(June 22, 2016 at 3:16 am)Ignorant Wrote: Unless I've missed something, all he's saying is that you can't prove the resurrection using the Gospel texts. I think any Christian would be very wise to agree. Ehrman says that the gospel narratives, as they are found in the text, about the resurrection are not reliable historically. You might find it interesting that Ehrman DOES NOT believe EVERYTHING in the gospel texts are historically unreliable, e.g. He thinks it is almost certain beyond doubt that Jesus existed and was crucified under the authority of Pontius Pilate. <= does that prove anything beyond that fact? No.
In his books Misquoting Jesus and Jesus Interrupted, Ehrman exposes theologically-inclined edits to the bible bullshit. No wonder the jesus freaks hate him!
My complaint with Ehrman is that after spending 20 years pissing on this self-serving bullshit which xtians call holy he still cannot make the break completely away from his early training and belief. For that you need a real historian. Richard Carrier. He doesn't give a flying fuck about theology. "Just the facts, ma'am."
