(July 8, 2014 at 1:18 pm)Confused Ape Wrote:(July 8, 2014 at 1:15 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Ehrman's problem there is that he spent a career denouncing those same sources he uses. It is akin to shitting in a small pond for 20 years and then saying "it's okay - I found a clean spot over here that you can drink from."
Sorry Bart. You were too successful in exposing the NT as a pile of bullshit.
So how did he think the Jesus story got started before he decided to 'prove' that there was a real man instead?
Why did he change his mind? Did he run out of ideas for books disproving Jesus?
Ultimately I suspect that it is simply a holdover from his fundie days. There "must" have been something to the story because...... just because.