The Lydia McGrew Podcast

Here I'm using the undesigned coincidence concerning the green grass (Mark 6) and the time of Passover (John 6) for the feeding of the five thousand as an illustration of the weakness of theological invention theories.   In the course of it I "help out" the theological theorists by presenting three suggested symbolic allusions to Old Testament passages for the pillow on which Jesus was sleeping in Mark 4:38. This is intended to show that our ability to think up a clever-sounding connection between some apparently factual, casually narrated Gospel detail and an Old Testament passage is of no epistemic value. It's much, much too easy.   I'm taking the occasion from Dale Allison's recent discussion of this on Mythvision, where he said that it is "just as good" an explanation of the green grass in Mark that this is an allusion to Psalm 23 rather than evidence of eyewitness testimony.   Here is the exchange on mythvision (cued up):  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohvL5FoCgHA  Here is an older article by Allison where he makes this same suggestion:  https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/irish-biblical-studies/05-3_132.pdf Originally uploaded to YouTube May 1, 2022

I've been talking for some time about the importance of giving a maximal data case for the resurrection rather than a case that relies only on what is granted (supposedly) by a majority of scholars. I've sometimes been asked what that would look like in practice, especially if one were delivering it in the time frame of about half an hour. I already have a video where I give some shorter versions of this.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyqF_9qPiG4&list=PLe1tMOs8ARn0sWTtdaXPg8oMRqmYnhU6M&index=3 As I've always said, everyone who makes a presentation (even of a minimal facts case) will have things that can be fleshed out more elsewhere and debated at more length elsewhere. Recently a skeptic and a Christian did a seven-hour (!) debate, even though the Christian scholar in question does not use a maximal data case in debates. So evidently there is nothing intrinsically "short" about a more minimalist type of case.  By the same token, there is nothing particularly "long" about a maximal data case that makes it unsuited for a context where you have to state your case in an opening statement and then debate the premises and/or the inference as the debate goes on.  Here is a video where I dispel several misconceptions about the maximal data argument:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIr4iG6RBY8&list=PLe1tMOs8ARn0sWTtdaXPg8oMRqmYnhU6M&index=10&t=70s  In the presentation for Areopagus I give an opening statement length and type.   My thanks to Areopagus 2022 and Women in Apologetics, the organizers of the conference, for inviting me and for permission to share this video, which was originally recorded on Good Friday, 2022. Originally uploaded to YouTube Apr 24, 2022 

This is an Easter episode! I'm drawing attention here to the details of physical motion in the meeting between Mary Magdalene and Jesus in John 20--one of the most beautiful scenes in the Bible.   For more information on the "Goldilocks zone" and Gospel details, see this video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW1Z_pFPr7c&t=364s  For a discussion of the other women at the tomb and "I told you so" Jesus, see here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZeV7VPUM1U  Originally uploaded to YouTube Apr 17, 2022

For Palm Sunday, I'm talking about one of the most common objections urged against John's literal historicity--the claim that he contradicts the Synoptics about the day of Jesus' crucifixion. Therefore, so goes the theory, John moved the day of the crucifixion to make Jesus appear more like the Passover lamb.  In this video I thoroughly discuss the three prooftexts used to allege this change by John and show that there's no there there. I'm relying heavily on the work of Craig Blomberg and Brant Pitre in my discussion here.  Originally uploaded to YouTube Apr 10, 2022

Arguments from silence are widespread in biblical studies. What makes the difference between a strong argument from silence and a weak one?  Here is the abstract for Tim McGrew's paper on this question:  https://philpapers.org/rec/MCGTAF-2 Originally uploaded to YouTube Apr 3, 2022

Be careful about trying to use multiple attestation to support propositions, especially if your overall methodology tends to undermine the individual access to the facts and individual literal truthfulness.   Here is my Themelios article on multiple attestation:  https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/finessing-independent-attestation-interdisciplinary-biblical-criticism/  Here is the written debate with Bart Ehrman mentioned in the video. (Search "midrash" on the page to find the relevant portion.)  https://tinyurl.com/LiconavsEhrman  Here is the recent discussion of Jesus' appearances that I discuss in the video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTXZb3IPaFw&t=2673s Originally uploaded to YouTube Mar 27, 2022

When you encounter a theory about unstated authorial intentions in a narrative work, how can you evaluate it correctly? Too often, scholars give epistemic value to their own ingenuity, counting a highly complex theory of hidden authorial meaning as plausible merely because someone thought it up and because other scholars take it seriously. This approach means that interpreters are coming to the document with the unargued assumption that the author is creating a literary work rather than a more straightforward work of narrative history. These literary theories, then, aren't subject to sufficiently rigorous scrutiny or made to carry the due burden of proof.  I suggest what I call "breaking it down" in order to evaluate a theory about some subtle authorial intention in the Gospels, using the theory that John moved the Temple cleansing as an example. For more on the Temple cleansing, see the playlist, here:  https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLe1tMOs8ARn0QhpT_JgxzoxmUolEg9d3K Originally uploaded to YouTube Mar 20, 2022

Three weeks ago I discussed Dale Allison's attempt to parallel the claims of the "rainbow body" phenomenon with the evidence for Jesus' resurrection. There I said that unless someone could show me reason to think that Allison overlooked some important type of evidence for rainbow bodies, I did not need to read another book other than Allison's chapter on the topic to see that the case looks extremely weak. When I encountered pushback on this, I issued a challenge to tell me in what way Allison was underselling his case or what important evidence he had failed to represent. This challenge was declined.  I have since then gotten hold of Francis Tiso's book on the topic containing his allegedly rigorous, skeptical, outsider's investigations of the rainbow body phenomenon and found them to be...underwhelming. Allison certainly did not undersell the case. If anything, he oversold it.  This is a common thing I have run into: "You have criticisms of this book? Well, you have to read this other book instead! No, I'm not going to tell you why, I'm just going to insist that you read this other book or else you're not investigating responsibly! Oh, now you've read the other book? Well, now you need to read another-other book! Otherwise, nope, nope, you haven't done a real investigation. Doesn't count. That's it."   Cue the Allison fans telling me that now I have to read another-other book in 3...2...1.   So if you're interested, watch here to see my review of Tiso's evidence for rainbow bodies.  https://www.amazon.com/Rainbow-Body-Resurrection-Attainment-Dissolution/dp/1583947957/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1XW14P1ON90C1&keywords=francis+tiso&qid=1646256629&sprefix=francis+tiso%2Caps%2C112&sr=8-1 Originally uploaded to YouTube Mar 6, 2022

This channel is all about Gospel reliability. But you might be surprised to find out how many different ways the term "reliability" can be used. Here I discuss four different possible uses of the term and distinguish them, and I explain why I'm going to try to avoid the phrase "general reliability" in the future myself, due to ambiguity.    Here is the link to the recent volume of The Journal of Greco-Roman Christianity and Judaism, which I mention at the end of the video. I've just had two articles (free to read) published in this volume. The topics there are slightly different, but I want to make people aware of these recent peer-reviewed publications in New Testament studies:  http://www.jgrchj.net/volume17/?page=volume17&fbclid=IwAR1wtvZs7l-V0VgWpt7WPXvjem7P3ZzCBba1WklDUXXRsOl9euKJeRLyTjc Uploaded to YouTube Feb 27, 2022

In this longer video I discuss a chapter of the book _The Resurrection of Jesus: Apologetics, Polemics, History_ by theologian and New Testament scholar Dale Allison.  https://www.amazon.com/Resurrection-Jesus-Apologetics-Polemics-History/dp/0567697568/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1XL4S3AYS9I0F&keywords=allison+resurrection+Polemic&qid=1644510654&sprefix=horae+evangelicae%2Caps%2C93&sr=8-1  The chapter I am discussing concerns the alleged phenomenon of "rainbow bodies" in which eastern sages' dead bodies supposedly dissolve into light after their deaths. Allison strongly implies that Christians should be "ill at ease" with these reports if they wish to affirm the resurrection of Jesus evidentially while dismissing the rainbow body claims. Here I analyze Allison's argument for epistemological parallels between the claims and find it wanting.  This discussion strongly illustrates the importance of taking a "maximal data" approach to arguing for the resurrection, since this makes plain the asymmetry between the evidence for "rainbow bodies" and the evidence for Jesus' resurrection.  Don't forget to like, share, and subscribe! Originally uploaded to YouTube 2/13/2022