Loading...With this post I want to take a brief break from what I’ve been doing on the blog to assess how it’s going. A couple of weeks ago now I decided to start posting on my current book project, How Jesus Became God. My idea was that this would allow me to “think through” some issues out loud, as it were, as I put thoughts on screen, and it would allow people on the blog to see where I’m going with the book. And so I’ve posted about a dozen or so posts on the topic, virtually without stop (well, there have one or two other things). On the whole I would characterize these posts as relatively heavy-hitting as far as posts go: I’ve been trying to write for the blog members, (you!), who as a rule are not scholars but are highly intelligent lay people who may not have all the jargon and background of professional biblical folk, but who are interested in topics related to NT and early Christianity, and don’t mind seeing an argument play itself out in some depth.
And so I’m wondering if this is a good thing to be doing on the blog, or if it’s too … much: too concentrated, too scholarly, too focused on one topic, too unrelenting. Or if it’s a good thing.
Part of my concern is that I seem to be getting fewer people join the blog during these two weeks, and I don’t know if that’s because the partial public posts are not as appealing to people as other directions I could take on the blog. Another part of my concern is that comments from those who are members are relatively few and far between (maybe 10 a day instead of 20). I’m actually not complaining about that, as it means less work for me. But I do want to make sure this direction (sustained reflection on a single topic, broadly defined) is a good one or not.
So, give me some feedback. Is this a good thing to do, a bad thing to do, or something in between? Do you like sustained reflection on a single topic played out over time, or would you prefer more constant variety? Is one post after the other on a theme OK or would you rather it be mixed up? Would you rather it be less scholarship and more personal reflections (about life and reality as we know it, for example?)?
As you no doubt know – since you have joined the blog! – my overarching goals for the blog are not only to perpetuate knowledge about Christianity in Antiquity (from the New Testament up through the first three centuries or so) but also to do so in a way that raises money for charity. If people are not satisfied, and if others are not signing up, then I’m failing miserably. So do give me some feedback.
And, to reiterate what I’ve said before, if you have any other suggestions for making the blog better or for increasing the number of people willing to be paying members, let me know that as well….
Speaking for myself I can only say that I thoroughly enjoy the pace, intensity of discussion, level of scholarship, and topics covered. The posts I am less likely to read are those on personal reflection and those that get a little too cosmological when discussing the odd beliefs of Gnostics (different “Gods”–OT vs. NT, different “planes of existance”, etc.). For some reason Gnosticism really makes my head spin.On the other hand I realize others like things I don’t like so I don’t mind not always getting what I want 🙂
Gnosticism made my head spin a good bit, too.
I have read most of Bart’s book The Lost Gospel of Judas Iscariot and it really puts pieces of the puzzle together.
Highly recommended.
Personally, I am really fascinated by this series. The whole idea of the blog for me, was that it was an inexpensive ($25 for a year? Shoot!) way to have a class with Prof. Ehrman. So I enjoy the education. There are from time to time religious stories in the news (such as the Pope’s resignation) that you might comment upon, perhaps with some ideas on the papacy and christianity in antiquity…you have done that before with the whole “Jesus’ Wife” fragment. That kind of topical thing might bring in more subscribers.
Bart, I plan on renewing no matter what direction you take the blog. I think it’s been a fabulous and genius idea. Now, I like the scholarly posts and I’m sure many of my fellow blog members agree with me. HOWEVER, in my opinion, if you want to keep this blog growing and continuing to raise more money for charity, you’re probably better off focusing more on your personal reflections over scholarship, because this will appeal more to the masses. Notice that I didn’t say to stop focusing on scholarship altogether. Please do continue to have scholarly posts from time to time. I’m just saying that if you want membership and comments from blog members to increase, I think you’re better off focusing MORE on personal reflections and still having scholarly posts, but having them (scholarly posts) less than posts on personal reflections.
Let me emphasize that this is just my opinion and I certainly could be wrong, but you asked for honest feedback, so here it is.
Oh, and I’d love it if you had some posts that reflected on your debates and posts that directly respond to criticisms of you. I’m probably not the only one who would be excited to read such posts.
Although more work would be involved I suspect you would help yourself in achieving your aim of getting more subscribers by analyzing the content of your blog over the last year and archiving it in a more successful way. Whilst it may be just me I find the website hard to navigate. As it happens I like what you have been doing these last couple of weeks but if I didn’t I would find it hard to take my own route through the blog if my interests were focused elsewhere. Meant as constructive criticism. I love it and will be reading your blog until Christ returns!
Please keep it coming! In my opinion your blog is by no means too scholarly. I am always disappointed when I reach the end of a post. I always feel there is so much more about the topic that can be said. So, my vote is to keep up the frequency and the scholarly level. Great work and keep it up.
Personally, I’ve enjoyed these posts more than most. It is quite interesting to see the development of your thought process, especially as it has been changing over time. As far as I’m concerned, I would prefer a more scholarly level of posts, but others probably find this level more accessible.
I have enjoyed staying with one subject for a while. Something new always turns up that I may not have thought about before.
I like what you are doing very much. I have learner more than you can imagine. The current blogs are particularly good, clearly stated, and of particular interest to me. I have not asked too many questions because I am waiting until you complete the current series. I am usually interested in how we can communicate this to the average church person without upsetting their belief. I am also interested in hearing more of your thoughts on Paul. I would also like to know more about how you are using our donations…some details on those who are being helped. I want to send more donations as well. Keep writing please.
I can only speak for myself, but I like where you’ve been going. It doesn’t hurt, however, to take a little break now and then, and it keeps things interesting. I like what you did a few blog entries back by tying your discussion into modern-day living. Since this blog supports charities, it might be helpful to mention something about that at the end of each entry going forward. The point of knowledge is not to fill our heads with information, but to take informed action. I’d like to add that the knowledge you provide is especially important to anyone who is interested in exploring how to interpret the New Testament and the Bible as a whole in light of today’s divisive religious and political issues. If more people knew what you know, I think it would be significantly harder for religious extremists and politicians who patronize them to bamboozle the public.
Bart, I just joined after…oh, after about a minute’s hesitation. I’ve purchased all of the courses you made for The Teaching Company, and each one was like water for a parched throat. I’ve also read every book you’ve written. So, from my perspective, it is inconceivable that one would not seek to go beyond the books and get into this blog.
Christianity has been denying reality for 2,000 years. It has been remarkably successful in usurping the role of critical thinking in humans for just as long. As you have pointed out more than once, people like Harold Camping and Hal Lindsey will never be caught asking for an extension of unemployment benefits. But why are not more people signing up for this blog? Well, I think there may be a few reasons.
One is that, quite frankly, people have less disposable income now than a few years ago. This is not merely because of the Republican-strangled economy, but because of sky-high cell phone bills and the perceived necessity of having said phones…for EVERYONE in the family. My brother, who paid just $70 a month two years ago is now spending $430. This is one aspect of self-inflicted financial damage that nobody wants to publicize: after all, we used to crow, not so long ago, about how far we’ve come in telecommunications. “Man, remember when we used to pay $0.25 a minute to talk to the next state? Now I can make the same call for nothing on Skype!” Yes, you can, but you also have your $430 cell phone bill. Care to mention that?
Second is the receding tide of fundamentalism. Fundamentalism creates a very strong reaction in reasonable people — people who might seek out Bart Ehrman’s blog.
Third…well, I had a third reason a few minutes ago but it now seems trite, so forget about it.
For better visibility, and thus better traffic on this site, you might want to pursue becoming affiliated with Huffington Post, Salon, or another high-profile site for reasonably bright people.
That’s all for now. I’m very happy to be a part of this blog, and extremely happy to have the opportunity to communicate directly with you and with other members in this way.
I think your blogs are great (worth much more than the annual fee), and its hard to figure out why interest in a topic/field goes in cycles – beats me. I wonder if a blog that also allows for further interactions (such as chat style) among members would help? Just a thought if your webmaster doesn’t think this is impractical and if others also feel this might be beneficial. This would allow us to interact with the authors of a specific question for more details and could also reduce the need for you to do as many posts at times when a conversation becomes self sustaining. (It could also provide some entertainment for you.) We all understand that you have the final veto power at any point (after all, it’s your site) if you think the conversations are becoming too weird. Wonder if this would be useful in attracting additional interest?
I for one (definitely a non-scholar) have been finding it fascinating! I paid for a 3-month subscription as a trial, but almost immediately decided that after the 3 months, I’d sign up for a year. The only suggestions I might make…maybe, once in a while, you could invite questions on Early Christianity in general, and then answer them? Now, if someone wanted to ask an “off-topic” question, we’d probably only feel free to do it by e-mailing you. And, could you make it easier to find things on the site? I’d seen at Wikipedia that a certain mythicist’s (I forget his name) criticism of *Did Jesus Exist?*, and your response, could be read at your website. But I never did find those specific things.
I think you may have started with the minutiae and left out some of the theme. “Overarching” theme. I am following you fine, but I am struggling somewhat with the destination. I am fascinated with the evolution of early christology so this is manna for me, but I want a hint as to where you are going to end up. BTW you use the term “overarching” too often. Say “theme” or or “inescapable conclusion” or something.
Bart,
I for one am really enjoying this series of postings. Not only am I learning things I did not know about the evolution, or perhaps the simultaneous competition, of Christology high and low, I am finding it very interesting watching the process you go through before getting down to the theme and outline of a mass audience book.
I particularly appreciate that you are not condescending to us; you assume a fair level of intelligence in your readers and then define enough of the techno-speak, background, and context to make issues clear and understandable.
I am not responding much to these posts because I am following them with interest and am not sure myself how Jesus became God or how you could deal with the topic in one short book aimed at a general audience. My sense, and a point which you have made in previous books, is that the 1st century Greco-Roman world was much more diverse than Luke or Eusebius would have us believe; and so were the “Christianities” that were emerging. I do think that the interplay between early Christianities and the Emperor cult are interesting as far as the thinly disguised subversive political message the Christology implied to “outsiders”. And the higher the Christology, the stronger and more bold the message became that, “Jusus is Lord, Caesar is not”.
My vote is “keep going”; this is fun!
Dallas Wolf
I say keep going!
Hmmm? I am impressed that you are humble and kind enough to often ask us for feedback and opinions. I think this recent series is going fine. I have learned a lot that I did not know about lower and higher Christology and exaltation (and how it shifted from Resurrection to baptism to birth to the beginning of time) and incarnation. I also like the shorter blogs (especially about textual variations and contradictions) and the generous way you answer questions. I also like the more personal blogs about how you changed from fundamentalism to thinking critically. So, keep plugging away and keep mixing it up. I would like to hear more about your opinion about Rubenstein’s book. Is the history he presents about the Arian controversy reasonably accurate or did he simplify it too much? Sometimes, to me, the differences between the two sides in the controversy do not seem all that great? Certainly not great enough to kill people over it. Did ancient people, as Rubenstein implies, really get involved enough in theological discussions to kill each other over the details?
If I can deal with his book without having to reread it, I will!
So far your blog has worked well, as far as I am concerned. As a a biologist, I am very interested in how scholarship works in the humanities – so the heavy-duty stuff is fine by me! There’s been a mix of material that seems quite familiar from your books and new material that I haven’t seen before. I’m always grateful for the new stuff. I’m interested in the personal reflections, but not to the exclusion of the scholarly material – the current balance seems about right. One of the big benefits for me of a forum like this is to get your current expert opinion on scholarly issues of the day.
Since this is my first time commenting, I just wanted to take this opportunity to thank you Bart for your sincere scholarship, which has opened my young and inexperienced (23 year old) mind up to new horizons. In answer to some of your questions, what with my innate love of detailed knowledge, I personally enjoy reading posts on a sustained, and oftentimes complex and multi-faceted, subject. However, perhaps it is not everyone’s cup of tea. As an alternative, I always find posts on the historical context in which early Christian texts were composed, and the life and teachings of Jesus, interesting. I’m sorry to hear less people have been signing up of late. I have posted links to your many Youtube debates, (and your blog,) on my Facebook page. I will continue to promote your incredible work as as often as I am able.
As for me, I have enjoyed all the post. I also like the scholarship approach to these issues since I’m a theology student. Maybe others don’t share the same conclusion as me, but for the the present line of reasoning and themes are just fine.
PLEASE keep on with your series about Christology! Since you started, I’ve been looking forward to getting home and reading the day’s posting. This is a subject that really interests me. I had heard a rumor some months ago that you were planning to write this book and I have been eagerly awaiting it. These posts are a good way to tide me over till the book comes out–I know it will be a while. So there’s my feedback: I love the blog and I’m loving this series.
In terms of new members over the last two weeks, I think one reason this may be the case is this seems to be the time of year where major charities are trying to raise money and have their various campaigns going. Also, some people are trying to pay off their credit card bills due to Christmas spending… Regarding the question of content, personally I don’t mind at all numerous posts addressing different aspects of a specific topic. This is probably because I’ve had a sustained high interest in NT and early Christian literature. I’m easy going though and will renew every year regardless!
Breaks from the detailed topics are always welcome I think. Perhaps you could post on some information bites tangential to current events. For example the recent papal resignation might be a lead in for a blog entry on the origins of the papacy and a few tidbits on the earliest popes.
I can’t speak for others, but as for me I love your blog the way it is, whether you stick to one topic or mix it up. I really like your recent blogs on how Jesus became God; I’m learning a lot. Also like a little variety now & then. I’m looking forward to your book.
My feedback is that I’m loving the “How Jesus Became God” posts. That, along with all the other info on the evolution of early Christianity, seems like the meat of why people would come here. (Although the other stuff is interesting too.) The RSS feed was hung up for a week (now fixed). I wonder if that could have had anything to do with the lull in subscriptions.
Dr. Ehrman, the only problems I have is being able to keep up with the fast pace. I almost feel like I am sitting in your class and getting one on one tutoring. I mean to take advantage of that! I really moreso do enjoy a fast pace, but when the weather turns nice, keeping up may be even more difficult. Sometimes I need to think about a topic for a couple of days before a response comes to me. And literally, it just comes to me Sometimes I feel like the class cut-up, or want to go off topic. Sometimes I feel totally out of my league, yes. Other times I’m like -“I can’t believe they haven’t heard of that or don’t know about that!” Of course, I’m on the well-seasoned side and age brings wisdom and exposure to other ways of thinking. About 50% of what I say is tongue-in-cheek. I know that it is difficult to know just where I’m coming from, because sometimes I just feel like being ornery and rocking the boat!
For that reason, you could consider having 2 or 3 easily accessed threads that allow for that off topic stuff where people can not worry about sounding stupid. Then again, if everyone was like me, you’d have a free for all on your hands! I’ve been on forums like that and it seems they usually generate huge fights.
I do think the format of the forum is a little difficult to navigate. I have a hard time finding reponses to specific posts and finding where we are in the current conversation.
I personally do not mind paying for membership. Its really not that much, and for that reason I don’t mind being billed every 3 months and paying more, because I’d rather give more. But I imagine that paying is a deterent for all but the very seriously interested.
On the other hand, I like your personal responses, which would be really difficult with a huge forum membership. (confession *I shared my username and password just to get a couple of other people to take a look. Don’t think they ever did because they are afraid to.)
Also, I work fulltime, still have a 14 year old at home and nightly homework, have older kids and grandbabies and siblings and nieces and nephews, and getting ready to put a new roof on my house. I have to check in on Facebook once in a while and I check in on other blogs that involve other topics of interest for me. Some nights, I just haven’t been able to check in and by the time I do, I’m 2 or 3 days behind.
People who are interested in this type of thing are a very select group. I think we a just a bunch of nerds. So I don’t think you can ever expect to have a really huge group on here. There aren’t enough nerds. I really have no complaints, except that the pace might be slowed down. Other than that, I’ve never seen a forum so closely moderated. That’s a huge amount of work. I’m really glad for the opportunity here. I am enjoying myself and having fun.
I am a brand new member as of TODAY – and these posts are precisely what I want to read. I have been gradually moving away from my Catholic upbringing and would probably now consider myself a deist – maybe. What has nagged at me for a long time is how and why people began thinking of Jesus as God. And it’s the answer to that question that I haven’t found in other author’s works.
So I can’t speak to anything other one day’s experience, but I’m eager to hear more!
I for one, find this fascinating. Alternate views before a trinity doctrine! You’ve go me hooked.
I like the recent series of posts on the same subject. I don’t think there is a risk of not understanding, as the thread is always available to newcomers. If your concern is appealing to potential readership, well, there may be a problem with your current readership, who is already convinced of this blog worth. (Excellent work, by the way.) Perhaps you could think of alternative ways to publicise this blog, like giving subscriptions to other bloggers and journalists?
Hi Bart. As a former evangelical pastor, I love the more academically oriented postings you have been writing about the evolution of Christology. So, my vote would be to keep it up. I recognize, however, that my view may not be shared by all, and because I value so much the larger goals of this blog ( and membership) I’d say go with what gets you the greatest exposure.
hi Bart,
I joined the blog several days ago, and I am well pleased with it 🙂 As one could expect (I’m familiar with your books, ttc lectures and debates) you’re doing a great job. I haven’t made up for all older posts and comments, so my reflection on the issue you ask may not be full. But as far as I can say – and I am also tuned to the free part of the blog nearly from the beginning – this last direction, series of post focused on particular matter, is very ok. The better one, than mixing subjects. I don’t know wheter it’s the best for fundraising, but works for me.
I am very much enjoying the Christology series and would not mind having a deep dive like this on another subject.
I suspect that the decline is that the people you attract, those who search you out, who know your past work, have been reached already. I frequent several religious forums of which I have been tempted to mention your blog. More in depth biblical discussion comes from interaction on the web, rather than in person. It may sound strange, but I feel as though putting something out there that remains forever, deserves permission. It could also generate some negative feedback? So, I am pondering over the issue. How is the best way to promote more joining. I very much enjoy your post and the responses, as you put it, “seeing the argument played out”. And it is for a worthy cause. If we are going to take this much of your time, then it may as well have a big result to better assist the needy. I for one would be willing to casually mention your blog, but only with your permission
Yes, feel free to proclaim the blog from the rooftops….
Will do
Personally I do feel a little bit overwhelmed … it’s too focused and too technical, at least for my taste. Or maybe I was overwhelmed because there seemed to be an RSS error? I didn’t get updates in Google Reader for this website for days and then suddenly 10 at one time …
As for how to attract more people? Good question. I don’t have a good answer yet though. I’ll think about it a bit more.
I’m enjoying reading just about anything you write! Don’t depend on my comments as a gauge to my interests. I like to read the longer thematic writings and keep up with comments. I like your humor too.
This has been a subject I happen to be particularly interested in so I am thoroughly enjoying it!
I lean toward more constant variety and personal reflections. I don’t know why, but since the Christology thread was begun I haven’t been reading every new post the day it came in. I’ve been meaning to catch up later.
“But I do want to make sure this direction (sustained reflection on a single topic, broadly defined) is a good one or not.”
Personally, I think it is a good direction. In a time when superficial blogs are the norm, yours has been refreshingly thought provoking. In my multi-year experience as a fundamentalist I rarely got very deep into any religious discussion. In the past few months I have more than once said “Wow!” out loud while reading your posts and watching them build. It’s hard to get to that point without some sustained reflection, on both the writer’s and the reader’s part. I can’t really see a better reason for following a blog.
By the way, I’m still waiting eagerly to learn your explanation of how the author of Luke and Acts came to express three different Christologies – two of them in the same Book! (Is much time thought to have elapsed between the writing of Luke and Acts? If it was several years, the discrepancy between *Books* could mean that he’d simply changed his mind.)
After sleeping on it, I would like to add another comment. I really don’t know why the subscription rate has recently fallen, but I do not think it has anything to do with the recent series of blogs on Christology which has been a great series. Then, I don’t really understand why Christians seem to have very little interest in the “historical” study of Christianity in the first place. It would seem like this would be one of the more important topics that Christians would want to really seriously study and serious study involves so much more than just reading the Bible over and over again. So, I don’t understand why people are not signing up for your blog by the thousands. I find this lack of interest among Christians in such topics to be quite discouraging. Moreover, the fact that you take so much time answering individual questions really makes the blog into a private tutorial class with an accomplished scholar. I do think comments may have slacked off for two reasons. First, many of us probably are not familiar with Christology so we don’t really know enough about the subject to comment. It’s not that understanding what you have been writing is difficult (it’s certainly no more difficult than understanding algebra and you always write very clearly), but it’s new for us so we have little to add to the subject. Second, I think we are waiting to see where this ends up before we know enough to comment. We know that you changed your book plan from the two lists of five “ways” to another plan, but that new plan is still being developed in the blog. It looks like you are headed toward a thesis that Paul was more connected to a divine, spiritual Christ than to a human Jesus and that, hence, all Christianities did not slowly and progressively evolve to a higher Christology, but some Christianities actually started with a higher Christology. That is just my guess. Even reading the Bible as an adolescent, I thought.that Paul was relating to a spiritual Christ rather than to a human Jesus because Paul has so little to say about the human Jesus (nothing about miracles or parables and very little about the teachings of Jesus.) I do think this blog is worth far more than $25 a year and I doubt that you would lose many readers by doubling the subscription rate. Finally, one of the strengths of the recent blogs has been how you nicely summarize where we are in this series with an introductory paragraph each time. I have, however, been somewhat surprised that most of the comments on the blog seem to come from Barnes and Noble readers, like myself, rather than from scholars in the field. Maybe, my impression about that is incorrect. Anyway, please keep going with this series. It’s snowing in Durham today so there is nothing to do except read until game time. No Saturday golf today. So, I will read another chapter in your New Testament textbook.
“And so I’m wondering if this is a good thing to be doing on the blog, or if it’s too … much: too concentrated, too scholarly, too focused on one topic, too unrelenting. Or if it’s a good thing.” Of course I can only speak for myself and I may not be the typical member you want to attract but I have to say it’s going great. I am really enjoying this series and looking forward to the book. I don’t want to read the book here so seeing your thinking process is really interesting as well as illuminating.
This has been GREAT. These are the kinds of things I’ve wanted to know. The comments are fewer because this is a lot to take in. We’re sitting here dumbfounded. “WOW” is about I’ve been able to say. LOL I’ve been telling my chat room friends that I joined your blog.
I’ve REALLY enjoyed this. Please keep going. I don’t have any questions because you really lay this out well.
thanks
I’m really enjoying the in-depth approach you’ve been taking. However, to add a bit more variety, perhaps you could insert some one-off posts on topics that don’t require multiple postings. That way you could diversify your postings without having get off track into yet another series of in-depth posts. For example, I’d like to know about the oldest known manuscript where the name of Jesus is legible. That might be kind of simplistic, but it might bring in some more “general interest” subscribers.
Thanks!
Hi Bart
I think the posts of late have been very interesting , however , I do feel that they may have gone on too long (on the one topic). Perhaps limit each topic to 2 days and maybe return back to the topic again after a month or so? I think mainly subscribers to this blog would want a variety of topics discussed at regular intervals of time and personally I think the majority may not like one topic to be discussed over a few days or weeks.
How to get more subscribers ? Well I think maybe ask the subscribers what topics they want you to comment on and then take it in turns to do so 1-2 days per topic at a time ; also getting other scholars to answer questions would be a “crowd puller” I am sure! James Tabor and yourself having it out on this blog is the one I am waiting to see (and I think I speak for many other (: – hope that helps) thanks ps as far as I am concerned I still view this blog EVERYDAY even though I havea very busy weekday work routine (12-15 hours a day) but it doesnt stop me checking it out , so you are doing great !
Sam Chahal
I doubt the number of people joining during past 2 weeks is indicative of the attraction or otherwise of the posts to newcomers. It probably just means less people were browsing your blog during this period. I recommend that there is a highly visible and publicly accessible section of the blog with a selection of free articles for potential subscribers to browse through. These articles (say a dozen) should cover a variety of topics, scholarly entries, personal entries. Variety is the important thing – different readers have different tastes and interests. Personally, I actually prefer less entries per week, as I want to read every one with some care, without missing anything. I would imagine most readers of your books – those who purchased more than 1 of your books – would be very happy to pay the price of a book to read your blog entries now and then. I would imagine there must be now at least tens of thousands of readers of your books. Perhaps most of these readers may be unaware of your blog and would subscribe if they are motivated to check out your blog in the first place. Do make sure your forthcoming trade books prominently advertise the blog in the opening pages. Any article you publish in magazines (e.g. the Newsweek article on Virgin birth) should mention this blog.
I like this direction. No idea why the blog traffic is down.
I am thoroughly enjoying the latest series of posts about Christology. So I would suggest continuing with sustained reflection on a single topic played out over time
It’s true that these last few posts are not necessarily as interesting as some others you have brought to our attention, but I would say that they are more important. Personally, I need to improve my critical thinking and push beyond the easier sound bites we can pick up on youtube or other social media. I don’t see any harm in expanding our usual tendencies to learn about any subject. If we stick to just the “easy to understand” stuff, we’ll make the same mistake of most christian fundamentalists. Keep pushing our limits!! But every now and then, go back to fun and sensationalist material!!
Look forward to reading your post every day. Keep it coming!
I have learned so much in this series of posts that I rush each day to see what the new one is. For me the series has been wonderfully paced and informative from a lay perspective. I have even taken notes.
I like the several installments on one topic. Please keep this going. On the changes in subscriber numbers, I’ve done a Freethinker blog everyday for about three years. There is an ebb and flow of readers, even when free like mine is.
Your blog is brought up by commenters on my blog. I think if you plug away at this for a long time, awareness will spread through the blogshere and membership will grow, but maybe more slowly.
One more thing: I’ve mentioned this in the past but it might be too late now. It’s really hard to search through your posts. It’s a challenge to find a particular post on a specific topic from the past. It’s too bad there’s no way of grouping the posts in different categories, i.e. Errors in the bible, changes made by scribes, Ressurection, etc etc…it woud be so tremendously useful.
And I like the idea of going over some famous debates on youtube and dissecting the arguments made. You don’t have to be in the debate, but it could be interesting debates such as Richard Carrier vs. William Lane Craig. Many times lots of things are being said by these individuals that are just not easily verifiable by the average layman. What do you think?
I’m looking into it….
I like the recent pace and intensity, especially given the topic. While you certainly need to consider the expectations and needs of all of your readers, I hope you won’t change course too drastically.
The post about Paul viewing Jesus as an angel was interesting as hell. After I read that, I went and highlighted that passage, and it helped me understand how ancient people viewed reality much better.
What I’d like to see more of are examinations of Jewish apocalyptic thought, it’s influence on Gnosticism (actually, more posts about the trippy beliefs of the Gnostics would probably attract more subscribers because their beliefs were so interesting and varied), and I really would like to see your view on how we got from Yahweh, the OT god that rides chariots and demands animal sacrifices, to the NT’s “Father God”, who’s a more shadowy, behind-the-scenes guy. Why did that character change so much? Hellenistic influence?
I also think more posts on Paul would be cool–what you personally think of him, especially. Do you think he corrupted Jesus’ message, the way Nietzsche thought he did?
OK, great suggestions!
Your books have changed my life! This blog is full of constant food for thought. Questions may seem academic curiosity. Perhaps here in Italy would not interest the public at large, because in Italy the Bible says little! However, I believe that it is important to understand how Christianity and its “Book” are wonderfully human. Variants, errors, the multitude of manuscripts, only with their presence, they teach mankind the caution, tolerance, the absurdity of fanaticism and fundamentalism. Your work is very important because it helps us to understand. For example, it would be interesting to address one by one the variants of the New Testament that have influenced the course of history and thought … Too much? 🙂
It would be a lot!! But thanks for the personal note!
I like what brandyrose said.
Anything you write about I like. I like the continuation, as you put it, sustained reflection, and I’d like some other stuff thrown in from time to time, such as brandyrose said. Items in the news commented on.
I’m a list maker. I like lists and charts. Would you make a chart of the NT saying if it’s authentically written by the said author or not? Guess I could make my own though. As you’ve said before I think, NONE of the books of the NT were written by who they said they were except Luke? Right?
Thank you for sharing with us. As far as more people signing on, I think they just haven’t heard you have a blog. As far as my friends, I don’t think most Christians are able to read your books and see the truth and still keep their faith so I don’t tell them. I don’t want to be responsible for them losing their faith. I am capable of reading your books and commentaries and still believing by choice, but I don’t think the many christians I’ve known and know are capable of that. Such as, I was teaching a class on where the Bible came from to 11, 14, and 15 year olds and didn’t mention a word of this to them as, again, I don’t want to be responsible for them losing their faith. To me it comes down to, “Well, I know Jesus/Yeshua lived, I believe he died on the cross for us and was resurrected.” The rest is commentary. Take it or leave it. It’s a heart and faith thing. And I DO believe He is God. That’s the mystery that was hidden from Gen 1:1. That GOD would come and save us. No mere man was capable of that. Hidden throughout the OT are hints of this. In the akeda, Abraham is told to take his son, his only son, to a place and sacrifice him. Just as he raises the knife, an angel tells him to stop, that God will provide HIMSELF a sacrifice. Himself. Key word. So it is throughout the OT. And in fulfilling that, Jesus/Yeshua was born a man that tabernacled amongst us and died for us, God shedding His blood, and being resurrected to new life. God had no blood before so he could not be sacrificed for us. He had to lower Himself to become man. Simple Sunday School stuff.
Thanks again for caring enough to take the time to write this blog. Anything you feel like writing I’ll love.
I’ve really been enjoying this series. I don’t post because I usually am late reading (just like I am finally now getting around to reading this one!) and also because everything you say is new information to me, so I am just taking it all in.
I like that you break it into bite-sized posts each day. I look forward to reading more.
(maybe this is more adequate here than in the other thread)
Bart,
How about posts about whether or not Christian concepts (like the Trinity, the Incarnation, etc) are actually logically coherent and consistent? Which they are not, according to my analysis but it’s always interesting to read other opinions (or having one’s analysis confirmed). Because Christians will, of course, claim that, for example, the Trinity IS logical but then they fail to actually make their case.
Same with other illogical concepts like ‘fully God, fully human’, ‘never-changing yet intervening’, ‘God is sovereign yet has to suffer’ etc.
By the way, do most religions require the belief in illogical, irrational constructs or is that a hallmark of Christianity? Christianity, a religion that seems to fully embrace its irrationality and even be proud of this.
Interesting idea!
Thank you 🙂
I think this aspect is too often overlooked in discussions and debates. So maybe you could champion it a bit? 😉
And these kinds of problems can be found on every level. For example:
Adam and Eve always get made responsible for the ‘fall’ and its consequences (corrupter nature, etc) by Christians. But WHO a. defined the trigger for such a ‘fall’ (if you do x then y will happen) and b. defined which consequences such a ‘fall’ would have? The answer is of course: none other than BibleGod, since he’s the only creature supposed to have such powers. Adam and Eve surely did not have them. Nor did they sit around and think: Hm, let’s cause a ‘fall’ and let’s have it these consequences …
It’s another Christian paradox: they want their God to be sovereign, omnipotent and so on but they don’t want him to be responsible for anything bad that happens.
Another example:
If Humankind could only be saved through Jesus dying as an allegedly innocent person at the cross then shouldn’t Jesus than Judas, the Jews and the Romans for helping him in achieving his mission? And why would this have been the ONLY way to save Mankind in the first place? Who would or could have imposed such a limitation on BibleGod’s options?
Spelling mistake: ‘then shouldn’t Jesus thanK Judas …’
Prof. Ehrman I thoroughly enjoy your blog. Just like your books, I’m learning so much from you. My problem lately has been finding the time to read. Although I’m a retired physics technician, I do organ tuning and repair and am unexpectedly busy. So it isn’t you.
I’ve been having a bit of difficulty following all the Christology reasoning but this is just because I haven’t been able to keep up. It will be an incentive to get your book(s).
Bart –
As the dating of this post may suggest, I am one of your blog’s readers who gets to reading it sometimes on a daily basis, sometimes on a delayed one. I want to echo the comments of virtually all those precedng me by saying “please keep going”, both with the scholarly tangents as well as the more personal ones. Although I come from a fundamentalist background you are dealing with many subjects I have often wondered about and many I simply have never contemplated. My personal challenge is often I feel is that I am “drinking from a fire hose” when reading your material and need sufficient time to reflect on what you are saying, especially considering my non-biblical scholarly background.
So please keep going and don’t stop any time soon.
Darrell K.