The truth according to Bart D. Ehrman

[John V]

He said up front that he wasn't very familiar with Ehrman, discussed what little he knew, and ended the post with:

"Now if Chas or others want to inform me on more of "Ehrman's facts" I'll be more than happy to discuss them."

Seems reasonable to me.

Plenty of atheists criticize Christianity despite having little knowledge of it.

[popeyespappy]

Plenty of atheists criticize Christianity despite having little knowledge of it.

And many atheists know more about religion in general than most Christians.

Atheists and agnostics, Jews and Mormons are among the highest-scoring groups on a new survey of religious knowledge, outperforming evangelical Protestants, mainline Protestants and Catholics on questions about the core teachings, history and leading figures of major world religions.

On average, Americans correctly answer 16 of the 32 religious knowledge questions on the survey by the Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion & Public Life. Atheists and agnostics average 20.9 correct answers. Jews and Mormons do about as well, averaging 20.5 and 20.3 correct answers, respectively.

Protestants as a whole average 16 correct answers; Catholics as a whole, 14.7. Atheists and agnostics, Jews and Mormons perform better than other groups on the survey even after controlling for differing levels of education.

Linky

[Minimalist]

Seems reasonable to me.

His books are all over the place. You could try fucking reading something that doesn't start with "IN THE BEGINNING."


You might learn something although I realize that is a scary thought.

[John V]

His books are all over the place.

Then it should be easy for someone to describe some of his arguments, as the OP suggested.

[Chas]

He said up front that he wasn't very familiar with Ehrman, discussed what little he knew, and ended the post with:

"Now if Chas or others want to inform me on more of "Ehrman's facts" I'll be more than happy to discuss them."

Seems reasonable to me.

Plenty of atheists criticize Christianity despite having little knowledge of it.

No, it is not reasonable. I suggested that Ehrman, a respected Biblical scholar, had plenty to say. No one should believe what I say about Ehrman or what Ehrman says - they need to read Ehrman.

Skepticism, facts, and evidence; not hearsay.

[John V]

He said up front that he wasn't very familiar with Ehrman, discussed what little he knew, and ended the post with:

"Now if Chas or others want to inform me on more of "Ehrman's facts" I'll be more than happy to discuss them."

Seems reasonable to me.

Plenty of atheists criticize Christianity despite having little knowledge of it.

No, it is not reasonable. I suggested that Ehrman, a respected Biblical scholar, had plenty to say. No one should believe what I say about Ehrman or what Ehrman says - they need to read Ehrman.

Skepticism, facts, and evidence; not hearsay.

No one should believe what Ehrman says? Uh, OK, i guess this case is closed.

[Mister Agenda]

First, if manuscripts said "written by Mark" or some such, would you accept it as actually written by Mark? Couldn't Ehrman or anyone else claim it a forgery?

Anyone can claim any document is a forgery. Whether I tend to accept that claim depends on the qualifications of the person making the claim.

---

There was no disciple "Mark". This is why we look at it today and see it as authentic and not as a forgery like the "Gospel of Peter" which tried to use one of the disciple's names for its credibility.

Quite right, thanks for the correction.

[John V]

Anyone can claim any document is a forgery.

Exactly.

Whether I tend to accept that claim depends on the qualifications of the person making the claim.

I suppose that's a factor, but personally I'd say the logic and evidence behind the claim are more important, and I would factor in motivation and access to information.

[Chas]

No, it is not reasonable. I suggested that Ehrman, a respected Biblical scholar, had plenty to say. No one should believe what I say about Ehrman or what Ehrman says - they need to read Ehrman.

Skepticism, facts, and evidence; not hearsay.

No one should believe what Ehrman says? Uh, OK, i guess this case is closed.

Try re-reading the sentence. With understanding this time.

[Minimalist]

You ask for much, Oh Chas!




Disappointed shall you be.