I am reading a book by Bart D. Ehrman titled Misquoting Jesus.
Ehrman has a couple of decades of study behind him and has gone from fundamentalist Christian to Agnostic. The book is about the history of the New Testament. Very Interesting.
Is anybody else reading this? Any thoughts.
Has anybody read any other books by this author such as
Lost Christianities
Lost Scriptures
Truth and fiction in the Da Vinci Code
Ant recommendations or criticism?
Ehrman is one of th best NT scholars out there at presenting material to a lay audience. I’ve read Misquoting Jesus as well as a few others like Lost Christianities.
While I don’t think that Ehrman’s popular books are necessarily groundbreaking in terms of new theories or discoveries, I do think they are quite well crafted as lay introductions to NT scholarship. He conveys the material at a very basic level without condescending or seeming to talk down to the reader. He also manages to main a respectful tone towards believers and does not sneer at or belittle Fundamentalists even as he is kicking every last slat out from under Biblical inerrantism. I guess that’s probably because he himself spent so many years as a self-described “hardcore fundamentalist.” He understands the mind set.
Ehrman is one of the writers I cite most often when I get asked to recommend “beginners” books on Biblical scholarship (be careful, though. Not all of his books are intended for a popular audience. Some are more scholarly and rather technical).
His credentials are impeccable. He studied under Bruce Metzger (on of the foremost textual critics in the world) at Princeton Theological Seminary and is a pretty formiddable expert himself. It’s ironic that he was driven towards Biblical academics because of his faith, but that decades of intense study turned him agnostic.
Coming from you friend Diogenes I consider that high praise. If you had called him a hack I would have had serious doubts about my investment.
I’m enjoying the book. As you said, he delivers the material in a manner that is easy to grasp for a lay person. After this I’ll read a couple of more of his. Lost Christianities looks interesting. I will probably pass this book on to my brother with whom I’ve been having an ongoing discussion. He sent me a copy of “Know the Truth” by Bruce Milne. It’s awful. It’s a great example of assuming the truth of a position and then pointing out what supports your assumption. It’s a tactic I see in a lot of Christian writing.
Speaking of books, I have a copy of The **Case for Christ **by Strobel. At time I got it I was intrigued by his interviews with scholars. Later here on SDMB I heard him refered to as a hack. Any insights to offer?
I have a great brother who gave me a gift certificate for Great Courses and last summer I got his course After the New Testament: The Writings of the Apostolic Fathers They are a series of 24 lectures, 30 minutes per lecture, Ehrman himself is the Lecturer (I will admit that until this thread I had no idea that he was well known - or even that he had books -tho I assumed he was published :o ) Having said that, it was probably one of the most influential things on my understanding of that time and place ever. I think it is indispensable for anyone who wants to understand the development of Christianity.
I had no idea he was a former fundamentalist… that really surprises me.
I an think almost no points --or at least precious few – that a fundamentalist Christian might find helpful in his insights.
Somehow, I think, without checking it when I get back, that my church is NOT gonna like either him or his books!
Based on what you all have posted, I am ordering this book and maybe some others you recommended. Amazon.com, here I come!
(I may be a Christian in a semi-fundamentalist church, but that does not mean I am brain dead)
In this thread I gave my opinion on his Case for Faith, as did one other poster. From what I know of him (which isn’t all that much), I probably wouldn’t call him a hack, but an original thinker he is not.
Thanks. That helps even though it’s a different book. That sounds like the same style he used in The Case for Christ. He interviewed so called experts. I’m wondering how biased his conclusions are and are his experts actually experts. Asking the faithful whose conclusion you already know is not the same as honestly examining an issue.
I’ve had so many people quote some friend or minister to me who has supposedly studied the Bible for years as if that makes it authoritative. I also realize that people with some religious degrees have not studied Christianity objectively.
Still seems like something(s) I need to read, and thanks for the extra link.
IMHO the key is to seek the truth. I don’t hold airstream Christian beliefs anymore but I can still go to church and enjoy worshipping. I don’t have to agree with everything. I think a lot of Christianity embraces tradition a little to easily without really questioning it.
Regardless, I’m glad to hear you want to read the book. It’s a good one.
Strobel is a bog-standard apologist who has no credentials in Biblical scholarship. His pretense is that he is a “hard nosed journalist” who asks the tough questions but e only interviews “experts” who support an inerrantist, fundamentalist point of view and accepts everything they say at face value without ever soliciting an opposing view even from liberal Christians much less serious critical views. He also employs a lot of strawmen- setting up and knocking down phony “skeptical” arguments that skeptics don’t actually make. Here is a detailed refutation of The Case for Christ by Jeff Lowder.
Here are a couple of worthwhile links about Ehrman. The first is a Washington Post article. The second is an NPR interview he did (you can download the audio) about Misquoting Jesus. During the interview, Ehrman takes calls from Fundamentalists.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/04/AR2006030401369_pf.html
Hmm… maybe he took calls on the air, but the interview online doesn’t have any questions afterwards. It ends right after he talks about how much he likes Christmas. Perhaps I’m missing the “caller participation” link?
Very interesting. Spells it out very clearly. Thanks.
Post article is excellent. Same result with NPR. Good interview but no fundie calls. I’ll bet they were interesting. He must get his share of real venom.
It seems I got my interviews mixed up. Ehrman took calls from fundies on the Diane Rehm show, not NPR. Sorry about that. I recently listened to both of them and for some reason I thought it was the Terry Gross interview where he took calls. My mistake. You can hear it in the Rehm link.
Couldn’t find the show with that link.
Would Misquoting Jesus be at all of interest to a former Christian who takes a dim view of all fundamentalist beliefs? (I just don’t believe that any text was dictated word-for-word by God- I don’t think God does things that way) Or would it be like The DaVinci Code- I didn’t really get into it because I don’t care one way or the other if Jesus had kids, because I’m not Christian.
I’m sorry, for some reason I posted the wrong link (too many tabs open at once). This one, I PROMISE, goes to the Rehm interview.
The DaVinci Code is fiction based on a fringe theory contrived by a group of non-scholars. Misquoting Jesus is a factual book on the history and transmission of Biblical manuscripts written by a genuine scholar and a recognized expert in the field of Biblical texts. Whether it would be interesting to you personally, I can’t say, but it’s not really an attack on fundamentalists or Christianity and doesn’t contain any crazy theories about Jesus or anything. One common theme in Ehrman’s books is how surprisingly diverse early Christian beliefs were and how the (often bitter) rivalries between different Christian sects played out in the earliest texts (see Lost Christianities for a great book on that subject). You can learn a lot about early Christianity from Ehrman’s books. I find the subject fascinating but YMMV.
I think what you mention here might be very interesting to Anne and anyone who is not very fond of the religious right and their desire to push their beliefs and traditions on others. Not as an attack on them but just as a presentation of the truth about how much of Christianity is just tradition that is accepted without question.
My own experience with Christians is that many assume the doctrine they are being taught now is the same doctrine and spiritual truth taught by Jesus and the apostles and passed down through the ages. It’s interesting to note that there was so little agreement in the early days of Christianity about the life of Christ and what it meant and how doctrines changed over the years. It’s also interesting to realize how many other ancient writings were considered sacred before an official list was made.