I’ve been getting very good feedback from users of the new blog site, and am naturally very pleased. There are also a lot of new users now, reading, listening, and making comments. Fantastic! If you have any problems with the blog, please be sure to contact us. Click the HELP button and you will see a list of FAQs and responses, and information about how to get Support.
Since we have so many new folk participating, I want to say a separate word about Blog etiquette. It’s a bit different from typical Internet etiquette, for which most of us, well I, at least, am thankful.
When I started the blog, from the outset I decided that I wanted it to be completely welcoming to all people, no matter what their religious convictions (or non-religious convictions), national background, race, gender, sexual identity, background knowledge, native intelligence, good looks, or … anything at all. And to be welcoming requires all of us to be polite, courteous, and respectful.
It’s hard to do. At least sometimes it is for me. But even when any of us disagrees with others, at least on the blog, the policy is that we do it without showing disrespect, whether it involves religious views, personal backgrounds, identities or anything else.
I typically receive anywhere from 20-40 comments a day on my posts, and I try to answer all the questions I receive and post all the observations and perspectives that do not involve questions. I’m sorry that I have to be brief in my responses. If I weren’t I would not be able to get through them all. But I do try to be direct and answer as best I can.
There are only two kinds of comments that I do not post. The first are ones that are not directly related in one way or another to the blog, that is, not connected with the New Testament and early Christianity, and related topics such as Hebrew Bible, ancient Judaism, Greek and Roman religion, and occasionally issues of faith (and doubt) in the modern world, especially in connection with Christianity. If comments are about other things I will not post them. The most common “other thing” is, as you might imagine, politics. Sometimes political comments are directly related to what the blog is about. But unrelated matters – for example, trashing one politician or public figure or another – need to be dealt with in other contexts, outside the blog.
Secondly I do not post comments that are not courteous and respectful to others. You can swear at the misanthropes you despise all you want in other contexts. I certainly do. But I don’t want it on the blog. Anything that I judge to cross the line of politeness and respect I simply won’t post. But again, hey, this is the Internet. There are roughly three trillion other sites that love that kind of thing — so you will not be wanting for venues! (Of course in roughly three trillion of them you’ll be preaching to the choir.)
Frankly, I VERY RARELY get anything that crosses the line. I’m thinkin’ once a month! But with more members, anything can and does happen, and I do think it is good periodically to state the blog policies so everyone can know. So there they are!
And now back to the blog. I hope you’re enjoying it. And if you have complaints, observations, or suggestions – do either send me an email or contact Support. Just go to the HELP button on the Landing Page and click support.
Mr Ehrman,,,this is really a great blog !
Thanks!
It’s a relief to come somewhere they’re not discussing politics.
Oh, are there politics going on??? 🙂
Could we get around the no politics rule by citing St Paul’s second letter to the Republicans? ?
Depending on your view of early Christianity, you may have to match it with Peter’s third letter to the Democrats.
Great to have increased readership … I look forward to the Blog every day. Thank you for taking the time to post your thoughts.
Question for you, Bart, and maybe you’ve answered this but I haven’t come across it yet:
Why or how would Paul, a devout Jew, start following Jesus unless he had a “real” experience? I understand how mourning prior-followers would have a resurrection (whatever that may mean, real or not) experience but I can’t imagine why/how Paul would? I read your book “How Jesus became God,” so I’m familiar with your arguments on people thinking they see dead people experiences but Paul doesn’t fit.
This notion of Paul “seeing” Jesus is really throwing me for a loop. Could it be that he was feeling so guilty for killing his fellow Jews that his conscious created a Jesus experience? I’m just spit balling ideas here because his story doesn’t make sense to me and I’m a conservative seminary graduate.
Yes, as you know from my book I think Paul did have a real experience. But that doesn’t mean the vision he saw was really there. There are indeed explanations for why someone you wouldn’t expect to have a vision would have one: it happens a good deal. Feeling guilt could be part of it; coming to a realization unconsciously could be part. I’m afraid we just have the tools to do the psychological analysis. But we certainly have lots of historical accuonts (not to mention contemporary ones) where peole have visions they are not expecting to have and it turns their lives around. (Constantine comes to mind). There could probably be a host of reasons.
Thank you for the reply. I appreciate you taking the time:)
Bart, admire your honesty, integrity and clarity of thought. Keep it up! Thank you.
Thanks.