Steven Carr

http://rogerviklund.wordpress.com/20...versus-ehrman/

This is a good article illustrating just why Bart Ehrman's reputation was trashed by his book 'Did Jesus Exist?'

outhouse

hey Steve

that guy makes almost no point at all that is relevant

I think he takes Ehrmans example and plays a little to hard on it taking it out of context.




Ehrman is right about how copies of copies can change and take a evolutionary path to what we have now.

and not every piece would have the same evolutionary rate if any at all.

Steven Carr

So Ehrman was right to say that there is no way to know what the text of Galatians said, and he is also right to say that it is beyond reasonable doubt that Paul wrote 'brother of the Lord'?

I think there is a simple rule.

Ehrman is always right, even when he is pointing out the fallacies in his previous book, which was also always right.

stephan huller

Viklund is really wonderful. Quite thoughtful. Don't know where he finds the time to do all this research.

Vorkosigan

Seconded.

aa5874

It would appear that Ehrman is indeed arguing Against himself in "Did Jesus Exist? Ehrman introduced his Jesus as SCARCELY known but before his book is finished would show that his Jesus was WELL-KNOWN.

Based on Ehrman the Pauline letters were written long before c 70 CE. Jesus should have been a household name when Paul and the Apostles were supposedly preaching all over the Roman Empire.

There is something wrong with Ehrman!!! How in the world could Jesus of the NT be SCARCELY known when according to the very same NT Jesus was WELL-KNOWN in the Gospels and Paul did PREACH about Jesus in Rome, Corinth and many other places in the Roman Empire???

Ehrman destroys himself.

Sheshbazzar

Ehrman is just carrying on the tradition of writing unsupported and contradictory crap just like the those NT writers before him.
What else should we expect from a source that is paid to produce Christian propaganda?