The New Christians

The New Christians


Got a Question for Bart Ehrman?

posted by Tony Jones

I’ll be interviewing Bart Ehrman tomorrow for Bnet regarding his latest book, Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (And Why We Don’t Know about Them).

If you’ve got a question you think I should ask, leave a comment.



Advertisement
Comments read comments(18)
post a comment
BOB

posted April 13, 2009 at 11:14 am


Ask him how he felt his interview with Colbert went.



report abuse
 

stifled student

posted April 13, 2009 at 11:19 am


how do you propose i finish moody?
cause i’m reading your books and they make a hell of a lot more sense than the stuff we’re studying and now i don’t know how in the world to finish this semester out…



report abuse
 

brian

posted April 13, 2009 at 11:22 am


whats your problem?



report abuse
 

jhimm

posted April 13, 2009 at 11:24 am


Ask Bart if he believes there were “many Christianities” or if there was simply a much wider spectrum of potential beliefs within Christianity in the first few centuries of The Chruch. I heard Scot say recently that there has only ever been one Christianity in spite of the fact that people like Bart would say there were many. I have never read anything by Bart that would suggest there were many. I have read a lot from Bart that insists that the potential spectrum of beliefs was massively diverse, even compared to contemporary Christianity.
I would very much like to hear Bart’s reaction to what Scot said. Especially in light of Scot’s recent series on heresy and his repeated insistence that “the church has always believed” in X, Y or Z (which Bart’s books repeatedly refute).



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted April 13, 2009 at 12:28 pm


Ask Bart what he prefers…Californian or European wine in the Eucharist?



report abuse
 

Sara

posted April 13, 2009 at 12:35 pm


Boxers or briefs?



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted April 13, 2009 at 1:00 pm


From his Salon interview, I’d like to know why he thinks “the possibilites of history and science” are trustworthy, and what does he mean by possibilities anyway? Is that description a way to hedge his bets because these systems/disciplines are no more consistent than the one he rejects?
I’d also like to hear his response to the Witherington critique of Jesus Interrupted.



report abuse
 

cas

posted April 13, 2009 at 1:03 pm


Your name is not really my name. Looks like the old bnet is back. Now if facebook would only repent.



report abuse
 

Mike L.

posted April 13, 2009 at 1:33 pm


I’ve been listening to recordings of his NT course. Tell him thanks for making those available for purchase by laypeople.
Ask him if he has thoughts about the discrepancy between Paul’s account of escaping King Aretas in Damascus (2 Cor. 32-33) as compared to the later accounts of this same story in Acts (9:22-23). It seems to change dramatically by the time Acts is written. In Acts, the author wants us to know it was “the jews” who conspire to kill Paul. Does this correspond with any other changes of the NT texts?
thanks!



report abuse
 

Sara

posted April 13, 2009 at 3:10 pm


Is it possible to study the NT (or anything) from an objective, values free perspective?
Does the Jesus Seminar follow the Modernist assumption that there is knowledge/truth that can be known objectively and applied universally?
Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza points out that “the Jesus Seminar’s polling method uses a reductionist consumer approach derived from market research” when it votes on the authenticity of Gospel passages. How is this technique effective?
What do you think about Kathleen Corley’s argument (against Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza) that early Christianity was actually quite patriarchal?
When you’re talking about the Bible, why do you use the word “discrepancies” instead of “multivocality”?
What do you wish you would have been able to say to Stephen Colbert?
What is your hope for the Church?



report abuse
 

Billy Kangas

posted April 13, 2009 at 4:33 pm


1) Bart has said the problem of Evil is what ultimately caused him to leave the church.
I’m sure there were many other unanswered questions he had. What made this one the reason for a final break?
2) Bart often talks about Jesus as Apocalypticist. I think this is often focused on at the expense of many other aspects of Jesus’ mission. I was wondering if he could comment on his views of alternative views like those expressed by Tom wright and other third questers.
3) I often think of Bart as the Britney Spears of Jesus scholars. He is very popular, and teaches in a very concise and accessible way.
Sometimes I feel he puts on a bit of a show though, by communicating information very selectively. Which can lead to some very sensational interpretations of what he’s said. For example I have many friends who will watch him on the discovery channel and come to me and ask me something like “why the church has been hiding the true story of Judas.” I am left in the awkward position of trying to explain that gnostic gospels are not a good source for history. Why doesn’t he take more time to set the framework of the scholarship he is commenting on.



report abuse
 

Peter Kuchnicki

posted April 13, 2009 at 5:23 pm


In response to Billy Kangas’s question of Ehrman selectively communicating his ideas, especially on television, the answer is obviously so in light of TV’s 30 minute time limit (commercials, show, etc). It is not the appropriate forum to discuss a single issue in depth and TV actually shoots far more footage than it uses and so “TV” edits what it wants to show and not Ehrman.
If you want a more detailed explanation, read his “popular” books meant for the layman, or if you have the background or inclination, the more highly technical works aimed at academics. Of course, you could purchase a number of his works on the Teaching Company as well.



report abuse
 

Joe Carson

posted April 13, 2009 at 8:12 pm


What are Bart’s answers to the “7 worldview questions” of Jim Sire (see “the universe next door”) and why are they more believable than the answers of Christian theism?



report abuse
 

Billy Kangas

posted April 14, 2009 at 1:15 am


Yeah I understand Peter. I do have a great deal of respect for Bart most of the time. I have read a few of his books and listened to almost all his teaching company courses. He is in general a very balanced person, and has been a great voice in clarifying many conspiracy theories (i.g. “Truth and Fiction”)
I have simply been disappointed in most of his interviews. The level handed approach seems to go out the window, and I’m not sure why.



report abuse
 

James's

posted April 15, 2009 at 12:07 am


I have not read the book yet so I could not ask something directly related to that. I like a lot of Ehrman’s premises but don’t usually arrive at the same place he does. One thing I would love to hear him talk more about is the idea of “Christianities” rather than “Christianity.” Specifically, it seems he is very critical of a very narrow view of “Christianity” when it suits his arguments and does not consider a lot of Christian voices who would agree with much of what he says. And since I believe he is too intelligent to pretend he does not know about those voices sometimes his arguments seem just a little too disingenuous. As contemporary Christianities wrestle with pluralism it seems he could be much more helpful by not just being critical with the narrow Christianities he rejects but speaking more positively about Christian theologians he thinks are doing good things.
Most importantly, where and when is this interview going to be available?
Peace,
JM



report abuse
 

Peter Kuchnicki

posted April 15, 2009 at 9:43 pm


“Specifically, it seems he is very critical of a very narrow view of “Christianity” when it suits his arguments and does not consider a lot of Christian voices who would agree with much of what he says.”
Why don’t we get more specific instead of random generalities, which quite frankly confuses me since I have not a single clue to what he is referring.



report abuse
 

Gayle Piazza

posted July 18, 2014 at 8:47 pm


I went over this website and I conceive you have a lot of fantastic info, bookmarked (:.



report abuse
 

Bert Weinreich

posted August 23, 2014 at 5:42 pm


Thanks, I’ve just been searching for information about this topic for a long time and yours is the best I have found out till now. But, what in regards to the conclusion? Are you positive in regards to the source?



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

My Blog Has Moved
Dear Readers, After a year with Beliefnet, I've decided to move to my own domain for my blogging.  It's been a fine year -- some things worked, other things didn't.  But in the end, I'll be a better blogger on my own.  My thanks to the Bnet editorial staff; they've been very supportive. Ple

posted 12:13:57pm Nov. 13, 2009 | read full post »

The Most Important Cartoon of the Year
By Steve Breen, San Diego Tribune, October 18, 2009

posted 8:51:22am Oct. 25, 2009 | read full post »

Social Media for Pastors
Following up on Christianity21, we at JoPa Productions are developing a series of boot camps for pastors who want to learn about and utilize social media tools like blogging, Twitter, and Facebook.  These are one-day, hands-on learning experiences, currently offered in the Twin Cities and soon

posted 10:45:52am Oct. 22, 2009 | read full post »

Ending Christian Euphemisms: "Fundamentalist"
I've taken some heat in the comment section for using yesterday's post on "unbiblical" and a "higher view of scripture" as a thin foil for my own disregard of biblical standards. To the contrary, I was pointing to the use of the word unbiblical as a stand-in for a particularly thin hermeneutic. Ther

posted 10:15:41am Oct. 21, 2009 | read full post »

Why You Should Get GENERATE
Last week at Christianity21, GENERATE Magazine debuted. With the tag line, "an artifact of the emergence conversation," it fit perfectly at the gathering. When I actually got around to reading it last weekend, I was truly surprised at how good it is.There have been several efforts to begin a paper j

posted 3:14:37pm Oct. 20, 2009 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.