Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.

Start by marking “The Triumph of Christianity: How a Small Band of Outcasts Conquered an Empire” as Want to Read:

Other editions

Enlarge cover

Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

Open Preview

The Triumph of Christianity: How a Small Band of Outcasts Conquered an Empire

Bart D. Ehrman,

George Newburn (Narrator)

3.91 · Rating details · 1,723 ratings · 251 reviews

From the New York Times bestselling authority on early Christianity, the story of how Christianity grew from a religion of twenty or so peasants in rural Galilee to the dominant religion in the West in less than four hundred years.

Christianity didn’t have to become the dominant religion in the West. It easily could have remained a sect of Judaism fated to have the historic ...more

Get A Copy

Audio CD, 15 pages

Published September 5th 2017 by Simon Schuster Audio

More Details... Edit Details

Friend Reviews

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

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about The Triumph of Christianity, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Add this book to your favorite list »

Community Reviews

Showing 1-30

Average rating 3.91 ·

Rating details

· 1,723 ratings · 251 reviews

More filters

Sort order

Start your review of The Triumph of Christianity: How a Small Band of Outcasts Conquered an Empire

Oct 24, 2018 Jenna rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: history, religion-mythology, non-fiction

Growing up, I recall hearing many times that the fact that Christianity spread from a small religion to a global one is "proof" that it is the "right" religion. After all, would God have allowed it to grow and flourish if it were false? Even at a young age, this "proof" seemed tenuous at best. At that point, I didn't even know there were other religions in the world other than Christianity, Judaism, or "Satanism" (those who did not accept God at all were considered Satanists because being "again Growing up, I recall hearing many times that the fact that Christianity spread from a small religion to a global one is "proof" that it is the "right" religion. After all, would God have allowed it to grow and flourish if it were false? Even at a young age, this "proof" seemed tenuous at best. At that point, I didn't even know there were other religions in the world other than Christianity, Judaism, or "Satanism" (those who did not accept God at all were considered Satanists because being "against" God or even not believing in him meant that you were pro-Satan). Still, though I thought most in the world were Christians, I was also taught that most were not the "right kind" of Christians. Catholics, Lutherans, Orthodox Christians, Pentecostals, Methodists, etc. -- all were wrong and thus their adherents were going to burn in an eternal hell. Only our brand and interpretation of Christianity (fundamentalist Baptist) was the correct one, and only we would go to Heaven.

So, I wondered, if God allowed all these other versions of Christianity to spread and flourish even though they were 'wrong', then didn't that negate the so-called proof that Christianity being around at all means that it is the correct religion? It seemed incredible to me that none of the adults around me were bothered by that inconsistency.

In The Triumph of Christianity, Bart Ehrman, one of the world's foremost New Testament scholars, shows how and why Christianity became one of the main religions in the world, without it necessarily being the "correct" one. Though Ehrman himself is no longer Christian, as a historian he does not make value judgments on Christianity nor any other religion, does not claim one is better than the other, or even that any of them are "wrong" or "right". He simply presents us with what we can know from the historical record.

I found this book fascinating, as Mr. Ehrman's books always are. Though full of historical facts and written by a scholar, his books are never dull or dry. Whereas the other books of his I've read deals with the time of the New Testament writings, The Triumph of Christianity extends further in time, throughout the first few centuries after Jesus' death. What exactly did the early Christians believe? Was Constantine responsible for the spread of Christianity and if he had not converted, would Christianity still have spread? Were the early Christians actually persecuted by the Romans? How did Christians treat pagans and vice versa? How might pagans have felt and thought about Christianity, especially as it came to dominate the empire? At what rate did Christianity have to grow in order to become a dominant religion, and is the fact that it did really proof that it's somehow the one true religion, or are there other reasons for its growth? Can it have spread from a small group of illiterate believers into a world-wide religion by easily-explained, non-supernatural methods? These and more questions are answered in this book and anyone interested in religions, Christianity, or ancient times should enjoy this book. I personally find Mr. Ehrman's explanations to be much more palatable and believable than what I was told growing up. You needn't be Christian to enjoy this book, nor do you need to worry about having your religious beliefs attacked if you are Christian. There is so much information in this book and thus it's well worth reading.

"Whether the Christianization of the West was a triumph to be treasured or a defeat to be lamented, no one can deny it was the most monumental cultural transformation our world has ever seen." ...more

flag 44 likes · Like · see review

Apr 01, 2018 Clif Hostetler rated it really liked it

Shelves: history

Bart Ehrman has a knack for turning facts from the academic study of Christian history into history books for popular audiences. He makes the subject personal by beginning this book by saying that he can understand how fourth century pagans must have felt when everything they understood about the gods was being taken away from them by the growing Christian religion. He explains how he started out as a conservative fundamentalist Christian and that his religious convictions were lost because of h Bart Ehrman has a knack for turning facts from the academic study of Christian history into history books for popular audiences. He makes the subject personal by beginning this book by saying that he can understand how fourth century pagans must have felt when everything they understood about the gods was being taken away from them by the growing Christian religion. He explains how he started out as a conservative fundamentalist Christian and that his religious convictions were lost because of his academic studies in the history of Christianity. As a student he identified with the feelings expressed in the poem Dover Beach by Matthew Arnold which expresses melancholy for the retreat of "The Sea of Faith."

On the subject of how Christianity displaced polytheism in the Roman Empire, Ehrman gives short shrift to the partisan suggestions that God made it happen—"If God wanted the masses to convert, why are most of the masses still not converted. … And why was the job never completed?"

Starting with perhaps a hundred adherents of Christianity in 30 AD and growing to become 7 to 10 percent of the population (i.e. approximately 2.5 million) by 300 AD required only an annual growth rate of 2.5 to 3 percent. So the growth rate was not so extraordinary, but why did it grow at all? Well, of course Paul—the apostle—played a significant role during the first thirty years by getting it started with his itinerant mission to spread a version of Judaism for gentiles. But once started, why did growth continue?

The growth can't be attributed to the concept of monotheism because there were henotheistic pagans who worshiped one god while not denying the validity of others. Of course Judaism was monotheistic too.

Ehrman finally concludes that the continued growth of Christianity was because of the combination of two unique attributes of Christianity—exclusivist and evangelical. Both Judaism and Christianity were exclusive—adherents were required to end allegiances to other gods—but Judaism was not evangelical. Only Christianity at the time was both exclusive and evangelical in nature.

In order to explain the effect of exclusivity to the reader, Ehrman summarizes Ramsay MacMullen's work which imagines a crowd of 100 pagans watching a persuasive Christian debate an equally persuasive adherent of the healing god Asclepius: "What happens to the overall relationship of (inclusive) paganism and (exclusive) Christianity? … Paganism has lost 50 worshipers and gained no one, whereas Christianity has gained 50 worshipers and lost no one."

Of course there were other reasons that made Christianity inviting to new believers. One was that it was open to women—in the earlier years it may have been predominately women. It was also concerned with questions of social welfare—healing the sick, caring for the poor. But if you believe the early Christians from their own writing as to why they gained new members you have to accept that the spreading of stories about miracles and the doctrine of eternal fires of hell after death for unbelievers were also significant reasons.

Of course after Constantine came to power in 306 CE and the Edict of Milan in 313 CE, Christianity grew even faster because he provided favored status to Christianity. It wasn't made the official state religion of the Empire until the year 380 CE. However, Ehrman maintains that Christianity could have thrived without Constantine because of its exclusivist and evangelical characteristics as explained above.

The book does tell of the efforts of Julian—emperor fro 361 to 363 CE—to revert back to paganism. He was emperor for only eighteen months, and it's interesting to speculate how history might have been different had be been emperor as long as Constantine (i.e. 31 years). Julian was sort of a philosopher king and notable author in Greek, and it's easy for modern secularists to sympathize with him because some of his Christian contemporaries were pretty extreme in their behavior when judged by post enlightenment standards. ...more

flag 32 likes · Like · see review

Mar 20, 2018 Tim O'Neill rated it it was amazing

Shelves: history

It's a mark of a good work of history when it changes the views of someone who knows the subject well, but this one has done that on several points for me. This is far from the first book which has tackled how Christianity went from a tiny Messianic Jewish sect to a marginalised and often persecuted saviour cult and then to the religion that conquered the Roman Empire and the western world. This is a subject that can stir up both triumphant apologism and vehement condemnation - with smug Christi It's a mark of a good work of history when it changes the views of someone who knows the subject well, but this one has done that on several points for me. This is far from the first book which has tackled how Christianity went from a tiny Messianic Jewish sect to a marginalised and often persecuted saviour cult and then to the religion that conquered the Roman Empire and the western world. This is a subject that can stir up both triumphant apologism and vehement condemnation - with smug Christian retrospective congratulation one hand or biased anti-religious idealisation of paganism on the other. The recent work of Rodney Stark or, to an extent, that of David Bentley Hart represents the former position. That of Charles Freeman or, more recently (and stupidly), Catherine Nixey represents the latter stance. As a judicious and objective leading academic and one of the best and most accessible public educators currently working on religion in the ancient world, Ehrman maps a careful and scholarly path between these distorted ideological extremes.

He does this by bracketing his story with careful analysis of the most critical figure in it - the Roman emperor Constantine the Great. Constantine's conversion to Christianity in 312 AD marks the turning point in the early history of Christianity - when it went from persecuted superstitio to the faith of the emperor himself and, within 70 years, the state religion of the Roman Empire. Why (or even whether) Constantine adopted Christianity has been a vexed historical question for centuries, and one complicated by theological and other ideological biases. Ehrman deftly maps out the most likely path that this tough soldier and brutally pragmatic politician took, rejecting both the cartoon Christian image of Constantine as some kind of saint (the man murdered both his wife and his son and killed his way to the throne) and the silly modern fantasy that he was a cynical opportunist who converted for political reasons. Ehrman looks at Constantine in the context of ancient religion and the way a soldier and pragmatist would have seen his relationship with a god who, in his eyes, had given him a victory in battle against the odds and handed him the Empire.

But Ehrman argues against the idea that Constantine's battlefield conversion was the key factor that turned Christianity from a marginal sect to the dominant religious and political force in the later Roman world. He argues that while the championing of Christianity by Constantine and his successors clearly made a significant impact and obviously turned the religion's fortunes around in dramatic style, Christianity was already on the path to dominating the Empire. This was because of a critical demographic and sociological dynamic - Christianity was an exclusive and rather intolerant creed, whereas paganism was not. The relatively plastic and generally (though not totally) tolerant nature of traditional Roman religion meant, as time went by, the totally exclusive and (largely) intolerant credal nature of Christianity meant it was always gaining traction while paganism was always losing ground. Ehrman argues - persuasively, in my opinion - that this dynamic means that even if Constantine had not converted, the law of increasing demographic returns means Christianity would have destroyed Roman paganism eventually anyway. For better or for worse, it was an ideological and demographic tide that had been building for centuries and could not be turned back.

Christian apologists have long attributed this to divine providence and argued it is evidence of their faith's truth. Ehrman shows it to be simply a matter of historical dynamics and coolly dismisses the idea that Christianity was somehow uniquely virtuous and inherently persuasive. Anti-Christian polemicists have exaggerated the level of political coercion imposed by Constantine and his successors and attributed the success of Christianity to imposition of a obnoxious new creed by increasingly oppressive despots and religious fanatics. Ehrman doesn't shy from the obvious evidence of the intolerance of late Roman Christianity, but notes that the fourth and fifth century emperors were not motivated or even powerful enough to impose the new faith by force. Christianity won out on its own merits, not because of the sporadic and highly periodic episodes of violence or destruction that anti-Christian polemicists since Gibbon have been keen to over-emphasise.

As a judicious historian of early Christianity with a clear-eyed understanding of the ancient world, Ehrman maps out a path between the ideological thickets that surround the question of the triumph of Christianity in Late Antiquity. He uses the sociological and demographic work of scholars like Rodney Stark while correcting the latter's apologetic biases. And he makes use of the studies of rather obviously anti-Christian analysts like Ramsey MacMullen while also avoiding his warping prejudices. This is not a groundbreaking work, but - like all good popular histories by leading scholars - it synthesises and clarifies what historians have detailed over recent decades. Like many of Ehrman's books, this will be a clear and accessible guide on this subject that will be useful for many years to come. Highly recommended. ...more

flag 19 likes · Like · see review

Mar 11, 2018 Raymond rated it really liked it · review of another edition

I found this book fascinating. It tells the early story of how Christianity became one of the major world religions. Ehrman challenges the notion that the cause was Emperor Constantine's conversion to Christianity and that the real reason is that the religion spread by word of mouth in small social networks. He presents his findings by using ancient source material and data. A very readable book. ...more

flag 18 likes · Like · see review

Dec 02, 2019 Michael Finocchiaro rated it liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: american-21st-c, non-fiction

I was a little disappointed with Ehrman's The Triumph of Christianity: How a Small Band of Outcasts Conquered an Empire to be honest. It was less interesting than How Jesus Became God: The Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher from Galilee perhaps because of the conjectural nature of the subject, or because of the somewhat redundant points repeated ad nauseum throughout the book. Admittedly, I may not be the best audience for this book, having already read quite a bit about late antiquity and being mo ...more

flag 15 likes · Like · see review

Apr 25, 2018 Socraticgadfly rated it it was ok

Shelves: history, religious-study-theology

Nice try in theory, falls well short in reality

This was a book tough to rate.

I generally like Ehrman. I generally think that mythicists unfairly belittie him, though I disagree with some specifics of his own supporting material offered for a historic Jesus.

The idea of the book isn’t new, but presented in popularizing form from a knowledgable New Testament scholar, promised to be good, possibly very good.

But, it fell short. Short enough in some ways that I took fairly detailed notes at chapter ...more

flag 7 likes · Like · see review

Nov 22, 2018 Michael Austin rated it really liked it · review of another edition

This was a fun, insightful, and somewhat frustrating book to read. The frustration comes from its length, which was not longer than most of Bart Ehrman's other books, but was, by my estimation, at least twice as long as it needed to be in order to make his case. This is not a reflection on the case he was making, just on the amount of repetition and filler that went into the making of it.

The actual case is pretty simple (and owes a lot to Rodney Stark's calculations in _The Rise of Christianity_ This was a fun, insightful, and somewhat frustrating book to read. The frustration comes from its length, which was not longer than most of Bart Ehrman's other books, but was, by my estimation, at least twice as long as it needed to be in order to make his case. This is not a reflection on the case he was making, just on the amount of repetition and filler that went into the making of it.

The actual case is pretty simple (and owes a lot to Rodney Stark's calculations in _The Rise of Christianity_): Christianity in the Roman Empire grew at a steady, exponential rate from the death of Jesus (around 30 CE) through to the conversion of Constantine (312 CE). During this time, Christianity grew from a small group of less than 100 people to a non-trivial religion of around 4-6 million people (a maximum of 10% of the population of the Empire).

The reasons for this growth aren't surprising, but they also aren't what they are often portrayed to be. Specifically, they were not the result of organized evangelism like we see in the New Testament. Paul was really the only large-scale Christian missionary in the first 300 years of the Church. The Church grew, instead, by what we would call word of mouth. People became Christians and told their friends and family about it, and those friends and family became Christians too. They became Christians because they heard about (and possibly experienced) miracles, because they were attracted to the Christian idea of God and the Afterlife, because the Christian community appealed to them, or just because other powerful people that they were attached to became Christians.

The growth of Christianity actually created a thing called "paganism"--something that Christianity wasn't. This is a good point that Ehrman makes, but he makes it a bunch of times and it starts to feel thin. But it is true that, before Christianity, nobody actually thought of herself as a "pagan." People just did what people did, which involved worshipping a bunch of gods, mainly by offering sacrifices and participating in other cultic rituals. Rome was actually very tolerant of different kinds of worship, people could worship just about anything they wanted any way they wanted to.

Christianity was transgressive, not because of the nature of its god, or even because it worshipped a former mortal being as a god (lots of Roman cults did this, including the cults of most of the recent emperors). But Christianity was exclusive. It didn't just worship a god; it proscribed the worship of other gods. This caused some conflict between Christians and other Romans, because it meant that Christians did not participate in the state-sponsored rituals that, most people in Rome felt, kept the gods happy and the empire safe.

But until the middle of the 3rd century, the persecution was not as dire as it is often portrayed. Nero did execute Christians in particularly grizzley ways after the fire that he probably started himself in 64 CE. But this was an exception. For the most part, most Christians lived and died for 250 years without encountering the power of the state. Even though they were growing exponentially, they were still too small to worry much about. But by 250 or so, when Christians numbered in the low millions, emperors started to pay attention--especially Valerian and Diocletian, who formalized the persecution of Christians.

But then Constantine became emperor and, in 312, converted to Christianity. This was a game changer, but it was not, in Ehrman's view, decisive. 90% of the empire was still pagan, but Constantine ended the persecution and instituted broad religious tolerance. More importantly, perhaps, he changed the dynamic of the imperial court. From Constantine until the fall of Rome, every emperor but one (Julian) was a Christian, and this conveyed a special status on Christianity and eventually led to the persecution of pagans (now that they were a thing).

Imperial favor accelerated, but did not ultimately cause, the triumph of Christianity. By the time that Constantine converted, the Jesus movement had already passed a key tipping point, and it was experiencing a growth rate that placed it on track to dominate the empire even without official sanction. Of course, without Constantine's conversion, and the subsequent Christianization of the Imperial gene pool, the growth might not have continued because of imperial disfavor of the sort that Christians experienced in the late 3rd century.

The most fascinating question that Ehrman raises is also the one that neither he nor anybody else can answer: what would have happened if Christianity had not become the official, and overwhelmingly largest religion of the Rome Empire. What would have emerged in its place? This is intriguing because people often claim that Christianity ruined everything with the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Dark Ages, and all of the other nasty things that happened between the Fall of Rome and the Enlightenment.

The thing is, though, that, if it hadn't been Christianity, it would have been something else--some other organizing principle (or principles) would have organized society for a thousand years. Would this have been a moral order based on the work of Plato and Aristotle, or a continuation of the brutality of the Roman Empire. No way to know, of course. But it is a really interesting thing to think about.
...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Feb 15, 2018 MG rated it really liked it

Shelves: 2018

This is one of Bart's best books in a while since he is not simply talking about his favorite topic (the Bible) from just a slightly different angle. This one is an exploration of what happened after the Bible was written, namely, how a handful of Christians became two to three million Christians by the time of Constantine's conversion early in the fourth century. I found his explanation of the cultural context the most fascinating--what it meant to be a pagan, how religion was defined by ritual This is one of Bart's best books in a while since he is not simply talking about his favorite topic (the Bible) from just a slightly different angle. This one is an exploration of what happened after the Bible was written, namely, how a handful of Christians became two to three million Christians by the time of Constantine's conversion early in the fourth century. I found his explanation of the cultural context the most fascinating--what it meant to be a pagan, how religion was defined by ritual practice and not by beliefs, what was new, unique, and attractive about Christianity, and so on. He points out that defining faith by beliefs was a new idea as was the idea that a religion should be evangelistic and exclusive. (The Jewish people were exclusive but not evangelistic.) His main argument (spoiler alert) is that by demanding exclusivity and promising power, care, miracles, and escape from hell, but without organized missionary activity after Paul, the church grew among the lower classes and laborers exponentially. Since each conversion meant one could no longer be a pagan (which did not work the other way), paganism inevitably declined. I found his conclusion less than fully convincing since it does not really explain why the church grew by 20 to 25 percent over three centuries. That is an amazing rate at any point in history for any religion. He says at the beginning that Christianity ushered in a completely different value system from the Roman one, which was built around dominance and authority. In Christianity there is a new idea that everyone is equal before God and one has the duty to help the weak, suffering, and marginalized. But he does not find this a compelling explanation (versus Rodney Stark) for the faith's "triumph." I would think this change had something to do with what made Christianity so revolutionary and attractive, even if only at the level of the evolution of ideas and values. Still there is much to enjoy and chew on since Bart is so gifted at remembering what lay people don't know and revealing new angles and questions that allows us to see the topic in a fresh and exciting way. ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Mar 13, 2018 Todd Stockslager rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: spiritual

Atheism, compounded daily

In "pagan" (more on that in a moment) Rome, the early Christians were considered atheists because they refused to worship the pantheon of Roman gods. This 180-degree twist in passages from contemporary documents quoted by Ehrman gives an ironic impetus to his historical examination of how Christianity grew from tiny Jewish cult to world-changing religion of empire over its first 350 years of existence. The answer lies in the messenger , the message, the method, the milea ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Feb 17, 2018 Dan Graser rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

In his latest book, Bart Ehrman turns his attention to the unique success of the christian religion at a time when there were several competing worldviews and examines why it was christianity that ended up with the lion's share of adherents. While believers point to the ultimate truth of their message as the main catalyst, non-believers frequently cite imperial pressures from the likes of Constantine (even though they usually mean Theodosius). After profiling the two most important important his ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Feb 17, 2018 Susan O rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: kindle, audible, religion, history-religion, bart-ehrman

Ehrman's latest book, The Triumph of Christianity, is not a literary form of a victory dance. He makes this clear from the introduction, explaining what we all know, that in any conflict where some person, organization, or nation, triumphs, there are always losers. In his book, he doesn't try to assess whether or not the triumph was a "good" or a "bad" thing in the context of history, just that it was.

Ehrman covers roughly the first 4 centuries of the common era, from the death of Jesus and the ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Oct 13, 2018 Daniel Chaikin rated it really liked it · review of another edition

53. The Triumph of Christianity : How a Forbidden Religion Swept the World by Bart D. Ehrman
reader: George Newbern
published: 2018
format: 10:22 Libby audiobook (~288 pages equivalent, 353 pages in hardcover)
acquired: library
listened: Sep 25 - Oct 4
rating: 4

From Litsy, Oct 5: I really enjoyed this book on audio. Nothing crazy or controversial, but a nice summary of the history of Christianity from a tiny sect to an empire-wide religion of the underclasses, to the empire's official religion. Eventu ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Apr 24, 2018 Grace rated it it was ok

My giving this 2 stars doesn’t necessarily mean it was a bad book, but it was definitely not what I was hoping for and not exactly what it purported to be. I’m a nonbeliever but I love history and really enjoy reading about how Christianity was practiced in the ancient world— I’ve enjoyed reading Marcus Borg and How Jesus Became God by Ehrman was a really fascinating and compelling read. This, unfortunately, was not.

What I did find fascinating was the exploration of what it meant to be a pagan ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Aug 15, 2020 Edward rated it really liked it

Ehrrman’s book covers the first four centuries of Christianity that followed upon the death of Christ and convincingly argues that its remarkable spread was due to natural historical conditions, that favored its development. If conditions were different, as they might well have been, it could have died out, as many other religions and cults did. Some other movement might well have taken its place. Ehrman, then, is not interested in making a case for any kind of miraculous guidance; he doesn’t de Ehrrman’s book covers the first four centuries of Christianity that followed upon the death of Christ and convincingly argues that its remarkable spread was due to natural historical conditions, that favored its development. If conditions were different, as they might well have been, it could have died out, as many other religions and cults did. Some other movement might well have taken its place. Ehrman, then, is not interested in making a case for any kind of miraculous guidance; he doesn’t deny the enormous cultural and spiritual influence that Christianity has had on the history of the work, but that is not his concern.

The earliest Christians were of course Jews and their beliefs were anchored in seeing Christ as a savior and messiah, but of course, not the type that Jews were expecting. Paul was the first great evangelizer, not restricting his message to Jews but opening it up to pagan converts. His preaching became effective, not by mass conversions such as we might think of as in big tent revival meetings, but rather by speaking to small groups, often in synagogues, and to individuals. Details of his message of love and salvation are found in his epistolary writings, but Ehrman thinks his message basically spread by word of mouth. By the second half of the first century after Christ, most believers had been pagans.

Ehrman emphasizes that what attracted people to Christianity was not so much a matter of belief (such as the formulations of the 4th century Nicene Creed, still recited in churches today) as practices of the Christians. Initially, he thinks this new belief and older pagan beliefs, of which there were hundreds, if not thousands of variations, had some things in common. They both looked to a god, or gods, that would help them to survive in their daily lives, and that entailed making requests and sacrifices to appease and access the power of the god (s).

What began to set Christians apart, though, was their emphasis upon love leading to an ethic of service, of helping the poor, homeless, hungry, and oppressed. The ritual of communion, of gathering and sharing a common meal, underscored these practices which were generally lacking in the Roman world. It’s true that Christians were much influenced by this Roman culture and often acted in ways contrary to their ideals, but the ideals were still in place.

Christian practices grew steadily, if not spectacularly, until Constantine, a Roman emperor declared at the beginning of the 4th century that Christianity was allowed full freedom of worship throughout the empire. At that time Christians probably made up seven to ten per cent of the population of the Roman Empire. By the end of the century, probably half of the empire’s 60 million inhabitants claimed Christian allegiance. Christians were not persecuted during the first three centuries, but after Constantine’s decree, it simply became easier to adhere to Christian practices and beliefs, especially in one god. And what set Christians apart was its growing sense of being exclusive. If you were a Christian you could no longer be a pagan practitioner. This, Ehrman thinks, is why it spread – it thrived by figuratively killing off its opposition, a new religious phenomenon.

From here, this exclusivity became enshrined in the Nicene Creed. Still, Christianity faced challenges, one that if successful might have wiped it out. Emperor Julian, for example, in the middle of the 4th century launched a campaign to restore the empire to greatness and that meant reviving pagan practices with Christianity as an obstacle to that goal. He died prematurely and had only several years to try to instill his vision and his efforts failed, but had he stayed in power for 30 or 40 years, it’s problematic whether Christianity would have survived.

Overall, Ehrman does a good job of demystifying the rise of Christianity. He shows that it grew naturally for understandable reasons and was not any kind of God-protected, triumphalist movement. ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Jun 11, 2018 George rated it it was ok · review of another edition

Shelves: lacpl-ebook, non-fiction

MOSTLY UNINTERESTING.

“The ancient triumph of Christianity proved to be the single greatest cultural transformation our world has ever seen.” (p. 4)

As a longtime enthusiast of ‘extraordinary popular delusions and the madness of crowds,’ I had hopes that I might enjoy Bart D. Ehrman’s book, The Triumph of Christianity: How a Forbidden Religion Swept the World. I was wrong. Although it was marginally informative, it was too overwhelmingly boring for that to matter much.

Recommendation: Don’t waste y ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Jul 18, 2018 Siria rated it liked it

Shelves: religious-history, nonfiction, history

Few people today have heard of the Essenes, a Jewish sect prominent in the first century CE. Yet another such sect, with far fewer adherents at the time, would go on to become the predominant religion in the Roman Empire within a matter of centuries, and eventually one of the world's most prominent faiths. In this book, Bart Ehrman sets out to explain the social, economic, and political contexts which enabled twenty Christians to become millions. There's not much that's new by way of argument he ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Jan 11, 2020 Alan Tomkins-Raney rated it liked it · review of another edition

3.5 Stars. Well organized and researched, and clearly explained, this is a scholarly study in history; it is not theology. In fact, the author is frequently quite sympathetic to the ancient pagans. It is very informative, but it was for me a bit dry and repetitive at times, so I'm giving it three point five stars. That being said, it is a very good examination of how Christianity went from twenty or so followers immediately after Jesus's crucifixion and resurrection to thirty million (half the p ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Aug 30, 2018 Mary Anne rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Well-presented history of the beginnings of Christianity. Refreshingly, there is no polemic and no apology. As the author states: if it were not Christianity, then there would be something else.
The book provides a view of the church that helps us understand that it does not hold the absolute monopoly on spirituality. Christianity is more a church of Paul than it is a church of Christ.

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Dec 19, 2020 Matt rated it it was amazing

A historical look at how a small Jewish sect of less than 30 people grew into the large scale Christianity we see today. Factual and objective. It isn’t preachy but details the events in history that allowed the followers of Jesus Christ to go from hiding in houses to large scale churches through the Middle Ages, renaissance to the modern day mega church

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

May 22, 2018 Eric Wojciechowski rated it it was amazing

Beginning with the conversion of Constantine (the same subject where the book returns in the end), Ehrman takes us then backwards to the oldest Christian writings we have, the letters of Paul. Although the Bible has many, there are only seven that appear authentic (the rest being later forgeries using Paul’s name). The authentic letters of Paul were directed at his budding church, authored somewhere around 50AD. Although Ehrman notes that this is relatively shortly after Jesus’ death, what he do Beginning with the conversion of Constantine (the same subject where the book returns in the end), Ehrman takes us then backwards to the oldest Christian writings we have, the letters of Paul. Although the Bible has many, there are only seven that appear authentic (the rest being later forgeries using Paul’s name). The authentic letters of Paul were directed at his budding church, authored somewhere around 50AD. Although Ehrman notes that this is relatively shortly after Jesus’ death, what he doesn’t discuss here is that a historical Jesus isn’t necessary to explain Paul or the rise of Christianity. No one believes Zeus or Osiris or Hercules or Zalmoxis or the many other gods or saviors were historical and yet, they had centuries of believers. Ehrman takes a historical Jesus as a given and we’re off. Which is just fine because the rise of Christianity is still chartable regardless of where you fall in the debate of Jesus historicity.

Paul’s letters tell of a man who came to accept the religion of Christianity and, working as perhaps a leather worker, he moved from town to town, talking to customers and anyone who would listen. His final goal was that of Spain where, once the message reached “the ends of the earth”, Jesus could return.

Ehrman discusses how this method of word of mouth was what got it started. As Paul persuaded new followers, they continued the mission. Unlike the pagan beliefs of the time, Christianity had such a mission: to spread this word. Paganism had no such mission. Why was the Christian mission of spreading the word so important? Because failure to accept it meant a terrible torment in the afterlife; where as, acceptance meant an afterlife of favors and pleasures. The many flavors of paganism had no afterlife message.

The likely community this created, of a new kind of family where Christians were all brothers and sisters, all joining in communal prayers and meals, was clearly winning over as by the time of Constantine, there were about thirty-million converts. What made Christianity so different than the pagan gods and rituals? Why was it that unlike paganism (which was everything other than Judaism or Christianity back then) which worked by assimilation, Christianity left everything else in it’s wake? It’s because conversion to Christianity meant having to give up all the other gods. Where as the pagan ways could incorporate everything anyone had to offer, any ritual, any god, anything at all without cognitive dissonance, Christianity required everything be abandoned in its favor.

This seems to be the key: If you wanna be a Christian, you can’t entertain any of the other religious practices.

Ehrman works through numerous other factors such as communal health care, and the like but I wasn’t entirely convinced this was as important in the matter (neither was Ehrman). Rome and Greece had long before created a system of charity, good works and even health care. Ehrman acknowledges this and doesn’t think it had a very big affect on winning hearts and minds anyhow. It could have simply been different enough, however, to be appealing to some who felt left out of the older system.

The final part of the book discusses persecutions and how the claims are highly exaggerated. But such stories of miracle workers who die in great pains without giving up on Christianity assisted winning over believers. Ehrman notes that like today, no one witnesses miracles. So it didn’t take the direct witnessing of miracles back then to convert people. All you had to do was tell people there were miracles, like today. This was something paganism also didn't offer: a god who worked through and for them. The pagan gods were simply meant to be appeased.

Ehrman ends with an in-depth discussion of Constantine and his sons and then those who came after until even the emperor was a Christian. From that point on, there was no stopping Christianity. As Ehrman says, Paganism died a natural death. ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Dec 29, 2019 Gaz rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: history, early-christianity

Ehrman has written an interesting, balanced and nuanced analysis of the rise of Christianity. By distilling the latest scholarly insights, he creates an account which is highly credible and accessible to those interested in the subject.

A key and interesting theme throughout the book is the religious world of late antiquity, and how this affected the development and growth of Christianity. Immediately, Ehrman debunks the idea of ‘paganism’, for the religious landscape was much for diverse than th Ehrman has written an interesting, balanced and nuanced analysis of the rise of Christianity. By distilling the latest scholarly insights, he creates an account which is highly credible and accessible to those interested in the subject.

A key and interesting theme throughout the book is the religious world of late antiquity, and how this affected the development and growth of Christianity. Immediately, Ehrman debunks the idea of ‘paganism’, for the religious landscape was much for diverse than the term ostensibly permits. Further, even the concept of religion would have been unfamiliar in the pre-Christian Roman Empire. Instead, worship consisted mainly of cultic acts such as sacrifice and prayer. It was insular, meaning there was a great variance between towns and cities. And the key aim of these cultic acts was to attract the benefices of the gods and spirits.

With the birth of Christianity, a different way of relating to the divine entered the empire, and yet in some ways its aim of attracting the benefices of God would not have been novel. Christianity was exclusivistic, totalising and evangelistic. This meant that a Christian would only acknowledge one God. Further, unlike traditional roman religions, for Christians proper belief mattered and their religion informed every aspect of their lives. The concerns of Christians extended into the life thereafter, and what happened in this life had an affect upon what happed after death. Due to apocalyptic thought, Christians were also duty-bound to convert as many people as possible.

In the narrative of how Christianity became a world-wide religion, Paul and Constantine play an almost pivotal role. Paul can be considered the first missionary, and also the last for several hundred years. He is the one who opened the religion to gentiles and felt he had been called to prepare the world for the Kingdom of God. Without Paul, it is perfectly conceivable that Christianity would have remained a small, obscure Jewish sect. Then we have emperor Constantine, whose vision in 312 CE was to have a profound effect on Western Civilisation. The imperial sponsorship that Constantine provided to Christianity, and the tolerance of all religions that he and Licinius promoted through the “Edict of Milan”, paved the way for Christianity to become a legitimate religious movement without the fear of persecution.

Constantine is sometimes seen as a controversial figure and it is sometimes doubted if his interest in Christianity and subsequent conversion was genuine. Ehrman is decisive on this point; Constantine’s actions were wholly congruous with genuine conversion. It should be noted that henotheism, the recognition of one god as superior to all the others, was gaining ground during this time. Indeed, Constantine’s father, Constantius, was a henotheist himself. Therefore, the idea of monotheism was not as alien as one might think. Further, although he did not force conversion – on the basis that when previous emperors tried to deconvert christians it had proved damaging to the empire’s stability – he clearly gave imperial support to the cause. Finally, and in line with ancient thinking, Constantine genuinely believed that it was the Christian God who could provide the most benefices to him and the empire.

There is an important point here which is stressed throughout the book; there was no distinction in this time period, and throughout the course of pre-modern history, between the socio-political and religious sphere. The gods or God provided benefices and helped empire and civilisation to thrive. Improper worship was believed to cause the gods to withdraw their benefices; therefore, it was a matter of concern for the state if ‘religious’ practices were not performed correctly. This is why early Christians faced sporadic – if at times brutal – persecution by local mobs and sometimes by emperors. It is also why, later, Christian – again sporadically – persecuted those who continued traditional practices.

Ehrman is very even-handed in his analysis, and this is especially evident when the book deals with violence and intolerance. The Roman state, both pagan and then Christian, exhibited violent intolerance. Their motivation was strikingly smiler: to stomp out improper worship. It is stressed that for the majority of time, pagans and Christians lived together harmoniously, especially towards the upper-classes, but the violence and intolerance did leave its mark. This is not to say that persecution was very effective, because it wasn’t, and this was realised both sides as evidenced by numerous pleas for tolerance. Tertullian advocated religious and human freedom in response to persecution, and Themistius in the midst of Christian intolerance argued strongly for an individualistic approach to religious practice and belief. It is suggested that the rise of Christian intolerance and violence towards the end of the 4th century was precipitated by the actions of Julian the Apostate, who sought to push back the tide of Christianity. It is important to note that his motivation was the potential benefices of the gods.

Towards the end of the book, Ehrman discusses Christian conversion and coercion, and it is in this context that the killing of Hypatia is broached. It is at this point that the narrative gets a bit murky, which matters because there is much misunderstanding in the public sphere surrounding Hypatia. The way the event is discussed in the context of Christian coercion, makes it possible for a less astute reader to conclude that because Hypatia was killed at the hands of Christians, it was therefore an example of Christian-motivated violence. Ehrman does not say this explicitly, and he does explain the political situation and how Hypatia simply got caught up in an argument between two political leaders, yet his lack of explicit clarity combined with the location chosen in the book, makes it too easy to misconstrue both the historical incident and Ehrman’s stance on it.

The central question the book seeks to answer is how a small sect became one of the main religions of the world. While it is true that Constantine sponsored Christianity, significantly reduced persecution and therefore made it attractive to the Roman administration, the success of Christianity was not contingent upon him. Far more important was word of mouth and the networks of people. The success is described in terms of an exponential curve, and once the number of converts reached a certain threshold the numbers increased exponentially. Through word of mouth, stories of miracles were spread and this was true from the very earliest times. Miracles were understood to be God manifest in the physical world, and to a pagan audience this was very attractive. While the fear of external damnation was a factor, it was the miracles which persuaded people to convert. It was believed that what happened in this life merely foreshadowed what would happen in the afterlife.

The type of miracles are described in depth and begin with the very earliest accounts. It is important to realise that Ehrman writes as a non-theistic historian, and whether or not these events happened is irrelevant; what matters is that people believed they had, even if they had not witnessed them themselves. The miracles begin with the Book of Acts, and it is demonstrated how these accounts set the scene for later miraculous accounts; a miracle occurs and people convert. Ostensibly historical accounts including that of Martin of Tours demonstrate how later tales draw inspiration from these very early accounts; St Martin miraculously avoids a falling tree and subsequently onlookers convert because “salvation had come to the region.”

The relationship between pre-Christian thought and the success of the Christian message is explained well, but without falling into the tired ‘pagan origins’ narrative. As already mentioned, pre-Christian cultic acts were performed with the hope of bringing the benefices of the gods or spirits. Christian thought had very similar notions, and we see this throughout the subsequent periods. Although it is not within this book, the conversion of King Clovis of France occurred because he believed the Christian God had given him a military victory over the Alemanni. Pagans worshipped the gods in order to receive benefices and over time, it came to be believed that the Christian God had the most power, based on the miracles done by Him or His believers. Therefore, there is a similarity of thought to be considered. There are also some interesting parallels with mystery cults; their eastern origin, their initiation rite (baptism), intimacy with deity, grades of authority and a shared meal. However, there are also big differences between Christianity the mystery cults, such as it being open to all genders, exclusivistic and its centrality of doctrine and ethics. Therefore, I came away from the book viewing Christianity as a Roman religion; it reflects the society in which it developed and yet it also brought something very new and original. While being very different in some areas, it ultimately tapped into the psyche of the time. I think some people are eager to see the similarities which support the view that Christianity was unoriginal, and yet are much less keen to acknowledge the similarities which show the pre-Christian world to be actively interacting with the divine in order to receive benefices, much like Christians do today.

This is the first book I’ve read by Bart Ehrman. His writing style is relaxed and accessible, while his analysis is unbiased and sufficiently detailed. On a fairly regular basis he explains the limitations of being a historian, and says he is unable to comment on matters of religious faith or belief. I think if a reader were new to academic analysis of religious movements, then hearing this regularly would only be good thing. However, for me it was a bit repetitive and I felt skeptical of his professed neutrality. I think every author has biases and an agenda; however, there is no doubt that this book is pretty damn solid.

Overall, this is a very insightful book and its central objective is met exceedingly well. It places early Christianity within the context of late antiquity, and provides a coherent explanation as to how it grew into a worldwide religious movement. By explaining how people interacted and thought about the divine, it allows the reader to understand why Christianity became both attractive to pagans and influential in the Roman Empire. It also provides clear overviews of important individuals such as Paul and Constantine, and explains why common myths are wrong and dated ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Sep 08, 2018 Lon rated it really liked it

I grew up in a religion founded on the premise that a universal apostasy characterized the entire sweep of Christian history between the death of the original apostles and the calling of Joseph Smith--and that the creeds of the existing Christian denominations are all "an abomination" in God's sight. Needless to say, the story of Christianity's rise was a major hole in my religious literacy.

Ehrman's book fills in that gap nicely. He makes no assumptions about how familiar the reader may already ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Nov 04, 2020 Gerardo rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Dr. Ehrman's always entertaining style depicts very vividly the cultural climate of the first centuries of Christianism. I would recommend reading Dr. Ehrman books even to most fundamentalist Christians, even though he very adamantly admits to his atheistic beliefs, you can always get valuable knowledge no matter what you believe in. ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Mar 20, 2018 Barbara H marked it as to-read · review of another edition

Shelves: history, religion, non-fiction

Today I listened to NPR for one hour to an interview with this intriguing, intelligent man. Once an evangelical Christian, he considers himself a "Christian Atheist". He is a professor of religion in North Carolina. I think he makes good sense.
*************************** ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Jun 01, 2020 Greg Williams rated it really liked it

This book asks the question "How did a small handful of the followers of Jesus come to convert an unwilling empire? . . . How does a religion gain thirty million adherents in three hundred years?" The author starts with an in-depth look at the apostle Paul, his conversion, his message, and how he evangelized pagans. He makes the point that we can't overestimate Paul's contribution to Christianity's success. He writes: "One can argue that, without Paul, Christian history as we know it would not h This book asks the question "How did a small handful of the followers of Jesus come to convert an unwilling empire? . . . How does a religion gain thirty million adherents in three hundred years?" The author starts with an in-depth look at the apostle Paul, his conversion, his message, and how he evangelized pagans. He makes the point that we can't overestimate Paul's contribution to Christianity's success. He writes: "One can argue that, without Paul, Christian history as we know it would not have happened." Paul didn't invent Christianity; the basic Christian message existed before Paul's conversion. But he was the one to take this message to the pagan majority.

The chapter on Paul is really good. But even better is the chapter on Roman paganism. That chapter alone made this book worth the price of admission for me. Paganism is so different from our concept of religion today. In actuality, there was no "unified" idea of paganism as a religion in the Roman world. There was no set list of gods to worship. There was no unified belief system or "doctrine" as we would think of it. There were mythological stories about the gods, but it didn't matter whether people believed those stories or not. Religious conversion was not a concept in paganism. You were welcome to add or subtract gods to your life at will without any issues. The traditional Roman religions were focused on cultic acts, not what you believed or how you lived. There was not an emphasis on the afterlife. Instead, you performed cultic acts for different gods, because these gods had control in specific areas and you wanted their help in those areas. "Gods were not worshiped to secure blessings in the afterlife. Worship was about the present life" because "this life, for most ancients, was lived very near the edge."

According to the author, what set Christianity apart was that it was a missionary religion (which was a novelty in Roman culture) and it was an "all-encompassing" religion in that it involved all of a person's life (i.e. what to believe, how to act towards others, etc.). It was also an exclusive closed community; it required you to give up all other gods to worship the one true God. This came to be an advantage for growth because, unlike with pagan gods, each new Christian was by necessity one less pagan. Another attraction was that Christians had a reputation for doing miracles. "It is consistently reported that this belief is what led outsiders to convert to the faith." This made the Christian God alive in a way that was not true of the pagan gods. This, along with fears about the afterlife, were some of the things that could make Christianity attractive to non-Christian Romans at that time.

The rest of the book follows the history of Christianity up through Constantine and the emperors that came after him in the fourth century, when the Roman Empire became a Christian empire. He also spends a chapter discussing what growth rate would be required to get from 20 or so Christian believers in Jerusalem after Jesus was crucified to some 30 million Christians at the end of the fourth century. His conclusion is that, due to the exponential nature of growth, a steady growth rate of 2 - 3 percent per year is enough to get there.

The author is not a Christian but sees the triumph of Christianity to be "the single greatest cultural transformation our world has ever seen." He gives what I think is a balanced view of the gains and losses that resulted from Christianity's triumph. On the positive side, when Christianity became dominant, it "advocated an ideology not of dominance but of love and service. This affected the history of the West in ways that simply cannot be calculated."

Without the conquest of Christianity, we may well never have had institutionalized welfare for the poor or organized health care for the sick. Billions of people may never have embraced the idea that society should serve the marginalized or be concerned with the well-being of the needy, values that most of us in the West have simply assumed are "human" values.

On the negative side:

One of the greatest aspects of ancient paganism, taken as a whole, was the widespread willingness to accommodate and even revel in diversity. This was lost with the triumph of Christianity

He ends the book with this:

However one evaluates the merits of the case, whether the Christianization of the West was a triumph to be treasured or a defeat to be lamented, no one can deny it was the most monumental cultural transformation our world has ever seen.

Bottom line: I liked this book. I especially found his discussion of Roman paganism to be enlightening. Whether you are a Christian or not, if you are interested in how Christianity came to triumph over the empire that at times tried to snuff it out, I recommend this book. ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Jan 31, 2019 Ginger Griffin rated it really liked it

So how did Christianity grow in the ancient world? By subtraction as much as addition, it seems.

The vast majority of people in the early Roman Empire were polytheistic. They worshiped hundreds of gods, and new cults were arising all the time. Christianity probably wasn't any more successful at gaining followers than other religions, but it had one big difference: It was monotheistic, requiring converts to give up the traditional gods they had previously worshiped. As a result, Christianity erod So how did Christianity grow in the ancient world? By subtraction as much as addition, it seems.

The vast majority of people in the early Roman Empire were polytheistic. They worshiped hundreds of gods, and new cults were arising all the time. Christianity probably wasn't any more successful at gaining followers than other religions, but it had one big difference: It was monotheistic, requiring converts to give up the traditional gods they had previously worshiped. As a result, Christianity eroded polytheism as it grew. (Judaism was monotheistic too, but it didn't generally proselytize.)

Christianity seems to have gained new adherents the same way other cults did -- by proclaiming miracles. Most people in the empire lived in poverty, subject to frequent famines, plagues, and other disasters. Miracle stories found an eager audience among illiterate people living on the edge. So tales of divine intervention abounded in every cult. (Particularly powerful men were assumed to have close connections to the gods, often through direct descent. One popular story of the time claimed that Caesar Augustus was the son of Apollo; supposedly his mother had fallen asleep in a temple and been impregnated by the god).

Christianity appears to have grown fairly quickly for the first couple of decades after the death of Jesus. Then growth dropped off (especially after it became apparent that Christ wasn't returning soon, as promised). Eventually, Christianity settled in at a growth rate of something like 2 to 3 percent a year. That doesn't sound like a lot, but think compound interest: This rate of growth allowed Christianity to claim about 3 million adherents -- roughly 5% of the Roman Empire's population -- by the year 300 or so (sporadic attempts to suppress it through persecution had little effect). Then the Emperor Constantine converted in 312, and Christianity suddenly became attractive to the Roman elite.

Once Christianity gained a foothold among the powerful, the traditional religions didn't stand much chance. In 393, the Emperor Theodosius made Christianity the official religion of the empire and outlawed all other cults. Christians probably still made up only about half the empire's population at the time, but their religion had been given official license to stamp out all the others. ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Sep 15, 2018 Dee Eisel rated it it was amazing

Shelves: history

I’ve read plenty of Dr. Ehrman’s books now, and I know some things he’ll say in almost every one. When the pool of primary sources is small, there’s bound to be some repetition - I’ve long come to terms with that! But I was pleasantly surprised to find that large sections of this history were new to me, and I thoroughly enjoyed the read.

Ehrman tells the story of how Christianity progressed to become the dominant religion of Europe, west Asia, and north Africa. He details the story of Constantine ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Jun 03, 2018 Kelly Sedinger rated it really liked it

Shelves: 2018-reads, history, religion

Bart Ehrman is a favorite author of mine. His writings about religion (primarily the history of Christianity and various issues with its central texts) are invariably fascinating, and I'm always excited to see a new book of his at the library. This is no exception. Ehrman's focus is on the question of how exactly Christianity went from a handful of adherents in 30 CE to millions just a few centuries later, on its way to becoming the dominant religion of the Western world.

There are a lot of answe ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Mar 23, 2018 Eric Wurm rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

This is not theology. This is not a devotional work. There are no adjurations to accept the living Christ, nor to reject such an imploration as nonsense. This is a work of history. It is about the evidence of how and why Christianity came to be the most dominant religion in human history.

An eminent scholar on the history of Christianity, its texts, and its evolution, Bartrand Ehrman never fails to deliver a sincere and impressive study of his subject matter. Having read the bulk of his work, I ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Feb 19, 2018 Michelle Kidwell rated it it was amazing

 The Triumph of Christianity How a Forbidden Religion Swept the World by Bart D. Ehrman Simon & Schuster Christian Pub Date 13 Feb 2018 I am reviewing a copy of The Triumph of Christianity through Simon & Schuster and Netgalley: In this book the New York Times best selling authority on Christianity explains how Christianity grew from around twenty Peasants in rural Galilee, to the dominant religion of the west in less than four hundred years. In this book we are reminded that the earliest Christ ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 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

Readers also enjoyed

See similar books…

Genres

Religion

154 users

History

152 users

Nonfiction

80 users

Religion > Christianity

37 users

Christian

12 users

Spirituality

10 users

Audiobook

9 users

Religion > Theology

7 users

History > Ancient History

6 users

History > World History

5 users

See top shelves…

About Bart D. Ehrman

Bart D. Ehrman

1,251 followers

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 Masters of Div 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 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.

...more

Books by Bart D. Ehrman

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

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

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

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

How Jesus Became God: The Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher from Galilee

More…

News & Interviews

6 Great Books Hitting Shelves This Week

Need another excuse to treat yourself to a new book this week? We've got you covered with the buzziest new releases of the day. To create our...

Trivia About The Triumph of Ch...

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

Quotes from The Triumph of Ch...

“The word “cult” comes from the Latin phrase cultus deorum, which literally means “the care of the gods.” A cultic act is any ritualized practice that is done out of reverence to or worship of the gods. Such activities lay at the heart of pagan religions. Doctrines and ethics did not.” — 1 likes

“Philosophers talked a lot about how people should act toward one another, as members of a family, in relationships with friends and neighbors, as citizens of a city. Good behavior was part of being a worthwhile human being and a responsible citizen. But it generally was not a part of religious activities.” — 1 likes

More quotes…

See a Problem?

Preview — The Triumph of Christianity by Bart D. Ehrman

The Triumph of Christianity: How a Small Band of Outcasts Conquered an Empire

Get A Copy

Friend Reviews

Reader Q&A

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

Readers also enjoyed

Genres

About Bart D. Ehrman

Books by Bart D. Ehrman

News & Interviews

Trivia About The Triumph of Ch...

Quotes from The Triumph of Ch...

See a Problem?

Preview — The Triumph of Christianity by Bart D. Ehrman

The Triumph of Christianity: How a Small Band of Outcasts Conquered an Empire

Get A Copy

Friend Reviews

Reader Q&A

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topicDiscuss This Book

Readers also enjoyed

Genres

About Bart D. Ehrman

Books by Bart D. Ehrman

News & Interviews

Trivia About The Triumph of Ch...

Quotes from The Triumph of Ch...

new topic
Discuss This Book