His name is Bart Ehrman and he's the hottest celebrity the secularists and anti-Christian crowd has right now. Why? Because this "former fundamentalist" is now attempting to "debunk" Christianity.
So, his timing is impeccable since we'll have another round of movies coming out over the next few weeks that will also try to infect us with this mindset that, "Hey, maybe what we thought we knew to be true isn't true! Maybe Jesus Christ isn't who he said He was after all!"
And the beat goes on I'm afraid.
He says he's not trying to destroy your faith, and that he's not trying to bash the Bible. Sure. I'm not quite clear on how he gets to that point because to claim the following seems like "bashing" and a blatant attempt at "destroying your faith":
> According to Ehrman, doctrines such as the divinity of Jesus and Heaven and Hell are not based on anything Jesus or his earlier followers said.
Oh really? Would love to see how he sets out to prove that one since Jesus Himself talked about all those things quite extensively.
> According to Ehrman, at least 19 of the 27 books in the New Testament are forgeries.
Oh really? Would love to see how he sets out to prove that one since the Holy Bible is the ONLY book (definitely the only religious book) to stand the test of time and to have never been proven false despite roughly 2,000 years worth of hysterical and persistent attacks from people of all walks of life.
> According to Ehrman, believing the Bible is infallible is not a condition for being a Christian.
Oh really? Would love to see how he sets out to prove that one since Jesus Christ is the Word in the flesh, and the divinely inspired Holy Bible is a living and breathing work designed to serve as an "Instruction Manual For Life". Then again, I can see this "conclusion" being popular with people since there are many Christians who today will pick and choose to believe the parts of the Bible they like while discarding and ignoring the parts they don't that make them feel uncomfortable.
> According to Ehrman, there was no resurrection!
Oh really? Would love to see how he sets out to prove that one as well. What the heck is going on here? I feel like we're in some bizarro world or something! Where's the Christian Church to stand for truth and condemn this heretic for what he is -- a wolf in sheep's clothing that is leading the flock to the slaughter? We need to pray for this man to return to his faith and for anyone who's reading his book.
Look, I'll admit that I'll agree with him only so far as to say that there are things that the Church hasn't taught and that they've tried to hide for centuries to serve their own agenda, but these are things that attack or put into question the fundamental tenets of the faith. Once anyone starts to attack those things and asks us to question them ourselves, that's where I draw the line and the point where we should be able to identify an agent of Satan from an agent of the Lord.
The sad thing is that this guy will definitely cause many new Christians as well as those who are weak in their faith to fall away from it completely. Why? Because of the perceived credibility he brings to the table through his unique perspective of "been there, done that".
Again, this is a man used to be a Christian himself, but he's now "seen the light", and he's also an individual who the world will prop up as being "very educated" and also a "scholar", a person who has even written a novel (remember, only the smartest people and those who know what they're talking about -- only those with access to the real truth -- can do that, right? wrong!), and if he has changed his tune then shouldn't we? Well, that's how it will be pitched to us.
Sorry. Not gonna happen here. Take that garbage somewhere else please.
What's funny about this entire case is that this is precisely the type of person Satan loves because now he'll be paraded around all the major networks, all the various cable channel documentaries on religion, and he'll attend all the most prestigious conferences and seminars because what he has to say will be regarded as gospel to a world that doesn't want to hear about sin, or how bad things (or they) really are.
Why? Because if people like me do that (speak the truth about sin and the need for repentance), then we force them to take a good hard look at themselves in the mirror, and once the Gospel shines a light on one's true nature it's tough to feel good about yourself at first. Fortunately, those initial feelings of disgust and fear will not last because we have hope and restoration in the One who can forgive us and save us and make those painful feelings go away.
Ironically, the same man who claims to "set us free" by unshackling us from the false beliefs and doctrines of Christianity binds us to a life of despair and hopelessness. Think about it! According to Ehrman, we can't even believe in the hope of forgiveness, restoration, and salvation that Jesus Christ offer us because Jesus wasn't who He said He was -- He was just a man.
Boy, who's the doom-and-gloom preacher now? It's all truly sad. Not only for the affect that his work will have on the world, but because this self-proclaimed "happy agnostic" is going to come face-to-face with the truth that is Jesus Christ one day.
I know that our Lord will be sad to find a lost sheep that never found his way back home. Question is, will Ehrman still be so "happy" at that moment of judgment on the cusp of eternity?
Lord come quickly.
28 Comments:
very informative post. I had never heard of this guy but, sadly, there have been some who have come before him.
Great information, Jeff!
I asked a pastor friend of mine what happened to Carlton Pearson and his explanation was that 'he got so close to the Lord' that he started getting goofy. That doesn't wash for me. I have to admit, I have a long way to go in my spiritual walk but it would seem to be the OPPOSITE reason for this happening- our eyes getting off of the Saviour.
This an example of the spirit of anti-christ. This spirit is also present in the books of Richard Dawkins, like The DaVinci Code. He alleges himself to be a christian. It is not a surprise, because Bible says that the anti-christs was inside of the church, but they don't belong to.
Jesus come back please.
The thing is, people like Erhman which claim to have "been there, done that" really haven't. How can a Christian who has a living, personal relationship with their Lord and savior Jesus Christ, deny the truth that is in them? I just find that hard to believe. I can certainly understand someone who is just going through the motions doing something like that, but someone who is filled with the Holy Spirit? Or, is that the very definition of "blasphemy aainst the Spiri"?
Shades of John Shelby Spong. All we can do is pray for these people and stay strong in the faith. The mockers and scoffers were prophesied to come.
Luk 21:35-36, Act 20:29, 2 Pet 3:3, Jas 3:1,
Yes, Bart Ehrman teaches at the University of North Carolina and our son was in his class a couple years back. The sad fact is he is a very talented lecturer and has an engaging personality that makes him extremely popular with students. My son overheard him laughing with another professor about the hundreds of Christian kids - "sheep" as he called them -in his classes who had grown up with an unquestioning faith before being enlightened in his class. We have put a lot of effort as parents training our kids in Christian worldview, and my son's faith emerged intact (and maybe strengthened as he's now an intern youth pastor). So important to prepare our kids for the attractive deception of worldly philosophies before they leave our nest!
I'm afraid we're in for some more spiritual deception tomorrow in the announcement of the 47 million year old "missing link" fossil that is the subject of the History channel and BBC documentary next Monday. I expect we'll be told that this is the "case closed" proof for human evolution. Of course since all research has been a closely guarded secret, they can get huge publicity for these claims before any other qualified scientific researchers (creationist or otherwise) have had a chance to review the evidence regarding what this fossil shows.
Psalm 141:10 Let the wicked fall into their own nets, While I pass by safely.
Psalm 35:8 Let destruction come upon him unawares, And let the net which he hid catch himself; Into that very destruction let him fall.
Isaiah 47:11 "But evil will come on you Which you will not know how to charm away; And disaster will fall on you For which you cannot atone; And destruction about which you do not know Will come on you suddenly.
Isaiah 2:12 For the LORD of hosts will have a day of reckoning Against everyone who is proud and lofty And against everyone who is lifted up, That he may be abased.
Isaiah 13:11 Thus I will punish the world for its evil And the wicked for their iniquity; I will also put an end to the arrogance of the proud And abase the haughtiness of the ruthless.
Isaiah 29:20 For the ruthless will come to an end and the scorner will be finished, Indeed all who are intent on doing evil will be cut off;
Isaiah 3:11 Woe to the wicked! It will go badly with him, For what he deserves will be done to him.
Isaiah 26:21 For behold, the LORD is about to come out from His place To punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity; And the earth will reveal her bloodshed And will no longer cover her slain
I feel much better now......... Praise Yeshua!!!!!
A prime example that debunks the OSAS doctrine........
Blessings,
Julie
As far as Bart EVER being a Christian, and then falling away, that just doesn't happen. He was never a Christian in the first place.
THIS is the major problem the 'modern gospel' causes. The modern gospel is nothing more than walking the aisle and repeating a prayer to 'accept' Jesus. You'll NOT find that anywhere in scripture. One needs to REPENT from sin. Since the modern church gospel doesn't define sin, let alone preach repentance, no wonder so many are nothing more than false converts.
You need to use the law, the 10 commandments to show people what God considers sin. Then they need to REPENT of those sins and TRUST in the payment Jesus paid for us for those sins. Only then will Jesus 'receive/accept' US. We don't accept him, he accepts us when we come to him on His terms.
Bart was never truly 'born-again', he was never made a 'new creature', because once you have an encounter with the Creator of the Universe, you truly will never be the same.
The question is, was he truely ever a Christian? The answer is he never knew Christ. Or as the Lord will say, I never knew you.
The sheep know their master and only him will they follow.
JRed,
I agree with Larry on this. I don't think God saves someone only to be lost again and over and over. We are born lost and must be born again to be saved. The question will be was that person truly born again and saved in the first place?
You guys need to lay off the cool aid. The creation of fictions about Ehrman are either outright lies or symptoms of seriously insecure minds.
This is very sad, may God grant him knowledge of the Truth and repentance!
Get over it. These discrepancies existed before Ehrman was even born! If Matthew says Joseph's father is Jacob and Luke says it is Heli, Ehrman DIDN'T INVENT THIS. It's in your own book. Instead of focusing on the "discrepency", the cool aid crowd attacks Ehrman and changes the whole conversation. Focus on the apologetics for the issue identified and not for the man who points out problems in the book being worshipped.
peTer,
Thanks for stopping by and for writing.
Not sure why in your first comment you took issue with what I wrote about Mr. Ehrman. Everything I reported is exactly what he says he believes -- there was no speculation in regards to any of that.
I guess I'm a proud member of the "Kool Aid crowd" then because for me it's MUCH MORE than just head knowledge (an intellectual decision) for Jesus Christ, but more about heart knowledge (and personal experiences I've had that prove to me He is real). I can't explain it and no one will ever understand that unless it's happened to them. That's where faith comes in.
I'm sorry we disagree, but I must warn you that I won't be shaken from my position or faith.
In Christ,
Jeff (JRed)
No, what you do, like the rest of the cool aid crowd is hide. Focus on the issues and man up. If Matthew says Joseph's father is Jacob and Luke says it is Heli, Ehrman DIDN'T INVENT THIS.
Quite frankly my concern in shaking you from your "faith" borders on sociopathic non-caring. So get over yourself. Focus on an issue such as the one I mentioned above.
peTer,
Quick question: Are you a Christian?
I don't want to assume my friend, but I'm guessing you're not since you question the veracity of the Bible.
If you're not a Christian, then why do you even care what I believe? Why not just leave me and others like me to our ignorance on the subject if that's how you feel about us?
I just don't get it. I mean, as a Christian, I want to see everyone come to the realization that Jesus Christ is who He said He was and to make a decision for Him, but I'm at the point where I've learned that intellectual arguments are not going to sway anyone who holds a different view than I do.
In addition, I leave it all in God's perfectly capable hands. I just plant the seeds and it's God who will determine if and when they grow into genuine faith.
My point is, most people always assume that we Christians are the ones who are aggressively and fervently trying to make converts, but I think it's evident by the few comments you made here that that's not true.
It's the secularist, agnostics (again, sorry to assume my friend, but that's the vibe I'm getting from you) that are the ones trying to force their beliefs on others.
I guess we'll just respectfully agree to disagree then. I'm glad you stopped by and want to engage in the discussion, but I'm afraid someone else is going to have to take it up with you because time is perilously short and I don't have time to engage in these debates on a daily basis.
Instead, I'll do the next best thing. I'll pray for you my brother.
Lord, I pray that peTer uses his passion for truth honestly and that he comes to the realization that you are exactly who you say that you are and that you and your holy words can be trusted. Please open his eyes, heart, and mind to the truth that is Jesus Christ before it's too late for him. Amen.
YBIC,
Jeff (JRed)
It's good that you and I disengage. I prefer to focus on the issues. You digress and focus on people trying to divert you from your faith; claiming I am trying to convert you; worrying about whether I am agnostic, atheist, muslim, buddhist, etc all of which are irrelevant to the statement I opened with and limited myself to.
If there is a God, he gave us a brain as well. Some choose to let it atrophy under the guise of having to choose between being rational and being religious.
You have a nice day.
Hey Peter -I am sure Brian McLaren could use you in his Emergent church.
Unfortunately JRed, along with the well earned kudos for your work, the "trolls" and scoffers come too. As their delusions grow stronger, so will their attacks. I too am proud to drink the Bible is true and divinely inspired Kool Aid.
I have no idea who Brian McLaren is, don't care to know and don't see how he is remotely relevant to my initial post.
Clearly you are not able to address the issue I raised with any degree of relevance or clarity which says a lot.
I just took a look at this site from its home page and wow! It brings to mind ALL those end time prophets who time AFTER TIME, AFTER TIME without fail predicted the "End Times"! And you know the one thing they ALL have in common??? NONE came true. They are all false prophets who ultimately seek to be worshiped as God's mouthpiece, but of course they don't and never will claim that. Whoever runs this site is bogus beyond belief. A self centered egomanic disguising himself as a prophet of God leading people to God, yet false beyond all measure. List him as simply one quack with ALL the other historical quacks. What a majorly dufas web site! Only in America!
peTer,
I pray for you, you are lost. May God grant you repentance into life.
Jeff:
Sadly, your "rebuttal" leaves much to be desired. As an example, merely stating "I'd like too see how he comes up with that" isn't a rebuttal; instead, it should have compelled you to see how exactly Ehrman arrives at such a conclusion and then critique it.
Ehrman isn't trying to "debunk" anything. All religions are based on faith and "debunking" faith is impossible. For this reason, Ehrman states in many of his lectures that the discrepancies he and many other bible scholars have found doesn't require anyone to abandon their faith. In fact, most of these discrepancies and problems are taught and discussed at leading seminaries.
I'm taken somewhat aback by those who assert Ehrman was never a Christian or a weak one. This says more about the person attacking Ehrman in that their faith must be so fragile that it cannot stand up to evidence and historical fact.
BTW, Ehrman transformed from being a self-described "hard-core evangelical" to being an agnostic not because of the many problems and discrepancies in the bible.
Anonymous, please leave a name next time so that I can address you directly (and pray for you as well).
Thanks for visiting and for sharing your thoughts. I get what you're saying, but am always fascinated by how "cerebral" these debates become. It's almost like no one will concede a point to the other side unless the strict rules of logic and serious debate are followed. I may have been right in what I wrote about Ehrman's assertions, but just because I never followed the proper rules for issuing a "rebuttal" my statements are ignored. How does that work?
How is he not trying to "debunk" Christianity when he questions the deity of Jesus Christ Himself?
What is Christianity without Jesus Christ? What is Christianity without the divinity of Jesus Christ?
A "Christian" is someone who believes that Jesus Christ is EXACTLY who He said He was -- the Son of God who came here to sacrifice Himself on our behalf for our sins, so that He could rise from the dead and give us eternal life through faith, repentance, mercy, forgiveness, and salavation in Him and from Him. It's that simple really.
Oh that's right! Ehrman questions the resurrection too. I forgot about that one.
So, now we have Ehrman "questioning" (I'll use that word instead of the word "debunking") not one, but two fundamental tenets of the Christian faith. These are things that one's entire faith is built upon.
Bottom line: I don't have a problem with people wanting to question things (like who was that guy's father like a previous reader commented about), but when you start to question the FUNDAMENTAL TENETS OF A FAITH that's when things go way off track and it becomes a case of "attacking" and "debunking".
Surely, as educated and intelligent as I know you are from your well-written response, I know you can see that, right?
Can't wait to see what rule(s) of logic and debate I broke this time. HA!
Friend, I'm sorry you hate my beliefs and position on this subject so much.
I don't know what else to tell you or anyone else except that my faith is strong because of the MANY PEROSNAL EXPERIENCES I've had over the course of my short life, and NOT BECAUSE OF SOME INTELLECTUAL ARGUMENT/DEBATE THAT I WON.
In Christ,
Jeff (JRed)
Jeff:
Ehrman presents his reasoning and evidence for why he believes many of the books of the NT are forgeries. An effective and honest rebuttal is to present your own reasons why Ehrman's evidence is wrong or not compelling. These are not rules, per se, but are accepted norms for serious debate.
As I mentioned previously, one can't debunk or question faith. If I have faith the moon is made of green cheese, it's going to be very difficult for you to move me from my belief. You could present me with findings from the moon landings, you could even show me a moon rock or soil. If my faith is stalwart, I'm going to stick with my green cheese beliefs. OTOH, it would be very foolish of me to claim that a moon rock is a trick or that NASA has hoaxed us all.
What Ehrman does is present evidence the bible is not infallible, that there are contradictions, discrepancies, and errors. BTW, this isn't very controversial, scholars have noted many of these for the past couple centuries.
I fear you are misstating Ehrman's purposes and motives. Because he points out the fact the bible contains contradictory accounts of the resurrection--in one case (Mark), the resurrection account wasn't part of earlier versions of the book--doesn't constitute an "attack" on anyone's tenets of belief.
I suppose if you believe the bible is infallible, inspired, inerrant word of God--you might construe Ehrman as attacking your religion. But as I noted earlier, most seminaries teach the fact the bible is full of errors and contradictions.
I am not necessarly KJV only, but it reality this man is vocalizing what has been caused by so many Bible versions with all of their dout causing footnotes. When a "Bible" comes out and casts doubt on passages on almost every page, how can anyone really trust it? I would tell English speaking people to pick up an old KJV, read it with patience, accept it as representative of God's word in English, and have faith in what it says. Bible readers didn't have these issues when the KJV was the only version availbe. God Bless!
I don't recall a single passage within the KJV claiming the KJV version was superior to any other translation or any revelation to man from God claiming KJV was THE version. So the claim must be based outside of the bible and in that case.....
Post a Comment