion department at University of North Carolina, he is certainly not a fully persuaded preacher. He approaches the ancient literature surrounding Peter the disciple, Paul the apostle, and Mary Magdalene (perhaps both, perhaps not) as a historian, not a theologian. That will tick off a lot of readers. I spent a week with this volume, approaching it with an open mind (easier for a religious liberal like myself) but a prayerful heart. Ehrman notes that most modern scholars agree that perhaps half of Paul's letters in the New Testament were not Paul's own work, and that half of Peter's smaller output is questionable as well. While he does not declare that non-canonical ancient writings have equal weight with those selected as sacred by fourth-century church leaders, he makes a sometimes persuasive case that the stories which did get in "The Bible" are not always older, or more accurate, or more believable than the tales and legends which were rejected. I am no scholar, but I am a person who hopes that Jesus was special, and that the basic Christian message is valid. Reading studies such as this one, to me, is vital for those who purport to have an honest belief, intelligently arrived at. Bart Ehrman pretty much demolishes any credibility to the idea that the words and sentences in the Bible are infallible, protected by God or the Holy Spirit from mistaken translations or political/religious agendas of later times. He does not opine on the divinity of Jesus or the validity of the Resurrection, however. One could come away from this reading experience with faith weakened, or strengthened. It is not the Gospel writing that is sacred, but the purpose of the life of the man/God (?) that the writing is about. That is something that will be debated until judgment day, whenever and however it arrives.

With captivating strength and clarity, New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman has written another winner. He exudes competency, frequently reminding us that his conclusions are those of a historian. In "Peter, Paul, and Mary Magdalene," this means he will not be an advocate for or against any specific theology - instead, he will give us his best assessments from all available sources about these three historic personalities. I was subjected (through age 20) to more than my share of fundamentalist preaching, yet values at home were more those of inquiry and evidence toward the world in general. Ehrman's approach to the Bible is more to my liking than reiteration of a dogma I've already heard, documented by passages of scripture preselected to prove that certain view. Consider a book where all aspects of the early development of Christianity are subjected to scrutiny. Issues of dogma are extensively discussed, but not endorsed nor advocated. Instead, they are examined for consistency within the whole context of Biblical and non-canonical sources and the political setting in which the early church solidified its views. Few seminary graduates that have studied Biblical Textual Criticism have seen fit to share this type of information with their flocks. Ehrman fills this gap - every page chock full of information you would not find compiled anywhere else. This is his forte. Mary Magdalene is incredibly popular, despite being mentioned in the Bible only thirteen times. One of the Bible's best stories is that of Jesus and the adulterous woman, mistakenly identified by many as Mary Magdalene. The Pharisees brought her to Jesus, asking what they should do with her. Of course, it was a trap. If he said she should not be punished, he would be going against scripture. If he recommended punishment, his message of mercy and love would be compromised. While writing something (speculations abound as to what) in the sand, he invited the sinless one amongst them to cast the first stone. Later when he looked up, they were gone, except the woman. Jesus told her to "Go and sin no more." What a great story - adding suspense and pathos to many a sermon. It's a shame that it was a late addition - not present in the oldest and best Greek manuscripts of John's gospel, nor in any of the gospels. Not only that, its writing style was different and it included many words and phrases not used elsewhere in John. But it was such a wonderful and well-known story, more than one scribe decided to add it to the New Testament - and in several differing locations. Ehrman compares the teachings of the historical Jesus with the theological views of the apostle Paul: Jesus proclaimed the imminent arrival of the Son of Man, and urged his followers to repent and return to a faithful adherence to God's law. Paul, on the other hand, insisted that following the Law would have no bearing on one's salvation, that in fact one could be saved only through faith in Christ's death and