Bart Ehrman article

[bullethead]

From:https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021-04-04/christians-heaven-****-soul
(Replace the **** with the double hockey stix in the link)

"Billions of Christians around the world believe that on Easter, Jesus was raised from the dead and taken up to heaven to live with God. They also believe that when they die, their own souls will go to heaven. The great irony is that this is not at all what Jesus himself believed.

 

[Spotlite]

From:https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021-04-04/christians-heaven-****-soul
(Replace the **** with the double hockey stix in the link)

"Billions of Christians around the world believe that on Easter, Jesus was raised from the dead and taken up to heaven to live with God. They also believe that when they die, their own souls will go to heaven. The great irony is that this is not at all what Jesus himself believed.

The link doesn’t work. As far as Easter, most just celebrate a time knowing that it most likely isn’t that exact date - no different than Christmas with the birth.

According to his “great irony” does he go on to say what Jesus believed about souls going to heaven?

 

[bullethead]

The link doesn’t work. As far as Easter, most just celebrate a time knowing that it most likely isn’t that exact date - no different than Christmas with the birth.

According to his “great irony” does he go on to say what Jesus believed about souls going to heaven?

Just underneath the link I noted that you must replace the ****'s with the he-double- hockey stix for it to work

 

[Spotlite]

Just underneath the link I noted that you must replace the ****'s with the he-double- hockey stix for it to work

Sorry , I misread that.

 

[bullethead]

Here is a more in depth article about it. Again the censors will put stars where the "hades" word goes. Replace the stars and the link will work.
https://time.com/5822598/jesus-really-said-heaven-****/

 

[bullethead]

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2020/03/27/bible-scholar-bart-ehrman/

 

[Spotlite]

For every nay there’s an aye.


https://m.barnesandnoble.com/w/misr...-misquoting-jesus-edward-d-andrews/1108428515


“MISREPRESENTING JESUS Debunking Bart D. Ehrman's "Misquoting Jesus" is an attempt to look behind the scenes at Ehrman's book, and get a picture of his mindset as he penned it by the way he worded something, or repeatedly worded something, or left something out, and far more. This is not to say that I did not get into his arguments, and debunk them, for that was done as well. By the time you finish this book, you will find that Bart Ehrman in Misquoting Jesus is evangelizing for atheism, and using his misleading words to find new members, by way of doubt, contributing to the unwary Christian's spiritual shipwreck.”

 

[bullethead]

For every nay there’s an aye.


https://m.barnesandnoble.com/w/misr...-misquoting-jesus-edward-d-andrews/1108428515


“MISREPRESENTING JESUS Debunking Bart D. Ehrman's "Misquoting Jesus" is an attempt to look behind the scenes at Ehrman's book, and get a picture of his mindset as he penned it by the way he worded something, or repeatedly worded something, or left something out, and far more. This is not to say that I did not get into his arguments, and debunk them, for that was done as well. By the time you finish this book, you will find that Bart Ehrman in Misquoting Jesus is evangelizing for atheism, and using his misleading words to find new members, by way of doubt, contributing to the unwary Christian's spiritual shipwreck.”

Misquoting Jesus is a totally different book from Ehrman.
What I did was research ancient Jewish beliefs to see if they lined up with Ehrman's claims and they did. It was late 1st century when H&H became popular which was the time more pagans were becoming Christians.

 

[Spotlite]

Misquoting Jesus is a totally different book from Ehrman.
What I did was research ancient Jewish beliefs to see if they lined up with Ehrman's claims and they did. It was late 1st century when H&H became popular which was the time more pagans were becoming Christians.

Edward D. Andrews is arguing against Ehrman - “By glimpsing into the life of Bart D. Ehrman and following along his course of academic studies, Andrews helps the reader to understand the biases, assumptions, and shortcomings supporting Ehrman's arguments”

 

[bullethead]

Edward D. Andrews is arguing against Ehrman - “By glimpsing into the life of Bart D. Ehrman and following along his course of academic studies, Andrews helps the reader to understand the biases, assumptions, and shortcomings supporting Ehrman's arguments”

Well to be fair, that is what Critics do. And I am sure in this case that Andrews will counter with late 1st century Bible verses to back up his assessment which is the time period that Ehrman is using to make his.

 

[bullethead]

Lets step back from Ehrman and Andrews and see what the Jewish people have to say about H&H.
https://www.tbs-online.org/rabbi-perlins-study/307-2/
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/heaven-and-****-in-jewish-tradition/

 

[Spotlite]

Lets step back from Ehrman and Andrews and see what the Jewish people have to say about H&H.
https://www.tbs-online.org/rabbi-perlins-study/307-2/
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/heaven-and-****-in-jewish-tradition/

This is good timing because I’ve recently (within the last 2 days) have acquired the desire to take another historical journey / study.

 

[bullethead]

I always try to check sources within the people and culture who lived it(no agendas like trying to sell books to target audiences)and see which "expert" more likely than not lines up along those lines.

 

[jollyroger]

https://time.com/5822598/jesus-really-said-heaven-*/

Replace * with that word. You know the one. All lowercase.

Just thought it was a good addition to the conversation.

 

[bullethead]

https://time.com/5822598/jesus-really-said-heaven-*/

Replace * with that word. You know the one. All lowercase.

Just thought it was a good addition to the conversation.

Post # 5

 

[jollyroger]

Post # 5

Missed that one, sorry 'bout that.

 

[bullethead]

Missed that one, sorry 'bout that.

The article was so nice it was posted twice.
It's all good

 

[SemperFiDawg]

From:https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021-04-04/christians-heaven-****-soul
(Replace the **** with the double hockey stix in the link)

"Billions of Christians around the world believe that on Easter, Jesus was raised from the dead and taken up to heaven to live with God. They also believe that when they die, their own souls will go to heaven. The great irony is that this is not at all what Jesus himself believed.

Bart Ehrman. For the life of me I can't see why he's held in such high regards. Every single one of his thesis rest on preposterous presuppositions. He cites them with conviction and then goes on to build his thesis off of them. I think it's that conviction that impressed someone enough to give him a Chair at UNC, Chapel Hill. Couple that with the fact that he was an A\A in a bellwether Southern University lent some notoriety and gave him a popularity bump. He quickly took advantage of that high horse and rode him right off the intellectual cliff.

Christianity does have him to thank though, because he singlehandedly made Gary Habermas a household name. Habermas has made hay off of Ehrman's follies to the point I almost feel sorry for Ehrman, almost.

I'm with Walt on this. The older I get the more I realize that just because someone occupies a position of supposedly "implied" intelligence, his rationale can't be taken for granted. And, like Walt, I'm finding most "common" folks reasoning stands up to scrutiny as well as or better than the "intellectuals". America is a Mecca for educating people into imbecility and then imparting a degree upon them. I see it more and more every day, highly educated people with absolutely no ability to think what-so-ever. And then to expect them to communicate.......pfft, don't get me started.

 

[bullethead]

Bart Ehrman. For the life of me I can't see why he's held in such high regards. Every single one of his thesis rest on preposterous presuppositions. He cites them with conviction and then goes on to build his thesis off of them. I think it's that conviction that impressed someone enough to give him a Chair at UNC, Chapel Hill. Couple that with the fact that he was an A\A in a bellwether Southern University lent some notoriety and gave him a popularity bump. He quickly took advantage of that high horse and rode him right off the intellectual cliff.

Christianity does have him to thank though, because he singlehandedly made Gary Habermas a household name. Habermas has made hay off of Ehrman's follies to the point I almost feel sorry for Ehrman, almost.

I'm with Walt on this. The older I get the more I realize that just because someone occupies a position of supposedly "implied" intelligence, his rationale can't be taken for granted. And, like Walt, I'm finding most "common" folks reasoning stands up to scrutiny as well as or better than the "intellectuals". America is a Mecca for educating people into imbecility and then imparting a degree upon them. I see it more and more every day, highly educated people with absolutely no ability to think what-so-ever. And then to expect them to communicate.......pfft, don't get me started.

When you take Ehrman and Andrews out of it you then have to see what the Jewish religion says about it and in this case the Jews support Ehrman's position. Above we can see your distaste for Ehrman but you didn't provide anything that refuted what he said regarding the Jews position on theH&H matter.
You did throw Habermas into the mix and he bases his "facts" of off beliefs rather than any hard core evidence. He holds his positions for the same reasons you say Ehrman holds his. He impressed someone enough because his presuppositions align with who ever hired him. Here is a good summary on Habermas https://truthseekingatheist.wordpress.com/2019/11/04/habermas-and-his-minimal-facts/
Like I said in a previous post these guys, Pro or Con target a specific audience and tell the already biased audience what they want to hear. The key as a reader is to step back and check into and research what they are saying and see what history tells us.
Attacking the authors positions of employment does not refute the content. In order to do that the content itself must be addressed. This is the place for us common folks to discuss such things, Ehrman's article is a foot in the door to initiate the discussion about what Jesus may or may not have believed being raised Jewish in those times.

 

[Israel]

That is the crux of the matter though, isn't it Bullet?

about what Jesus may or may not have believed being raised Jewish in those times.

The assigning of Jesus to some sort of toeing the party line in regards to "general" beliefs of the Jews at any particular time.

Or that a Jew has the more accurate or refined understanding of the scriptures even today because they claim the Tanakh as their own. And many agree.
In essence the the thought that the "OT" is theirs, the NT is for the christian.

But we need not even look into the NT to see what by inclusion is glaringly contained in the old. (Though I am generally loathe to divide the scripture thus)

Quite frank tellings of those prophets sent most often to Jews "in general"/Israelites/Hebrews with the message "You folks are not really getting it at all. What you think you have in apprehension, you do not, what you mistake for meaning one thing means quite another in truth."

And we have in those accounts of how those prophets speaking thus were often treated by the "governing" Jews.

One needn't be a scholar to hear Isaiah's general reproval of misapprehended matters especially in regards to the significance of the sabbath, fasting and the observances thereof that had been inflated in great displays for religious declarations of self righteousness.

For reference one could read Is 58.

It is not without note Jesus most often quoted those prophets who "saw in part" what He is in substance. And He was quite unrelenting (even if one only reads casually) that He is the "it" of it all.

The Pharisees, the so called "keepers of the flame" (as no doubt some Jewish traditionalists/rabbis would even be called today) were those most often rebuked for their lack of understanding or willful disobedience.

Jesus having the boldness to tell one in regards to being born from above:

Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

Jesus was/is quite plain that in any dealings with Himself as He is, any stand upon traditions, previous assumptions and presumptions as to what constitutes abiding in the faith of God as true observance and practice must all be abandoned as shadows that, at best, only hint at His fullness. He touches all that might lend itself to idolatry as only He can.

His repeated phrasing of the "time is coming and now is" perhaps especially salient in regards to "exalting" earthly places:

Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father...But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

And this remains as scandalous today in its essence of rebuke against all those who would nail a placard, engrave a stone, hang a billboard or sign that such and such constructed building is the church...the "house" of God.
But we need not even go far into the "OT" to find the same sentiment expressed.

“Heaven is My throne,
And earth is My footstool.
Where is the house that you will build Me?
And where is the place of My rest?
For all those things My hand has made,
And all those things exist,”
Says the Lord.
“But on this one will I look:
On him who is poor and of a contrite spirit,
And who trembles at My word.

As (opposed) to what might have been "general apprehensions" and continued consciousness after the death of the body Jesus is not unknowing.



Jesus knew this when He spoke it to the enlightened thief on the cross of a continuing consciousness to be set at rest:

And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

No less in:

And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in he11. (Read Gehenna as needed, but there is no implication it is a "preferred" place)

Jesus also spoke (though often assumed in parable) of the beggar Lazarus and the rich man. Of conversations and continued consciousness...and one particularly consumed in regret and torment.

But saying this is "mere" parable (even if it was given as such) and not the truth of the matter is moot to me.
I suppose we could discuss what it might mean to be "carried to Abraham's side" but the matter of continuing consciousness as expressed, and whether Jesus would throw in a "red herring" of such obvious misinformation (if there is no continued consciousness) is, for me, the more pressing matter.

Would Jesus lie to express a truth?

That question has already been satisfactorily answered for me...and not apart from the many rebukes that have accompanied any excursions of my own into doubt regarding Jesus' credibility.