And yet Ehrman still thinks that there was some shlepper named jesus walking around doing something.
The problem...which all of these "historians" refuse to face is that the only evidence is the fucking gospels themselves. And they tell a story of a miracle worker who rose from the dead.
Ehrman, who rejects that for the absurd propaganda that it is, nonetheless feels compelled to try to dumb down the story into something in which an insignificant preacher gets himself executed. The trouble is that there is absolutely NO EVIDENCE... not even the fucking gospels...to back Ehrman up on that story.
I've read as many of his books as I can get my hands on and when he stays in his own field of ancient documents he is one of the best. But he is trying to let "faith" dictate his beliefs on an HJ and "faith" is one shitty way to run a railroad.
The problem...which all of these "historians" refuse to face is that the only evidence is the fucking gospels themselves. And they tell a story of a miracle worker who rose from the dead.
Ehrman, who rejects that for the absurd propaganda that it is, nonetheless feels compelled to try to dumb down the story into something in which an insignificant preacher gets himself executed. The trouble is that there is absolutely NO EVIDENCE... not even the fucking gospels...to back Ehrman up on that story.
I've read as many of his books as I can get my hands on and when he stays in his own field of ancient documents he is one of the best. But he is trying to let "faith" dictate his beliefs on an HJ and "faith" is one shitty way to run a railroad.