Here now is my second post on that intriguing little article by Louis Markos in the journal First Things, which he entitled “Errant Ehrman.” If you’ll recall from my last post, Markos starts the article by indicating that he felt “great pity” for me because I was the wrong kind of fundamentalist back when I was a conservative Christian. My problem, he indicates, is that I applied modern standards to decide whether the Bible was inerrant. Here are his words: He [Ehrman] was taught, rightly, that there are no contradictions in the Bible, but he was trained, quite falsely, to interpret the non-contradictory nature of the Bible in modern, scientific, post-Enlightenment terms. That is to say, he was encouraged to test the truth of the Bible against a verification system that has only existed for some 250 years….. Read by Petra Ortiz
A brief recollection about changing spiritual views, the fundamentalist idea of the rapture, and a film called "Thief in the Night" that was a...
This post continues my 10-part interview with Ben Witherington dealing with “mythicists,” those who claim that there never actually *was* a man Jesus, but...
The apocryphal 3 Corinthians, Bart argues, is a forgery written to oppose forgeries. Read by John Paul Middlesworth.