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
In the past couple of posts I have talked about early Christian “docetists,” those who were so convinced that Jesus was completely God that...
In a guest post, Professor of Religious Studies at UNC-Chapel Hill Jodi Magness recounts the "last stand" of the Jews against Rome at Masada,...
What is (Sexually) Unnatural? Read by Ken Teutsch.