Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible & Why We Don't Know About Them

My rating:

add to my books

Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible & Why We Don't Know About Them

by Bart D. Ehrman

3.96 · rating details · 1,272 ratings · 276 reviews

Picking up where Bible expert Bart Ehrman's "New York Times" bestseller "Misquoting Jesus" left off, "Jesus, Interrupted" addresses the larger issue of what the New Testament actually teaches--and it's not what most people think. Here Ehrman reveals what scholars have unearthed:

The authors of the New Testament have diverging views about who

...more

Hardcover, 292 pages

Published March 3rd 2009 by HarperOne (first published January 1st 2009)

more details... edit details

Get a copy:

More…

There is a good chance some of your friends read this book. Sign in to see!

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

God is Not Great by Christopher Hitchens

Letter to a Christian Nation by Sam Harris

Notable Atheist Books

14th out of 149 books — 306 voters

Understanding the Bible

5th out of 128 books — 53 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 2,976)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

Jun 26, 2011

Ian rated it

Shelves: nonfiction, religion-spirituality, fits-like-a-glove

I have written elsewhere in angry fashion about a crisis of faith I experienced a couple of years ago. I have emerged from the crisis and entered something of a renaissance in my own faith. I haven’t given up on everything I once believed but I also won’t pretend that the faith I now hold is merely a stronger version of what I was taught to believe growing up. To be sure, my faith now is much stronger than what I was taught to believe, but it’s also much more thoughtful, intelligent, egalitar...more

like 24 likes

· see review

Apr 14, 2009

Eric rated it

Shelves: religion, recent-reads

First off, I think it’s important to dismiss any of the common misunderstandings about Bart Ehrman and this book. The book is not a diatribe. It does not set out to debunk Christianity. Ehrman, in my opinion, is not angry, condescending, or uncaring in this book – quite the opposite, actually. Ehrman is not asking that you abandon your faith. I personally feel, having read the book, that Ehrman has served us up a wonderful tool, and has provided us with a great opportunity for discussion th...more

like 36 likes

· see review

Aug 24, 2009

Brad rated it

Recommends it for: truth seekers

Once again Bart D. Ehrman has reminded me why I transferred out of Lancaster Bible College. "Jesus, Interrupted" is a summery of the Critical-Historical approach to the New Testament. This is opposed to the devotional studies approach espoused by nearly all evangelical churches. The Critical-Historical approach looks at the various books of the Bible as being historical documents existing separately, each written with a specific message for a specific audience. I.e. Paul's letter t...moreOnce again Bart D. Ehrman has reminded me why I transferred out of Lancaster Bible College. "Jesus, Interrupted" is a summery of the Critical-Historical approach to the New Testament. This is opposed to the devotional studies approach espoused by nearly all evangelical churches. The Critical-Historical approach looks at the various books of the Bible as being historical documents existing separately, each written with a specific message for a specific audience. I.e. Paul's letter to the Church of Corinth was written to the churchgoers of first century Corinth and not to the those of 16th century Singapore or 21st century Pennsylvania. Or that the author of the Gospel of Luke couldn't have intend for his gospel to be combined with any other, such as the then unwritten Gospel of John. Therefore when someone takes a verse from Luke and then combines it with a verse from John they are creating their own version of the Gospel which is completely different from either book. As you can probably imagine this concept is quite controversial, but having attended a Bible believing Christian college I can say that almost every point made in this book I was taught at LBC. The only difference being that my Professor at LBC intellectually bent over backwards with pious imagination to hold firm to the belief that the Bible was with contradiction and is the infallible word of God. Here is a very brief summery of what the book states...

# Only 8 of the 27 books of the New Testament were actually written by the authors to whom they're attributed. Others are likely forgeries.

# The gospels provide remarkably divergent portrayals of Jesus.

# The message of the Apostle Paul and the message of gospel writer Matthew are completely at odds over the question of whether a follower of Jesus also had to observe the Jewish law.

# The Nicene Creed and the Trinity were constructs of the later church and are not found in the pages of the Bible.

# Traditional doctrines such as the suffering Messiah, the divinity of Christ, and the notion of heaven and hell are not based on the teachings of the historical Jesus.

# The commonly told story of Jesus -- his birth, death, and resurrection is actually a composite of four vastly different gospel narratives.

Check out http://www.bartdehrman.com/mp3_NPR_jesus... for an audio interview with the author.(less)

like 3 likes

· see review

Jul 28, 2011

David Chivers rated it

An excellent book on the historical aspects of the Bible, its origins, its conflicts within itself, and the problems thatarise with Biblical research. For anyone who took historical/critical Bible studies in college, it will go over familiar ground, and he makes no bones about this. But as he points out, while most theological schools have critical Bible studies as a part of the regular curriculum, most of this basic research (The Q source, problems of literary consistency in the wiritng sugge...more

like 1 like

· see review

Aug 02, 2011

Curtis rated it

A fascinating and objective history of the New Testament's creation and the formulation of the early Christian church, and about the transition from the religion OF Jesus to the religion ABOUT Jesus that dominates much of the world today. This book is a revelation (no pun intended) because of the startling facts it reveals and because of the availability of those facts to anyone who cares to know more about the book that guides so many lives. I think it is the duty of any devotional Christian ...more

like 1 like

· see review

Dec 29, 2010

Tim rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: history, religious, theology

Oh man was this book good....

It's along the same vein as Misquoting Jesus, his previous book on the scribal mistakes of the NT. This book focuses more on the textual, political, and theological history of early Christianity and how these factors came to influence the orthodox views that we're familiar with today. Ehrman exposes a few very important issues and the impact they may have for us today.

A few of the issues that he brings up strike me particularly hard, and now that...moreOh man was this book good....

It's along the same vein as Misquoting Jesus, his previous book on the scribal mistakes of the NT. This book focuses more on the textual, political, and theological history of early Christianity and how these factors came to influence the orthodox views that we're familiar with today. Ehrman exposes a few very important issues and the impact they may have for us today.

A few of the issues that he brings up strike me particularly hard, and now that he's brought them up I can't see how I could have missed them in previous readings of the Bible.

Namely that every author, speaking to a particular audience with a particular culture, had emphasized DIFFERENT aspects of the same familiar stories about Jesus to portray a DIFFERENT view of Jesus, and a DIFFERENT interpretation of what Christianity means to the individual. When writing these books the authors did not know, or intend, that their writings would one day form a formal orthodox canon of scripture. In fact they would have considered that heretical because "scripture" was a term that referred only to the ancient writings of the Jewish prophets. For instance...in Mark Jesus rebukes any attempt to display his miracles as proof of his divinity, instead opting to say that God should not be tested in this manner. In John it seems as if Jesus is just going around performing miracles every day to prove his divinity. Clearly one or both of these versions of the story is untrue. How do we decide? How do we decode Jesus life from the documents we have left? What did Jesus ACTUALLY teach and believe? Does modern Christianity have anything in common with the religion of Jesus? If not, does it matter? All these questions and more are addressed in stunning clarity and easily digested sentences. Truly a powerful glimpse into the world of biblical scholarship for the layman.

One thing this book asserted for me was that the Christianity I grew up with was certainly NOT the religion Jesus preached about. Many of the beliefs that Christians hold as truth were not uttered from Jesus' mouth, but added to scripture decades, and sometimes centuries later by scribes, priests and theologians who were probably well-meaning, but changed the landscape of Christianity nonetheless.

It strikes me as a delicious irony then that to reclaim the Christianity of Jesus we cannot look to orthodoxy...indeed we must seek the sources deemed heretical. We must throw off the shackles of antiquity and re-examine the scriptures in the light of reason, history, and faith. We need to give up the notion that for Christianity to be valid it must be based on an infallible document, that it cannot be a human religion. We are all seeking the truth of God. Even a Christian would not disagree with the fact that God is too infinite to comprehend and that religion is our attempt to place the infinite in a finite box so that we might understand, love and relate to God. So what's wrong with religion being human? What's wrong with the Bible being a document written by human hands, mistakes and all, as a record of devotion and theology throughout the ages?

The biggest question of all... If the evidence shows us that modern Christianity is actually misaligned with what the original authors knew of God and Jesus, then aren't we called to abandon it? In other words, If the church has the wrong view of Jesus and His message, then by beleiving it we are actually growing apart from what God intends for us...how then do we proceed in seeking truth? and once we embark on this mission how do we avoid trading the shackles of modern Christianity for shackles of our own making through our own misinterpretations and inadequacies? I don't know, but I'm going to continue reading, seeking, praying and when I find something good and true I will hold onto it. (less)

like 3 likes

· see review

May 08, 2009

Clif Hostetler rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: religion

I recommend the review of this book by Trevor at the following link:
http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/746...

The following is my review written five months ago:
There is nothing new or revolutionary in this book for anyone who has studied bible in a mainline seminary or divinity school (or in my case, listened to Ehrman's lectures from the Teaching Company). The problem is that most ministers use the Bible only as a source of devotional material, and refrain from telling...more

like 1 like

· see review

Jan 08, 2012

Laura Lee rated it

Shelves: religion-spirituality

I would probably do 3 1/2 if there were such a thing. Better than average, but because the concept of a historical critical reading of the Bible is not news to me, I found that this book spent an inordinate amount of time explaining the concept. Once it gets started, the reminder that each book of the bible was written separately with its own point of view and the device of using contradictions between different books to show their different perspectives and emphases is instructive. It is a go...more

· see review

Dec 11, 2011

Caitlin Marineau rated it

Shelves: history, religion

I found this book to be a very good introduction to the scholarly study of the Bible. Professor Ehrman sensitively and effectively explains the state of biblical scholarship and historians' views on its writing and creation, including discrepancies between the different gospels, views on miscredited books, and a discussion of how the current "orthodox" view of Christianity won out over competing views. I read some criticisms of the book that essentially argue that the book does not off...more

· see review

Nov 04, 2011

Dave rated it

Bart Ehrman, saddened by the misery in the world and deluged by factual discrepancies in the canon, succumbs to the "Historical Jesus" movement and sets out on a crusade to convert the unwashed masses to his newfound agnosticism. Previous reviewers of this book squabble about whether it's a diatribe or not; I'm not sure, but Ehrman doesn't score any points with his tone, style, or editing. I find his approach transparently pedantic: (1) point out differences between accounts in the Gos...moreBart Ehrman, saddened by the misery in the world and deluged by factual discrepancies in the canon, succumbs to the "Historical Jesus" movement and sets out on a crusade to convert the unwashed masses to his newfound agnosticism. Previous reviewers of this book squabble about whether it's a diatribe or not; I'm not sure, but Ehrman doesn't score any points with his tone, style, or editing. I find his approach transparently pedantic: (1) point out differences between accounts in the Gospels, (2) conclude that the faith-inspiring elements of the story must have been fabrications, if the writers can't even agree on simple details, and (3) appeal to authority, ensuring us that most scholars and even our pastors secretly see things this way. Rinse and repeat. After nearly every cycle he reiterates the assertion that to harmonize the accounts by merging details (no matter how minute) from different gospels into one story is akin to writing a new gospel, and who would dare do that? (gospel of Q, anyone?)

Ehrman frequently takes a stance that I find intellectually dishonest. He claims that affiliation with the "Historical Jesus" movement is not only benign, it is mainstream: that one can be Christian and doubt the divinity of Jesus seems absurd to me, but Ehrman takes this to a new level by exploiting the naivety of his readers -- assuring them that his views are backed by decades of consensus among the majority of both historians and clergy.

Many of the errors he cites are well known -- the chronology of the birth, trial, and death of Jesus for example -- but to Erhman, the fact that different gospels present different elements of a story, and sometimes even contradict each other, means that the purportedly divine events in the stories should be doubted as well. If conviction of divine events comes from historical inquiry, why did Ehrman wait so long to leave the faith? These discrepancies were a non-issue to Ehrman until he decided that the suffering in the world was too great for there to be a caring God. And that is the main point: religious conviction is the product of real or perceived personal experiences with the Divine. It was a lack of those experiences, not an encounter with factual discrepancies, that led Ehrman to lose his faith. Why then should he expect to sway anyone from their beliefs if this rhetoric never worked on him?(less)

· see review

Oct 15, 2011

Justin rated it

Shelves: favorites, paper-worthy

I have always loved my Bible. My religious upbringing gave me a deep and abiding love of the book which was, truly, a love. It wasn't a fear that if I didn't read it something bad would happen. It was a love for the work. A passion for understanding it.

Ehrman seems to have the same thing.

I completely agree with Ehrman that the Bible is the most important book in western civilization. A solid understanding of what is is and what it says (and doesn't say) can only help us if we...more

· see review

Jul 13, 2011

David rated it

Bart Ehrman promises at the beginning of "Jesus, Interrupted" that for those who are seminary educated this book will not have anything new. He delivers on that promise, and, as such, I found the book to be a bit disappointing. That being said, I have watched two of Ehrman's courses on DVD by the Teaching Company, and have found them to be quite a good review. For me, seminary was twenty years ago, and re-visiting material I learned in my twenties is a big help.

For those ...moreBart Ehrman promises at the beginning of "Jesus, Interrupted" that for those who are seminary educated this book will not have anything new. He delivers on that promise, and, as such, I found the book to be a bit disappointing. That being said, I have watched two of Ehrman's courses on DVD by the Teaching Company, and have found them to be quite a good review. For me, seminary was twenty years ago, and re-visiting material I learned in my twenties is a big help.

For those new to the historical-critical method, this will likely be a very interesting book. Ehrman's strength is that he writes in a very clear and straightforward style that is easy to understand and difficult to combat, if you are a critic. Like a good lawyer, he makes his case for each point he makes in a convincing fashion, backing up what he says with citations from scripture that the reader can investigate.

My main criticism of this book is that it seems to be lacking a theme, and is more like a re-hash of things that Ehrman has written and said in the past. It begins as a book that examines discrepancies in the New Testament gospels, and to a lesser extent, epistles. Fair enough. Then, it seems to shift to questions of authorship; territory I suspect Ehrman is currently *re-* re-hashing in 2011's "Forged!", which I haven't read. From there, he worries about textual criticism and from there he moves on to the early church and anti-Semitism. All interesting topics. I guess that Ehrman would argue that the purpose of the book is to show how Jesus himself was reinterpreted by the church as time went on. However, the book reads more like an anthology of interesting topics than a book with a coherent argument. *Moreover* (Ehrman's favorite word) he ends with a discussion of his own faith journey and implications for faith today. Again, this chapter is well-written and interesting, but here he repeats many of the things he has already said earlier in the book. I don't mind him repeating material from previous books (well, actually, maybe I do) but previous chapters -- come on man!

So, if you are new to the historical-critical method, you will likely find this interesting. Having done a lot of work in this area already, I found the book to be a bit of a hodge-podge of various topics, not really connected to an identifiable theme. While I found Ehrman's discussion of his own faith journey (or loss-of-faith journey) to be interesting, I am not sure of its purpose, other than to plug yet another Ehrman book, "God's Problem". I highly recommend Bart Ehrman's Teaching Company courses, which are scholarly but at the same time, highly accessible. As for, "Jesus, Interrupted", I might re-title it, "Reader, Disappointed". Maybe my Adult Education class will set me straight!(less)

like 1 like

· see review

Jun 15, 2011

Russell Ince rated it

I'm a big fan of Bart Ehrman because, as an erstwhile Christian and venerable New Testament scholar, he is adequately equipped to discuss these subjects but unlike many Christian academics his agnosticism lends him an air of intellectual honesty which I, as an agnostic atheist interested in Christianity, sometimes find lacking in other New Testament scholars. Ehrman has a respect for his Christian material that axe-grinding atheists may lack but is not clouded by personal subjectivities and...more
I'm a big fan of Bart Ehrman because, as an erstwhile Christian and venerable New Testament scholar, he is adequately equipped to discuss these subjects but unlike many Christian academics his agnosticism lends him an air of intellectual honesty which I, as an agnostic atheist interested in Christianity, sometimes find lacking in other New Testament scholars. Ehrman has a respect for his Christian material that axe-grinding atheists may lack but is not clouded by personal subjectivities and religious dogmas. Put simply, Ehrman is not afraid to call a spade a spade.

'Jesus Interrupted' is a work that covers a lot of ground in a short space and I would recommend it to anyone beginning a study of the New Testament. It is, however, rather a hodge-podge of different subject areas, many of which Ehrman had previously or has since covered in more detail elsewhere.

'Jesus Interrupted' makes largely the same point as Ehrman's earlier work 'Misquoting Jesus', namely, that the New Testament should be read for what each individual author or editor had to say rather than as a single text with a single unifying dogma. But whereas 'Misquoting Jesus' demonstrated this point through textual criticism and the study of changes to the text in the course of its transmission, 'Jesus Interrupted' makes the point by looking directly at the text itself.

Chapter 2 of this work looks at some of the discrepancies in the gospel narratives of Jesus. Whilst scholars have long recognised and celebrated the different flavours of the evangelists, Ehrman, as an agnostic, is not afraid to see contradictions where Christian scholars prefer to see nuances of emphasis.

In chapter 3 Ehrman attributes these contradictions to different dogmas. Ehrman states (p.62): "Many of the differences among the biblical authors have to do with the very heart of their message. Sometimes one author’s understanding of a major issue is at odds with another author’s, on such vital matters as who Christ is, how salvation is attained, and how the followers of Jesus are to live."

Chapter 4 then discusses the question of authorship of the books of the New Testament. This ground is covered in more detail in Ehrman's later work 'Forged'.

Chapter 5 deals with the quest for the historical Jesus. Again, this is an area Ehrman has covered before and at greater length in 'Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium'. Ehrman uses the the usual methodology of various criteria (contextual credibility, independent attestation and dissimilarity) to establish which traditions about Jesus are the most reliable. This methodology, whilst useful, does not offer nor does it claim to offer, any cast iron guarantees. To take a few example, Jesus is believed to have been baptised by John the Baptist because this would have been an embarrassment to Christians and so is not likely to be untrue. Indeed Christianity, as it emerged and now exists, would find Jesus' early inferiority to John the Baptist embarrassing but it may have been the case that the earliest Christians did not possess such an exalted view of Christ as later emerged, especially in the gospel of John. In actual fact, John the Baptist was a well known and admired preacher discussed at good length by Josephus and so an association with him may have offered prestige rather than ignominy.

That Jesus, as Messiah, was believed to have come from Nazareth may also be a legend explained by the fact that the evangelists claimed this was prophesied (although we don't know by whom) or from a confusion with the place Nazareth (which according to Rene Salm was not inhabited in the early 1st century) with the word Nazarene. Paul is described in Acts as the ring-leader of the Nazarenes and there are a few etymological theories on its original meaning.

Chapter 6 looks at the transmission of the bible and the formation of the canon which Ehrman explores in greater detail in 'Misquoting Jesus'.

Chapter 7 deals with the theological development of Christianity and the notion that the faith is not so much the religion of Jesus but the religion about Jesus. Again, Ehrman explores this subject in more detail in works such as 'Lost Christianities'.(less)

like 1 like

· see review

May 30, 2011

Chungsoo Lee rated it

Recommends it for: all Christians

Recommended to Chungsoo by: NPR

Every Christians should read this book. “Have courage to read this book,” as Sartre said about Fanon's The Wretched Of The Earth. As Ehrman says, the book contains information which is nothing new. He only organized very lucidly the updated scholarly findings regarding the New Testament which are widely taught in the top 10 seminaries in the U.S.A. for the last 20 to 50 years. But American layman is completely in the dark due to pastors not teaching them in the Sunday schools about the histo...moreEvery Christians should read this book. “Have courage to read this book,” as Sartre said about Fanon's The Wretched Of The Earth. As Ehrman says, the book contains information which is nothing new. He only organized very lucidly the updated scholarly findings regarding the New Testament which are widely taught in the top 10 seminaries in the U.S.A. for the last 20 to 50 years. But American layman is completely in the dark due to pastors not teaching them in the Sunday schools about the historical and critical reading of the Bible. The penultimate Chapter contains convincing arguments and evidence--again nothing new--about Paul's relationship to Jesus, how the theological distinction the early Christians made to identify themselves apart from Judaism (from the Johannine community to the third century) lead to the origin of antisemitism, and about how Christology and the doctrine of Trinity evolved. The findings (again nothing new) are indisputable: that Jesus did not intend to create a new religion, that Jesus was a Jewish apocalypsist who (along with Paul and almost all of the contemporaries) believed that the End of the World would come in their life time, that there were many versions of Christianity which were reduced into a single and unified theology centering around Paul's interpretation and application of the Good News that Jesus has risen (the apocalyptic belief on resurrection was common among the Jews, including the Pharisees), that only 8 books out of 27 in the New Testament were written by the authors we know, etc.

The development of Christology is worthy of note in particular. Jesus never claimed to be the Son of God. He may have been called the Son of Man, the common but distinguished title for apocalyptic figure after the Book of Daniel, which is written some 200 years prior. Paul makes him Christ, worthy of worship as God, at the moment of and because of his Resurrection. In Matthew, Jesus is presented as the Son of God beginning from his baptism. In John, he is pronounced as being equal to and with God in the beginning of the world. At the Council of Nicaea in A.D. 325 Christ is defined as having the same substance (homo-ousia) with God, not a similar substance (homoi-ousia). Based on the difference of the "i" how many hours were spent and how many lives lost for years to come!

What comes loud and clear in the book is that the Bible is a human book, made up of many manuscripts handed down, edited, and selected by later leaders in the religious establishment to present a unified version; that Jesus was human who preached the imminent coming of the Kingdom of God with particular vigor, piety, and originality and whose death was particularly shocking. Ehrman's own thesis about Paul is convincing: that Paul adopted and developed (not created and dominated) the common view of the earliest followers of Jesus who believed that Jesus was risen from the dead by God as the sign of the end time, that his death and resurrection was to vindicate injustice in the world and to usher in the Kingdom of God, that his death and resurrection was to atone the sins of the world and to bring about the salvation of the world--the belief which became dominant at the time of codifying the written Gospels and canonizing the New Testament and which accounts for many redactions and emendations of the Gospels.

Christianity is not an invention of one man, Paul, but a creation of Jewish apocalyptic belief held by the followers of Jesus who were attempting to come to grips with the catastrophe of the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 and many other historical disasters and sufferings surrounding them at the time and the prior time. Who would not believe in the resurrection of the righteous who has been unfairly and innocently crucified? 'God must descend to earth to establish his kingdom' was and still is a palpable longing the religious people had then as well as now.

The concluding chapter, "Is Faith Possible?," is a disappointment. Ehrman only refers to his personal journey into agnosticism--not due to his knowledge about the Bible but, he says, due to the problem of evil—and how other like-minded scholars and colleagues still fervently believe in Christianity. Ehrman does not push his (scholars') findings about the New Testament into logical conclusion: that the findings would change Christianity as we know it. He does not have to because he is no longer a practicing Christian. But he does emphasize that the finds should not turn Christians into non-believers either. So, the question must be asked: What becomes of Christianity if Jesus is no longer believed to be divine? What happens to Paul's teaching if Jesus had never been raised from the dead? Is Christianity possible without the centrality of death and resurrection of Jesus? If we reject Paul, what do we have left to follow in the New Testament? To be fair to the author, Erhman does not propose rejection of Jesus' resurrection or of Paul's teaching. He sees no problem in accepting them as myths, which help to address life's conundrums for the believers. (He ended up rejecting the myths all together due to the unresolvable problem of evil. The myths no longer make sense, he says, in light of suffering in the world.)

But whether to have faith or not is not the question in light of the facts presented in the book that would destroy the foundations of Evangelical Christianity. For the evangelical Christianity is not the ultimate. The question is: whether we should only read the Bible as the ultimate. Why not read the Nag Hammadi Scriptures, the Qur'an, Bhagavad Gita, Tripitaka, Tao Te Ching, and many other religious texts as being on equal footing?

The informed view of Christ (Jesus retrieved after the historico-critical method) would not exclude but embrace other faiths. Christ is the model of the faithful, humility, and of compassion, and the acme of suffering. Resurrection (or reincarnation as Hindus would say) represents hope beyond all hope, a new beginning despite and in spite of all that is fallible in humanity. (less)

like 1 like

· see review

May 19, 2011

Mike rated it

This book felt like a follow up of Misquoting Jesus. It dealt with many of the same issues but instead of focusing on text criticism the book genrally deals with how and why early christian belief lead to changes to be added into the texts. The topics are related and Ehrman covers a lot of the same ground but without feeling repetitive. The texts that Ehrman uses differ from Misquoting Jesus which and when he does reuse them he offers insight that is interesting and novel (at least to me).
...more

like 1 like

· see review

Apr 17, 2011

Victoria S. rated it

Shelves: nonfiction, religion

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here.

like 1 like

· see review

Oct 26, 2010

Bob rated it

I liked this book a lot more than I expected to. My typical reaction to Bart Ehrman is that I find his facts compelling, but I don't feel compelled to accept all his conclusions, and this book was no different.

He does a good job of presenting scholarship (i.e. facts you can look up for yourself in the Bible) about discrepancies in the New Testament accounts. He also presents good historical information about the origin of the New Testament canon, as well as conclusions scholars hav...moreI liked this book a lot more than I expected to. My typical reaction to Bart Ehrman is that I find his facts compelling, but I don't feel compelled to accept all his conclusions, and this book was no different.

He does a good job of presenting scholarship (i.e. facts you can look up for yourself in the Bible) about discrepancies in the New Testament accounts. He also presents good historical information about the origin of the New Testament canon, as well as conclusions scholars have drawn about authorship of the books.

One comment my wife consistently makes, though, is that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. For example, because the book of Matthew doesn't say Matthew is the author doesn't mean Matthew is not the author. Because the book is written in extremely well-formed Greek not expected of a Jewish tax collector doesn't mean he didn't dictate it to a scribe. My view is that you can't necessarily prove some of this one way or the other, yet Ehrman often advances conclusions and assumptions like this, that because you can't conclusively prove something to be true it must be false.

He does a good job of surfacing his biases and being explicit that you can believe everything he says and still be a faithful and committed Christian. What you cannot do is maintain a simplistic view of the Bible as being a consistent set of works of known authorship. Factual details presented in the accounts disagree, so does that mean one or the other or both is somehow not inspired?

Honestly this book produced a huge wrestling match with my previously held view of the Bible, but I remain on the side of faith. Not so much faith in the inerrancy of the Bible, but faith in a God who works in ways I don't always understand. My faith emerges better and stronger and more solidly grounded than it was before.

I believe every Christian should read this book with an open mind, prepared to sift out truth and facts from opinion. If you can't read this book and come out stronger, your faith is founded on shifting sands.(less)

like 2 likes

· see review

Jul 18, 2010

Notary Tim rated it

If you are happy in your belief that the Bible was dictated by God or otherwise inspired in such a way that it is "inerrant," you will not want to read this book -- as it is a direct challenge to that belief.

Ehrman points out the many, many contradictions within the New Testament (his speciality as a Bible scholar) and gives a good overview of the historical-critical approach to Bible studies, as contrasted with the devotional and other approaches. Most church-based Bible ...more

like 2 likes

· see review

Jun 08, 2010

Hayden rated it

· review of another edition

Despite having an incredibly stupid title, this book is fascinating. Ehrman dishes all the dirt on not just the contradictions between how, say, Mark and Luke tell Jesus' story, but also who the authors of the New Testament really were (and more importantly, who they were not), what the early sects of the Christian church were like, and how they battled it out to decide what would be left in and out of the canon.

A couple of my favorite tidbits:

1. Matthew says that Jesus...more

like 6 likes

· see review

Jun 03, 2010

Bookworm1858 rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: read-2009, history-or-general-nf

Summary: Ehrman is a New Testament scholar who has published multiple books discussing things that are well-known among scholars of the Bible but are less known to lay people. This book discusses the irreconcilable differences, how the books of the NT were chosen, and what that means.

I didn't know much of what he presents as I've mostly had a devotional approach to the Bible rather than historical-critical, to use his terms. But actually this has provided new encouragement for studyi...more

like 1 like

· see review

Nov 10, 2009

Charles rated it

I enjoyed this even more than Misquoting Jesus. It includes a much broader look at the new testament and early Christianity. Provides an overview of the historical-critical approach to reading the new testament as opposed to the devotional reading that most Christians are familiar with including "horizontal reading", side by side comparison reading of the gospels to more readily see the variations in detail and, more significantly, even the contradictory views of widely held beliefs t...moreI enjoyed this even more than Misquoting Jesus. It includes a much broader look at the new testament and early Christianity. Provides an overview of the historical-critical approach to reading the new testament as opposed to the devotional reading that most Christians are familiar with including "horizontal reading", side by side comparison reading of the gospels to more readily see the variations in detail and, more significantly, even the contradictory views of widely held beliefs that are present in the different books of the new testament.
In subsequent chapters Ehrman presents the consensus scholarly opinions about who wrote the bible, how the "modern" canon evolved based on the different beliefs and debates of early Christians, and how the religion itself coalesced in the first few centuries C.E.
As Ehrman states "everyone thought their own views were orthodox at the time", even though those views varied widely among the early sect.
He even paints a fairly plausible, in my opinion, picture of the historical Jesus based solely on critical analysis of the scant evidence that is available in the historical record.
In the final chapter "Is Faith Possible" he presents his thoughts about how a critical evaluation of the bible and learning the things that most bible scholars and students of top-level seminaries and divinity schools in North American and Western Europe have known and discussed for the past two hundred years need not lead to a loss of faith. Even thought Ehrman, who started out in his youth as a very conservative evangelical christian, now self identifies as an agnostic he stresses repeatedly that his loss of faith did not come from critical bible scholarship but from the problem of human suffering which he addresses in his book, "God's Problem: How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question--Why We Suffer".
He also points out that even for non-believers studying and understanding the bible in a historical critical framework is important to understanding how one of our earliest civilizations developed a religion that still has overwhelming influence in the modern world. (less)

like 1 like

· see review

Nov 03, 2009

Matt rated it

I generally avoid the religion section of the bookstore, not for lack of interest but because of a general fear of accidentally picking something up that basically wants to preach one way or another. In that sense, it's not a lot different than the political aisle. Some years ago I stumbled into the work of Elaine Pagels and I liked several of her books. But with religion, most books are guilty until proven otherwise.

But I took a flyer on this one. I became familiar with Ehrman becau...moreI generally avoid the religion section of the bookstore, not for lack of interest but because of a general fear of accidentally picking something up that basically wants to preach one way or another. In that sense, it's not a lot different than the political aisle. Some years ago I stumbled into the work of Elaine Pagels and I liked several of her books. But with religion, most books are guilty until proven otherwise.

But I took a flyer on this one. I became familiar with Ehrman because he's one of the superstars of the Teaching Company's "Great Courses", the audio/video courses seen advertised in highbrow magazines. So I've heard a few of his lectures, and indeed, he takes what he calls the historical-critical approach to theological research. And he's pretty sharp.

And lo and behold, it's a very easy and fun read. Ehrman teaches at the University of North Carolina, and I suspect a lot of this material comes straight out of his undergraduate New Testament course. Which explains why it's such an easy read. (Sorry, I couldn't resist a jab at the Heels.)

What this book sets out to do is give a broad overview of the different viewpoints of the different authors of New Testament writings, highlighting the variety of viewpoints and beliefs proposed by each, and even contrasting those views with gospels that never made the canon and beliefs that are held today. All of this is framed as being the result of the broad consensus on scholarship today.

And for me, raised in a liberal church and retaining a rather hazy recollection of the general accumulation of the Jesus story, it's really interesting to hear a lot of this spelled out. Sure, I knew the book of Revelation offers a theology vastly different than the book of Psalms. But I didn't realize just how different John and Mark are, and I learned a lot about what scholarship says about the historical Paul. I already knew a lot about the essentially political debate in the early church about how to portray the Jews and Romans in the crucifixion story, but I didn't realize how intense the debate was over whether it was important for followers of Jesus to obey Jewish law. And the book pays off with a lot of these details. Furthermore, it tries to set everything into proper context regarding the historical development of the church and the battle of ideas that was ensuing in the several centuries after the death of Jesus.

What I really liked about this book is that while it doesn't explain with volumes of footnotes how scholars and historians have arrived at their conclusions, it doesn't simply parrot their findings either. Ehrman puts some effort into describing the background and logic of their methodology.

And ultimately, this is a really quick read. There's a lot of repetition, but I feel like I learned a bunch and it didn't outlast my attention. For someone really into this stuff, a more in-depth volume might be called for, but for the 8th grader, or the Carolina undergrad, or me, this was a real fun book to motor through.
(less)

like 3 likes

· see review

Oct 15, 2009

Judith rated it

Like many people, I had a vague picture of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John keeping journals of their everyday lives with Jesus and stapling them together to send them in to Random House for publication. Well, duh! Do you know who wrote the Bible? As it turns out, every seminary student learns in his first year of college that the 1st 4 books of the New Testament weren't written by MML&J at all, at least not the disciples, (though they could have been coincidentally 4 men with the same names.) ...more

like 3 likes

· see review

Oct 15, 2009

Trevor rated it

Shelves: history, religion

Here’s a question for you. How important is it that the Jesus of the Bible and the historical Jesus are more or less the same guy? Or even better, how important is it that the ideas Jesus was trying to spread by his ministry are the same ideas that have come to be followed in the various Christian churches?

There was a time when I would have thought that all Christians would have wanted to answer both of these questions by saying that it was fundamentally important to their faith th...moreHere’s a question for you. How important is it that the Jesus of the Bible and the historical Jesus are more or less the same guy? Or even better, how important is it that the ideas Jesus was trying to spread by his ministry are the same ideas that have come to be followed in the various Christian churches?

There was a time when I would have thought that all Christians would have wanted to answer both of these questions by saying that it was fundamentally important to their faith that what they currently believe as Christians is exactly what the historical Jesus taught. I would have thought that Christians would have developed their ideas about what Christ had to say about the world from the Bible (which, I had always assumed was seen by most Christians as the inspired and inerrant word of God) and that their task, as Christians, would be to come to an increasing understanding of that message by close and intense study.

As Ehrman basically says somewhere in this book – if you truly believe that the Bible is a book that God wrote on how you should live your life it seems a bit strange that you might believe that and not have bothered to go on and read it.

The other side to this is that if the Bible is the inspired word of God then you would not expect there to be any contradictions in it – particularly not in the various tellings of the Jesus story which is presented four times, once in each of the first four books of the New Testament known as the Gospels.

But there are differences between these tellings and some of these are not just differences of passing interest only to the pedant – although, I would have thought that the guy responsible for creating the Universe might have been the world’s worst pedant, myself. No, some of these tellings actually say opposite things, that is, are literally contradictory. And some of the differences have fundamental theological significance.

This is a book that looks at what scholarship is able to tell us about the historical Jesus and what his actions meant in his time and therefore the significance of those actions for him. It also shows how the significance of those actions to him would have been quite different to what those actions have come to signify to us a couple of thousand years later. The short version is that Jesus was an apocalyptic Jew and he and his earliest followers believed that they were living at the end of times and that meant their world was about to end and to end immediately. When they say things like there are people here who will see me return in glory that was meant to be taken literally. Paul believed he would be alive to see the second coming. I would think that for these reasons alone the historical Jesus can hardly be seen as identical with the Christian Jesus.

Large parts of this book look at our earliest texts of the New Testament and then question whether Jesus and his earliest followers actually believed that he was divine and then if he was divine when did he become divine. For John, for example, the last of the gospels to be written, Jesus was with God at the beginning of time as the word that created the universe. For the other three Apostles his literal divinity is never quite so well spelt out and if he was divine at all, then he probably became divine after the resurrection.

There are fascinating questions asked in this book. For example, as Jesus was going to his death was he anxious and upset – as he is depicted in Matthew – or was he pretty well cool, calm and collected as he is depicted in Luke. You know, there is a pretty big difference between these two versions of Jesus’ death which can be summed up by what they say his last words on the cross were: either “My God, my God why hast thou forsaken me” or “Forgive them for they know not what they do.”

The point is that Luke and Matthew were wanting to make very distinct theological points with their tellings of the crucifixion story and they do this by telling very different stories. Ehrman makes it clear that how these contradictions are generally resolved is by having Jesus say both of these lines while he was on the cross and for some reason both Luke and Matthew left out the other one, but this does not go nearly far enough to resolve the many, many contradictions in the two stories. The problem with this way of resolving contradictions in the Bible is that it creates a new text which is different from both of the texts you are using as your source. But the real point here is that this third text you have just created by smashing together the two gospel versions has to be less accurate than either of the gospel versions, not more accurate as we generally assume. We confusedly think that the Bible is one book, whereas it is many books telling somewhat similar stories - this can make us think that the differences are just differences in detail, whereas some of the differences are much deeper than that.

These differences are fundamental and make for quite different ways of looking at Christianity. To focus on one more than the other gives quite a different ‘Christianity’. And I would have thought that Christians would be told about the differences that exist in their gospels and the implications of these differences. But this is another reason why Ehrman has written this book. Although standard Christian scholarship has accepted and studied the contradictions in the Bible for around 150 years and have developed many explanations as to why and how these differences arose – this is virtually never taught either in Church services or (much more surprisingly) in Bible study classes organised by Churches – despite the fact that this is precisely what ministers are taught in seminary.

Ehrman’s passion and depth of knowledge always make me want to spend time reading over passages of the Bible and consider the implications of the various differences and emphasises laid by the various authors of the Bible – if he can do that for an atheist, I would imagine he would only have a much stronger effect on a Christian, at least, I would like to imagine that would be the case. But it seems I’m invariably wrong about what interests Christians about their religion. This is another excellent book beautifully written.
(less)

like 22 likes

· see review

Oct 10, 2009

David rated it

Very thorough treatment of exactly what the subtitle indicates. Uses convincing (to me anyway) "historical-critical" methods to document that most books of the new testament were not written by the authors to whom they are credited, that some arbitrary/political processes were involved in deciding which accounts of Jesus' life and teachings would be retained in "the" Bible, that the Gospels contradict one another on basic points of fact (what day did Jesus die?), interpretat...more

like 1 like

· see review

Sep 20, 2009

Denice rated it

Admittedly, I knew nothing of the Bible before reading this book. Although this book is really interesting, the author repeats himself often about how many scholars agree with him in each chapter (and sort of rehashes the same "now this is what we have learned in the last chapter", he is constantly on the defense from his critics. I was annoyed though that he constantly name drops one of his other books a few times throughout, and then, in the middle of the book, he just takes a huge p...more

like 2 likes

· see review

Aug 05, 2009

Nick rated it

By far his best book.....until the last chapter. Before I explain why, I would like to put forward that I find Bart Ehrman by FAR the best of the newer agnostic authors. Much like myself, he know longer believes in the Christ or the bible, and yet he is not condescending or combative with those who are, unlike a Richard Dawkins who kills his own arguments for me when he attacks religions. However, This line in the last chapter killed it for me...

"Even now, as I type these word...more

like 5 likes

· see review

Jul 22, 2009

Sally rated it

Shelves: religion-christianity

This book explains to the general public some main points of the current consensus reached by modern scholarship on the New Testament, which approaches the subject historically and analyzes the texts and evidence with academic rigor. This historical-critical approach draws on 300 years of German and English-speaking Biblical scholarship, and it is taught in universities and in all but the most conservative seminaries and divinity schools in America and Western Europe. Virtually all pastors have...moreThis book explains to the general public some main points of the current consensus reached by modern scholarship on the New Testament, which approaches the subject historically and analyzes the texts and evidence with academic rigor. This historical-critical approach draws on 300 years of German and English-speaking Biblical scholarship, and it is taught in universities and in all but the most conservative seminaries and divinity schools in America and Western Europe. Virtually all pastors have studied the material presented in Jesus, Interrupted, and a great deal more. Why, then, do most church-goers remain ignorant of it? As the author says:

One of the most amazing and perplexing features of mainstream Christianity is that seminarians who learn the historical-critical method in the Bible classes appear to forget all about it what it comes time for them be be pastors. They are taught critical approaches to Scripture, they learn about the discrepancies and contradictions, they discover all sorts of historical errors and mistakes, they come to realize that it is difficult to know whether Moses existed or what Jesus actually said and did, they find that there are other books that were at one time considered canonical but that ultimately did not become part of Scripture . . . , they come to recognize that a good number of the books of the Bible are pseudonymous (for example, written in the name of an apostle by someone else), that in fact we don't have the original copies of any of the biblical books, but only copies made centuries later, all of which have been altered. They learn all this, and yet when they enter church ministry they appear to put it back on the shelf. . . .
"[After I gave an adult-education course at a local church:] a dear elderly lady came up to me and asked me in frustration, "Why have I never heard this before?" She was not distressed at what I had said; she was distressed that her pastor had never said it. . . . [I was:] wondering the same thing myself: Why had he never told her? He, too, had gone to Princeton Theological Seminary, he too had learned all these things; he taught adult education classes at this church and had been doing so for more than five years. Why had he not told his parishioners what he knew about the Bible and the historical Jesus? Surely they deserved to hear. Was it because he didn't think they were "ready" for it – a patronizing attitude that is disturbingly common? Was he afraid to "make waves"? Was he afraid that historical information might destroy the faith of his congregation? Was he afraid that church leaders might not take kindly to the dissemination of such knowledge? Did church leaders actually put pressure on him to stick to the devotional meaning of the Bible in his preaching and teaching? Was he concerned about job security? I never found out." (pp. 15-16)

This book seeks to remedy this lack of access. Simply and accessibly written, it introduces lay readers to the conclusions of mainstream scholarship and some of the evidence behind them. As an adaptation of the themes and material in the author's introductory college course on the New Testament, it offers enough concrete examples and evidence to make his points compelling without drowning the reader in details or linguistic technicalities. Christians who haven't looked into early Christianity or scholarship of the Bible may find it thought provoking. Those who have studied some of these issue on their own may find a brief summary of the mainstream scholarly viewpoint of interest.

(less)

like 1 like

· see review

May 26, 2009

Mike rated it

Shelves: non-fiction

If you really want to understand the Bible and where it came from then this is book is a must read.

If you've read the Bible and felt frustrated when you tried to make sense of it, as I did, this book will help you understand why, clearly and without exaggeration or bias - the author wants to show you the true sources of the book.

Bart Ehrman will show you inconsistencies and contradictions that were so glaringly obvious when he pointed them out that I had to wonder how d...more

like 1 like

· see review

Apr 25, 2009

David rated it

This is a very readable and well-written book on modern biblical scholarship. In his introduction (and reiterated numerous times through the book), Ehrman notes that what he is presenting is nothing new -- it has been published and discussed in academic biblical circles for many years -- but that someone forgot to tell everyday Christians. In this book, Ehrman directs his message to everyday (but open-minded) Christians.

In this book, Ehrman focuses mainly on the New Testament, sinc...moreThis is a very readable and well-written book on modern biblical scholarship. In his introduction (and reiterated numerous times through the book), Ehrman notes that what he is presenting is nothing new -- it has been published and discussed in academic biblical circles for many years -- but that someone forgot to tell everyday Christians. In this book, Ehrman directs his message to everyday (but open-minded) Christians.

In this book, Ehrman focuses mainly on the New Testament, since that is his principal research focus. He covers a number of different topics, including: (a) the many historical discrepancies and contradictions between different accounts; (b) questions about authorship of various of the books of the New Testament, (c) difficulties in identifying exactly what the historical Jesus did, (d) the evolution of the Bible to the form that we now have it, and (e) the evolution of Christianity through the first several hundred years.

Every chapter is chock-full of very interesting material (although I have seen many of these items before), and is explained with a remarkable level of clarity. Everyone interested in the Bible will learn something new and intriguing!

My only quibble with this book is that Ehrman makes quite a big deal of his personal struggle and eventual loss of faith in anything resembling orthodox Christianity. He explains that his main reason for leaving faith is the problem of suffering -- how can a great Deity permit the level of suffering that pervades the world? I personally wish that Ehrman hadn't been so public with this. His personal beliefs are his own business, but by advertising his loss of faith so prominently, it makes it difficult for other scholars who wish to comment on and discuss these matters to quote him -- because faithful persons who wish to retain a very strictly literal view of the Bible will immediately discount Ehrman's views because he is a "nonbeliever"...

But believer or not, no thinking person can dispute the overall conclusion of the enormous amount of very specific and compelling evidence that Ehrman amasses and presents here: the Bible is full of contradictions; for many books, it is likely that the real author is not the traditional author; and Christianity arose from a tortuous development process from its earliest days to after the "orthodox" creeds fixed many of the beliefs in the fourth century. One has to accept the Bible on this basis -- traditional notions that the Bible is "inerrant", or that every word or every book is "inspired", which are widely believed in the evangelical world today, simply cannot be defended. Ehrman explains why.(less)

· see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 99 100 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

Recommend it | Stats | Recent status updates

combine
Other Editions (9)

More editions...

Genres

Religion

124 users

Non Fiction

89 users

History

43 users

Religion > Christianity

15 users

Religion > Atheism

12 users

Spirituality

8 users

Religion > Theology

7 users

Philosophy

7 users

Reference

5 users

Philosophy > Skepticism

4 users

See top shelves...

Readers Also Enjoyed

About Bart D. Ehrman

Bart D. Ehrman is the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor at the University of North Carolina (UNC) at Chapel Hill. He came to UNC in 1988, after four years of teaching at Rutgers University. At UNC he has served as both the Director of Graduate Studies and the Chair of the Department of Religious Studies.

A graduate of Wheaton College (Illinois), Professor Ehrman received both his Ma...moreBart D. Ehrman is the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor at the University of North Carolina (UNC) at Chapel Hill. He came to UNC in 1988, after four years of teaching at Rutgers University. At UNC he has served as both the Director of Graduate Studies and the Chair of the Department of Religious Studies.

A graduate of Wheaton College (Illinois), Professor Ehrman received both his Masters of Divinity and PhD from Princeton Theological Seminary, where his 1985 doctoral dissertation was awarded magna cum laude. Since then he has published extensively in the fields of New Testament and Early Christianity, having written or edited 21 books, numerous scholarly articles, and dozens of book reviews. Among his most recent books are a Greek-English edition of The Apostolic Fathers for the Loeb Classical Library (Harvard University Press), an assessment of the newly discovered Gospel of Judas (Oxford University Press), and two New York Times bestsellers: God’s Problem (an assessment of the biblical views of suffering) and Misquoting Jesus (an overview of the changes found in the surviving copies of the New Testament and of the scribes who produced them).

Among his fields of scholarly expertise are the historical Jesus, the early Christian apocrypha, the apostolic fathers, and the manuscript tradition of the New Testament.

Professor Ehrman has served as President of the Southeast Region of the Society of Biblical literature, chair of the New Testament textual criticism section of the Society, book review editor of the Journal of Biblical Literature, and editor of the monograph series The New Testament in the Greek Fathers (Scholars Press). He currently serves as coeditor of the series New Testament Tools, Studies, and Documents (E.J. Brill), coeditor in chief for the journal Vigiliae Christianae, and on several other editorial boards for journals and monographs in the field.

Winner of numerous university awards and grants, Professor Ehrman is the recipient of the 1993 UNC Undergraduate Student Teaching Award, the 1994 Phillip and Ruth Hettleman Prize for Artistic and Scholarly Achievement, and the Bowman and Gordon Gray Award for excellence in teaching.

Professor Ehrman has two children, a daughter, Kelly, and a son, Derek. He is married to Sarah Beckwith (PhD, King's College London), Marcello Lotti Professor of English at Duke University. He lives in Durham, North Carolina.

(less)

More about Bart D. Ehrman...

Books by Bart D. Ehrman

Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible & Why

God's Problem: How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question-Why We Suffer

Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture & the Faiths We Never Knew

Lost Scriptures: Books That Did Not Make It Into the New Testament

The Lost Gospel of Judas Iscariot: A New Look at Betrayer & Betrayed

More…

Share This Book

Facebook Twitter Your website

Pin It

Trivia About Jesus Im Zerrspie...

1 trivia question

More quizzes & trivia...

Quotes from Jesus, Interrupted: Re...

“One of the most amazing and perplexing features of mainstream Christianity is that seminarians who learn the historical-critical method in their Bible classes appear to forget all about it when it comes time for them to be pastors. They are taught critical approaches to Scripture, they learn about the discrepancies and contradictions, they discover all sorts of historical errors and mistakes, they come to realize that it is difficult to know whether Moses existed or what Jesus actually said and did, they find that there are other books that were at one time considered canonical but that ultimately did not become part of Scripture (for example, other Gospels and Apocalypses), they come to recognize that a good number of the books of the Bible are pseudonymous (for example, written in the name of an apostle by someone else), that in fact we don't have the original copies of any of the biblical books but only copies made centuries later, all of which have been altered. They learn all of this, and yet when they enter church ministry they appear to put it back on the shelf. For reasons I will explore in the conclusion, pastors are, as a rule, reluctant to teach what they learned about the Bible in seminary.” — 10 people liked it

“The historical problems with Luke are even more pronounced. For one thing, we have relatively good records for the reign of Caesar Augustus, and there is no mention anywhere in any of them of an empire-wide census for which everyone had to register by returning to their ancestral home. And how could such a thing even be imagined? Joesph returns to Bethlehem because his ancestor David was born there. But David lived a thousand years before Joseph. Are we to imagine that everyone in the Roman Empire was required to return to the homes of their ancestors from a thousand years earlier? If we had a new worldwide census today and each of us had to return to the towns of our ancestors a thousand years back—where would you go? Can you imagine the total disruption of human life that this kind of universal exodus would require? And can you imagine that such a project would never be mentioned in any of the newspapers? There is not a single reference to any such census in any ancient source, apart from Luke. Why then does Luke say there was such a census? The answer may seem obvious to you. He wanted Jesus to be born in Bethlehem, even though he knew he came from Nazareth ... there is a prophecy in the Old Testament book of Micah that a savior would come from Bethlehem. What were these Gospel writer to do with the fact that it was widely known that Jesus came from Nazareth? They had to come up with a narrative that explained how he came from Nazareth, in Galilee, a little one-horse town that no one had ever heard of, but was born in Bethlehem, the home of King David, royal ancestor of the Messiah.” — 5 people liked it

More quotes…

Groups That Shelved Jesus Im Zerrspie...

Challenge: 50 Books

3937 members

last activity 56 minutes ago

shelf: read

Atheists and Skeptics

1178 members

last activity 4 hours, 14 min ago

shelf: read

Daily Show / Colbert Report

347 members

last activity Feb 01, 2012 04:00pm

shelf: read

title link	preview: Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible & Why We Don't Know About Them
avg rating	preview: Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible & Why We Don't Know About Them Goodreads rating: 3.96 (1272 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6101996-jesus-interrupted?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1255645385m/6101996.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6101996-jesus-interrupted?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible & Why We Don't Know About Them by Bart D. Ehrman[/url]

Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible & Why We Don't Know About Them

Friend Reviews

Community Reviews

Readers Also Enjoyed

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website