Rook, What is your opinion on Bart D. Ehrman's work and his beliefs?

HeyZeusCreaseToe
Superfan
HeyZeusCreaseToe's picture
Posts: 675
Joined: 2008-02-27
User is offlineOffline
Rook, What is your opinion on Bart D. Ehrman's work and his beliefs?

Rook, What is your opinion on Bart D. Ehrman's work and his beliefs? I have recently finished his Historical Jesus, The Lost Gospels of Judas, and am currently going through Misquoting Jesus and From Jesus to Constantine. I find his work to be quite fascinating, although much of it heavily overlaps. I think he is presenting himself as an agnostic so as to not alienate his students, colleagues, and consumers of his works. It seems from most of the claims he lays out he is a closet atheist who purports to celebrate the traditions of Christianity out of social and nostalgic reverence. I know that you have your mythicist campaign which conflicts directly with his historical interpretation. Summary of Ehrman's Jesus being: an apocalyptic prophet who taught the end of times would come very soon in his own generation and he would sit as King of God's People in the Kingdom here on earth.

Do you think the claims he makes about the nature of Jesus in his own time, as understood by his textual criticism, to be a fair interpretation of a historical Jesus if he did exist? The question isn't whether you think he existed, you don't, and I don't think he probably did either, but whether Ehrman is tapping into a more realistic account of the Jesus Myth than has being portrayed previously by the likes of Atwill, Acharya S, Doherty etc.

Do you see him as a fairly objective historian doing honest work?

Where would you say you disagree with his conclusions? I'm not sure he doesn't believe Jesus is a myth, I just don't think he sees that as his position to argue for or against.

 

Thanks in advance for your response.

 

 

 

“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.” Yoda


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
HeyZeusCreaseToe wrote:Rook,

HeyZeusCreaseToe wrote:

Rook, What is your opinion on Bart D. Ehrman's work and his beliefs? I have recently finished his Historical Jesus, The Lost Gospels of Judas, and am currently going through Misquoting Jesus and From Jesus to Constantine. I find his work to be quite fascinating, although much of it heavily overlaps. I think he is presenting himself as an agnostic so as to not alienate his students, colleagues, and consumers of his works. It seems from most of the claims he lays out he is a closet atheist who purports to celebrate the traditions of Christianity out of social and nostalgic reverence. I know that you have your mythicist campaign which conflicts directly with his historical interpretation. Summary of Ehrman's Jesus being: an apocalyptic prophet who taught the end of times would come very soon in his own generation and he would sit as King of God's People in the Kingdom here on earth.

Do you think the claims he makes about the nature of Jesus in his own time, as understood by his textual criticism, to be a fair interpretation of a historical Jesus if he did exist? The question isn't whether you think he existed, you don't, and I don't think he probably did either, but whether Ehrman is tapping into a more realistic account of the Jesus Myth than has being portrayed previously by the likes of Atwill, Acharya S, Doherty etc.

Do you see him as a fairly objective historian doing honest work?

Where would you say you disagree with his conclusions? I'm not sure he doesn't believe Jesus is a myth, I just don't think he sees that as his position to argue for or against.

This is quite an extensive list of questions.  I'm going to forward my answer to Bart and allow him a response, because I respect Bart a lot and would not want to keep him from voicing any disagreements with my conclusions here.

(1) I have quite a bit of the books Bart has published.  I find him to be a fiercely read individual, who takes his profession very seriously.  He is to be respected, in my opinion, even if you do not agree with everything he has to say.  I disagree with some of Bart's conclusions, but if everyone agreed with each other, Bart and I would both be out of work, and at the very least it would make for some dull monographs.  Scholarship already manufactures endnotes at an incredible speed (I'm sure there is a factory somewhere that just spends all day producing endnotes...). 

(2) Bart's claims echo quite a few very prominent scholars, some I know, many I do not.  Their scholarship focuses on different questions than mine does, although I think that is part of the problem.  You can check my article on the historical Jesus for more information on this particular issue.

(3) I would never consider Atwill or Acharya S as "realistic".  They do not register as historians, in my opinion.  Atwill makes some pretty outrageous claims, and he admits he is not a historian or scholar.  Acharya S introduced more prevalently her opinions on astrotheology, which I find to be dubious and pseudoscholarship.  Bart is not only one of the worlds top textual critics, but he also is not afraid to reconsider or restate previous positions he has made in light of new perspectives.  That is commendable.

(4) Bart is a serious student (and teacher) of history.  Like I said, we do not always agree, but I believe we have more in common than we have differences.  Bart has (and I'm not ashamed to admit it) corrected me several times when I have overstated a position or had a source wrong.  I'm honored that I have the ability to run perspectives by him, even if he shoots them down.  His experience has been helpful. 

(5) I disagree with Bart's conclusions the same way I disagree with Dom Crossan's, Paula Fredriksen's, and Geza Verme's opinions.  I will have the arguments laid out in their entirety in my forthcoming book.

The best,

 

Rook

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)


HeyZeusCreaseToe
Superfan
HeyZeusCreaseToe's picture
Posts: 675
Joined: 2008-02-27
User is offlineOffline
Thanks

Thanks for your prompt and well enumerated responses. I really just wanted your perspective on his works and ideas, and I didn't count on you knowing him and forwarding this to him, but thanks. I guess the underlying question about Dr. Ehrman was whether he was seen as one of the more reliable, honest, and well respected peers in your field. Your response plainly shows that he is.  Being an active, honest peer reviewer is a fairly thankless job and that speaks a lot about a person's character. Thanks again.

“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.” Yoda


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
Here is Bart's

Here is Bart's reply:

Quote:

Rook,  

Thanks for this.  Looks to me like you handled a tangled set of questions very well!

BTW, on the agnostic issue:  I *would* be classified as an atheist if the question were "do you believe in the traditional (Judeo-)Christian God."  No, I don't believe he exists.  But the question should be larger than that (since, on that definition, adherents of most other religions are atheists too -- which doesn't make sense).  It should be "Do you think there is some kind of superior force/divine entity in the universe?"  To that question I say, "I don't know."  So I'm an agnostic, one who doesn't know.

I don’t mind if you post it – either way is fine. 

-- B

  Bart D. Ehrman James A. Gray Professor Department of Religious Studies University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 

 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)


HeyZeusCreaseToe
Superfan
HeyZeusCreaseToe's picture
Posts: 675
Joined: 2008-02-27
User is offlineOffline
Thanks

That does clear it up a bit for me. I suppose I was kind of wondering if he was agnostic with regard to the Judeo-Christian God, and he isn't. I appreciate you forwarding this to me  Rook.

“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.” Yoda


phooney
phooney's picture
Posts: 385
Joined: 2007-02-07
User is offlineOffline
I wonder if instead of "Do

I wonder if instead of "Do you think there is some kind of superior force/divine entity in the universe?" the question was "Do you believe in some kind of superior force/divine entity in the universe?" Would he would answer "no" given that he doesn't know if it exists in the first place.

I suspect that he would, which would make him an atheist in pretty much every sense of the word besides the 'positive belief of no god' that theists like to slap on us.

Regardless, I am looking forward to picking up a couple of his books at some stage this year.


spumoni
Theist
spumoni's picture
Posts: 108
Joined: 2007-01-31
User is offlineOffline
Ehrman

Bart Ehrman is an excellent scholar on textual criticism.  That being said, he is the king of overstatement.  He is a self-proclaimed agnostic and lost his faith because his fundamentalist upbringing couldn't handle the rigors of academia. 


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
That's a real brash

That's a real brash statement from somebody who doesn't know the man. 


spumoni
Theist
spumoni's picture
Posts: 108
Joined: 2007-01-31
User is offlineOffline
Rook_Hawkins wrote:That's a

Rook_Hawkins wrote:

That's a real brash statement from somebody who doesn't know the man. 

 

Its a statement of known fact based on his own self-disclosure in his books.  Do you priviledge yourself by knowing people?


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
spumoni wrote:Bart Ehrman is

spumoni wrote:

Bart Ehrman is an excellent scholar on textual criticism.  That being said, he is the king of overstatement.  He is a self-proclaimed agnostic and lost his faith because his fundamentalist upbringing couldn't handle the rigors of academia. 

If theism (fundametalst or otherwise) can't handle scrutiny, that leads me to think theism has the problem.

You seem to be blaiming the scrutiny.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
spumoni wrote:Rook_Hawkins

spumoni wrote:

Rook_Hawkins wrote:

That's a real brash statement from somebody who doesn't know the man. 

 

Its a statement of known fact based on his own self-disclosure in his books.  Do you priviledge yourself by knowing people?

It is hardly a statement of "known fact" when you are stating your opinion.  He has never said that he "overstates" so that cannot be claimed as fact.  And since I know Bart, I know your statements are just childish regret - regret that you'll never be able to refute the positions Bart has laid down, so you attack him personally without any logical argument.  Thanks for playing, but everyone who has read a post you've made here knows you can't seem to get the difference between fact and opinion.  That is an opinion, by the way.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)