(15 votes, average: 4.87 out of 5)
Loading...I’m back from Greece and Turkey now, with two weeks with nothing to do but work like a wild-person day and night on my book project on Christian tours of heaven and hell in relation to their Greek and Roman predecessors. I’m madly into Virgil’s Aeneid just now. Great stuff. I’ll say more about it anon.
But it seems like a good time for me to pause for a day and take assessment of developments on the blog and get your reactions. I do this a couple of times a year, as old-timers will know. My basic questions: How is the blog going, from your point of view? And is there anything we should change/do differently? Any feedback at all is welcome – just let me hear it.
The goal, of course, is to keep the customers satisfied and to draw more in. I’d like to use the blog to disseminate scholarly knowledge of the New Testament and the early Christian movement more broadly, for three interrelated reasons. First, of course, is that I think this material – both the history and the literature of early Christianity — is of vital importance for understanding our world, our culture, and our civilization. Whether we are people of faith or not, whether we are drawn to Christianity or not, and, in short, whether we like (or love) it or not, our entire history (past and present) can’t be understood without knowing about these Christian roots.
But, second, most people are woefully ignorant about early Christianity. Or rather, the vast majority of people are woefully misinformed about it. Everyone seems to have an opinion about Jesus, the Bible, the earliest Christians, etc. But very few people actually know anything about these things, let alone scholarly information based on careful study of all the ancient sources of information. People basically think what they have heard (often repeatedly) on TV, or at Sunday School, or in some popular book written by someone who was regurgitating what she read in another author who was repeating what he heard from a preacher who was vaguely remembering what she heard once in seminary. Etc. On the blog you get actual scholarly information based on rigorous historical and literary analysis – not just my personal views, but 99% of the time views widely shared by intelligent and hard-working experts who have devoted their lives to the topic. That’s all to the good.
The third reason is intimately related but far more broad-based. We live in very, very scary times, far scarier than any I’ve experienced in my brief 63 years on this planet. Times are scary for all sorts of reasons (you can come up with your own list), but one of them is that the very idea of “truth” is under extremely serious assault. Huge numbers of our fellow citizens don’t appear to believe in truth or to care. They can’t tell a lie from a truth. They don’t think expertise is anything other than personal opinion. If they hear something different from what they want to think, they reject it. If someone shows it’s a lie, they claim the person is deceived and bad-intentioned and out to destroy us all.
The basic problem, as I see it, we are moving into an age where evidence doesn’t matter. All that matters is rhetoric and claims, whether based on evidence, no evidence, or flat out deceit. This ain’t good.
I’m a proponent of truth and evidence and solid argumentation. I hope you are too! But we need to fight against those who don’t care about the truth so long as they get what they want. The blog is a tiny, minuscule attempt to stand up for expertise and evidence and real historical knowledge.
ANYWAY, enough of the rant (one that not even I saw coming!). Back to the details of the blog. I’d like feedback.
Recently I’ve done a couple of things that I’d like your opinion on. As you may have noticed, I’ve started using “guest posts” more frequently, with scholars in the field contributing guest posts on something they’ve done or are doing their research on. I have more lined up. But what do you think of this as an addition to the blog?
For the blog’s first several years I had readers ask (sometimes plead) for other voices than mine. But every time I asked a fellow scholar to contribute a guest post, they hemmed and hawed, and said something about being busy and, well, they never did it (even when they said they would). But as the blog has grown over the past couple of years, I’ve come up with a new strategy with much better success. I’ve told a colleague about the numbers of members, around 7500 just now, plus thousands of more who tune in via Facebook, Twitter, and the blog Podcast, and pointed out that if they’ve just written a book this is absolutely free advertising among a crowd that is deeply interested in the sorts of things they’re doing and would not know about their book otherwise.
That seems to be doing the trick! But what do you think of the idea of guest posts? Am I doing too much of that sort of thing? Not enough? About right? Give me some feedback.
ALSO, this past couple of weeks I’ve posted a short thread of much more technical scholarly posts (re-posting them actually) to show the level of argumentation that gets done in academic circles rather than for general readers. I am certainly not inclined to do that a *lot*, but it does seem worthwhile to do on occasion, in part to show that scholars who state their views are not simply stating an opinion based on guessing but on the basis of a very close analysis that simply is not possible for anyone lacking the training and expertise (in ancient languages, a broad knowledge of ancient literature in those languages, other scholarship over the centuries, etc.).
But is that worth doing on (rare) occasion? Or not so much?
The other thing I tried was that blog debate with a conservative Christian who wanted to prove there are no contradictions in the Bible. I found the exercise frustrating – as I knew full well I would – but it did seem to spark a bit of interest. And we used it to raise extra funds. It brought in probably $3000 or so altogether. So that’s good. But what do you think? Do you like that kind of thing?
I doubt if I would do too much of it, since if I were to debate an established scholar on any topic of interest I couldn’t just whip out the posts, but would have to do serious research. That would be an enormous effort, comparable to writing an academic article. Not sure I can do that. But maybe on some topics on some occasions? What do you think?
The ultimate goal of the blog, as you know, is to raise money for those in need. Need is increasing these days. I’d like to keep growing the blog – growing it exponentially rather than incrementally if possible. If you have any ideas about how to do that, do let me know!
And give me any other feedback you’d like. This blog is for *you* — I want it to meet your needs and expectations. Many thanks for being part of the venture.
Hi Bart,
I only signed up for the blog just over a month ago, having not come across it before then. So far, I’ve found it extremely informative and good value, with a good balance between scholarly and more “popular”/accessible content. I joined just in time to see the debate between yourself and Matthew Frith, which I must confess didn’t find all that useful. By contrast, the guest posts from Jeff Siker were top notch, and his willingness to engage in discussion in the comments really helped too. I’ve also enjoyed the recent stuff about the authorship of 1 and 2 Thess.
So far, I’m glad I joined and looking forward to plenty more!
Rob
Very informative and educational. You discuss literary works and contexts which most people never even know exist.
I have loved the guest posts. It’s been awesome hearing from other erudite scholars on areas of their specific interest. Part of the reason I’m into this blog is it helps to bring a scholarly knowledge of a subject I’m interested in down to my thoroughly layman level, so it’s great to get a wider variety of that.
The debate pretty much went the way everyone expected it would go. I found it interesting, but I suspect probably not enough for you to subject yourself to it regularly, lol. I’ll be content to get my Bart debate fixes from YouTube.
I agree that the occasional “glimpse into scholarly argumentation” is good, if only so that I can remain humble about what I know and don’t know about the subject. Rare occasion is fine, more would probably not be of much value.
In terms of growing, I’m no expert but a common model, particularly for things like Patreon, is to have a sort of tiered membership system with more benefits for higher cost. You might be able to drum up more cash if you added some perks for donating more, like maybe getting a burning question *definitely* answered by the Man Himself.
One of the things I really enjoyed from your Great Courses lecture on the historical Jesus & the Triumph of Christianity was getting a feel for the historical context in which these incredibly important events were happening in, and their consequences to history shortly afterwards. Stuff like who other apocalyptic prophets of the time were, what kind of disputes the Pharisees were having amongst each other, what life in Roman Judea looked like, I find that fascinating. It’s not the focus of the blog, of course, since this is specifically about early Christianity. But I personally would enjoy occasional posts on some of the “bigger picture” stuff to situate early Christianity in its context.
All in all, keep up the good work. I definitely get my money’s worth and then some!
I really appreciate the blog – thanks for all the work that goes into it and I share your concerns and objectives about getting people back to facts and truth, not prejudice and tradition.
I like the guest blogs, they seem a very Good Thing now and then.
I enjoyed the debate and would have liked to see some responses from Rev Firth to blog comments. I would like more such debates from time to time.
Academic posts are OK….I am not so bothered.. we know that actual academic writing can be quite technical and heavy, and I see no need to read it. I am more interested in the chance to access academic consensus conclusions that you provide.
My request, which I have made before somewhere, would be to do a subscriber version of the podcast without the membership plugs. I love listening to the podcast and am grateful to JOhn Mueller for reading it, but hearing the plugs for the blog once and often twice per podcast when I am already a subscriber is a bit wearisome..
I look forward to every blog post. Since I was a kid , the question of religious cults have been a burning issue with me.
Even at an early age it made no sense to me.
I told my parents one morning ( I’m 63 like you) that this idea of a loving god who created everything and demands your obedience or you’ll be sent to a burning inferno , so you better do as he says and love it or else, reminded me of a guy that walks in to the 7/11 and demands the money from the register or he’ll shoot you.. in both cases you have a choice!!
But it has nothing to do with love or compassion.. anyway it started early for me and just never sounded right.
Later, on the GI Bill I went to college and took two theology courses studying Martin Buber and Gabriel Marcel ( which I don’t recall now) ha
By far and away my philosophy courses especially the course on Existentialism was my favorite..
Then I watched for four years and five months my gentle, quiet wife slowly die of glioblastoma and I remember as she was being rolled out in her wheelchair one day to meet me at the group home she ended up at the lady sitting next to me saying “ It’s all part of God’s plan”… and I yelled “ It’s not much of a goddamned plan”!!!
Oh well, that’s it.. I heard you on a Sam Harris podcast and I’ve read Misqoting Jesus, the newest book on the forbidden religion spread by the apostle Paul and am currently reading “ Forged” on Kindle
Hope you keep up the good work.
Long distance RUNNER
Greetings, Bart. Very much enjoy the guest posts. As to debating non-experts, not so much. Frankly, I’d faint dead away if either side of the argument, even once, said, “you know, you’ve got a good point there.” That said, an interesting variation could be an exchange between you and another NT scholar who has a different take than you on some topic such as the identity of the Son Of Man or the historical value of the Gospel Of John, to name just two. And, although not new, one way to generate donations might be to provide the blog’s membership with more opportunities to meet you. Not sure what that might look like and not sure how much of your already busy life you’d be willing to sacrifice. Anyway, I view every penny of the cost of my blog subscription as money well spent. Thank you.
I think the blog is great, most of the time. Intelligent, informative, articulate, interesting. I didn’t care for the debate with the conservative Christian. I found it frustrating. I have too much of that element in my life and use your blog to escape it. The idea of guest posts is OK, it really depends on who they are and what they say. My only gripe with the blog at all is when you imply that those of us without a degree (from a prominent University) in Christian History, are ignorant of the topic at hand. It’s a bit insulting. I would’ve have loved nothing better than to study at the University of Chicago, but we just couldn’t afford it. And now as an adult, my money goes toward my children’s education. That does not me I’m not very well read on the subject of Christian Origins, Early Christian Literature, or Ancient World Religions. So please don’t lump everyone, who is not your equal, into one illiterate basket. It’s comes across as very arrogant, and might cause you to lose members.
Enough of that rant. All in all I thoroughly enjoy reading your blog posts. I have learned a lot, and your blog has inspired many a late night reading binge. Keep up the good work!
I’m into people…what they do and how they live. I would like more information about how early Christians lived, during the development of the early church, what the early churches were like, how early Christians got their information before the New Testament was formed, where they lived and what they did to support themselves, and how they avoided persecution. Also, what their churches were like, where they worshiped, and what ceremonies were used…daily life of Christians before Constantine…if such information is even available. That sort of thing interests me.
I like many of the initiatives you are making to enhance the blog. Ultimately, to me, the most important thing is you do what you think would make the blog viable in terms of demand on your time.
1. I’m enjoying the guest posts a lot, and would be happy to have more of them.
2. I find your very technical posts exciting, even though I’m not a scholar. I really like reading about the nitty gritty of scholarly arguments (including seeing the Greek – as long as it’s also translated). More of those would be fine for me.
3, I find the debates with conservative Christians upsetting, and don’t want more of those. But I would like to see some scholarly discussions on points of disagreement – e.g. you and Mark Goodacre, and Stephen Carlson re: the existence of Q.
The guest post are amazing. I’ve discovered Brent Nongbri’s blog and I’ve also recently gone back and found posts of yours on Papias.
The debate was disappointing and frustrating to read about half way through. Perhaps you could have an Q&A where you and another scholar explore some issue. It might work well with someone who’s work you are unfamiliar with (e.g. archaeologists or Jewish scholars). You are constantly saying we’d be surprised at what you don’t know! 😉
I recall a few times on the blog someone mentions Gnosticism and at some point you say something to the effect: well, it’s complicated. I’d like to hear more about Gnosticism. (There’s an amazing Dr. Who episode that screams Gnosticism. It’s in a series of episodes with the theme of organized religion)
You reach more people with your books, I presume. Perhaps use that somehow: ask for a donation, ask them to join, have a companion website to the book on this blog.
I want to say that it’s an amazing blog. I’ve learnt so much from this, and what is even better is that I get to pick your brain on relevant topics when I feel like it. It’s a privilege.
I like the more scholarly posts, but I agree that they should be a sometimes food. And I would love to hear more debates from you.
And finally, this has nothing to do with the blog, but if you haven’t seen Rocket Man yet I strongly recommend it. It’s a proper spectacle, as an Elton John biopic should be, and I think it’s best seen on the big screen.
I definitely found the debate unenlightening, other than reinforcing how convoluted inerrantists positions can be. Things I would find interesting would be discussions with people who are critical scholars, but who have slightly different takes.
For example, Peter Enns seems like he holds on to a real Christian faith, but after leaving Westminster Theological Seminary, seems to view the Bible as a critical scholar. How does he do this? What do you think of it?
While your previous “debate” with Robert M. Price was underwhelming on Price’s part, he has a wide range of speculative theories (other than mythicism, please anything but that!) that would be fun to hear your comments on. I am sure a discussion, rather than a debate, would be the right forum. He is so kind and humorous and so many of your followers listen to the Bible Geek, we are always eager to see you engage (even critically). Maybe a discussion of his Holy Fable volumes?
Also, two of the books you have recommended that absolutely confirmed my doubts about the Bible and allowed me to think more openly was “The Bible Unearthed” and “How to read the Bible.” Would love to hear how you agree or disagree with Finklestein or Friedman. For example, what do you think of Friedman’s Levite theory in “The Exodus”?
Yes, I don’t agree with lots of Friedman’s views once he gets outside the mainstream. But the basic presentation of the problems with the Pentateuch and the need for a solutoin involving sources I think is admirable. As to Enns, I don’t know him, but I do know lots and lots of firmly committed Christians who have a critical view of the Bible.
Regarding Friedman’s book on Exodus:
I won’t presume to make any judgement on the “correctness” of Friedman’s claims concerning Friedman’s theory of the history of the Levites. But that said, speaking as a non-expert, I thought his book presented an excellent example of how a scholar goes about using the sources and their content to build and support an argument.
Highly recommended to everyone.
1. I love the guest posts. And I have gone and purchased their book (and in a nod to you, told them so in my comments).
2. I love the “debates”. you shouldn’t get frustrated because the ‘other side’ simply promotes a traditionalist argument that, like it or not, is part of the discussion, and we get to see this within a professional context–we gain regardless of their argument. I would be totally fine with complete fundamentalists coming in and promoting their ‘side’. In that way, you can still teach–even if it is only how to dialogue.
3. I would really love (I know I’m repeating myself here) for you to discuss your views on important books, similar to the chapter ends of your textbook.
4. Of course, you could simply just keep doing what you’re doing because I’m a VERY satisfied customer and promote the blog to my friends.
I’m all for having guest scholars post their work on the blog. It takes some of the load off of your shoulders and enlarges the scope of discourse on the blog.
That on-line debate you had with the conservative Christian was informative and personally I would like to have more of that.
As far as your concerns about society not valuing evidence, I think that it’s all the fault of religious thinking in which believers become close-minded and defensive about their treasured beliefs. These folks think that their beliefs about the supernatural are 100% true and, as a result, exhibit the symptoms of nearly invincible selection bias. And this mindset spills over into other aspects of their lives to produce the phenomenon you describe in which evidence is not valued and all that matters is individual subjective belief.
What’s behind this devaluation of evidence is fear. For many of these believers, to question their religious beliefs is sinful. And apostacy is the unforgivable sin for these people who are fixated on the afterlife (non-existent) and the threat of eternal punishment to their soul (also non-existent). People who have been indoctrinated since early childhood into this living hell of supernatural fantasy, fear and threats of everlasting punishment are trapped by their cherished beliefs and will resist any attempt to change them. It’s the work of a lifetime to overcome this indoctrination and my guess is that many try but relatively few succeed.
Good day Bart,
For me being on the blog for just under a year I do find the blog very informative and interesting. I have seen great views posted by both yourself and even some of your colleagues who are scholars yet still Christian. There scholarship seems to not sway on their faith which I do find interesting.
Onto my suggestions….. so my ONLY suggestion would be to when you post I would like to see more uses of other writings. This I mean use evidence (like how you’ve shown 2 Thess. Is most likely a forgery). How you used scholars and evidence blew me away. Since most of your posts are usually generalized or less “scholarly” focused. I know you are trying to reach out to a common folk audience, I personally am more interested in what makes scholars tick. Why they think what they think, what is the evidence for their conclusion, how do they come to that, etc. So for me more scholarly posts would be awesome!!
Other than that one suggestion the blog format is great, the posts are lengthy, and you respond to any comments within 24 hours. Plus I do find it enlightening to have other guest writers who post on new ideas and conclusions that are gaining in the scholarly community (Jeff Siker, Brent Nongbri, etc). Overall great job so far!!
Hey, Bart. Welcome back. Wish I could have made the trip with you. I spent a day in Jerusalem and Bethlehem last summer. Very frustrating with huge crowds at every venue. Would have preferred a personal tour at a less-busy time.
To your main question, the blog continues to match my wants and expectations. I like the full coverage that several linked posts can provide. I think the occasional invited guest is a nice addition. And I really enjoyed the deep dive into the forensics that go into your research.
Reading an on-line debate is less appealing. I much prefer the YouTube posts of real-time debates. And I enjoy revisiting the Great Courses material to refresh my memory.
As to the concern that we are rapidly becoming a “facts are irrelevant” society, I share your opinion and I try not to despair. I think it odd that people will ask advice for something like a DIY project for which they know nothing about, but disdain information on something else that goes against their beliefs, even when it’s something they know nothing about.
The blog is fantastic. Full stop.
Feedback re: your questions:
1. Love the guest posts – in themselves (both the content and the comment interaction), as well as a curated avenue to good further reading (happy to be “advertized at” by these select scholars)
2. Huge fan of the wonky pieces – perhaps I’m an exception, and a glutton for rigorous argumentation. Maybe the optimal mix is 5%-10% academic-level posts (with translations!), to concurrently maintain the snappiness and accessibility that has the widest appeal plus the occasional deep cut for the hardcore fans (like Bruce and “Incident”)
3. The debate was excellent, but I’m clearly biased (so will refrain from commenting further on this one, aside from a pragmatic observation that it definitely captured eyes/clicks). Would love to see more on other topics periodically
One thought (broken record) on expanding the member catchment area would be an audio version of posts on a tiered subscription – I think you’d reach a broader cross section (there is an audio-only market, and JM’s *excellent* podcast proves it – make a subscription version daily, current and paywall). Roll it out alongside the next book blitz…
I find the blog highly informative and the reasons you give for its existence are spot on. A lot of us are old-fashioned enough to care about “truth”. If we don’t have a real (in some sense) objective external world, knowable by us, at least within the limits of historical and scientific methods, we are well and truly lost. “I am the way and the TRUTH and the light”– sort of remember reading that somewhere. Hmmm. Whatever serves the cause of truth. I think you have a reasonable number of guest posts so far, and the debates as an occasional event are great. But we all know you have a lot on your plate. Everything you’ve done here so far is fine. Just don’t burn out. It is possible to overextend. If the blog stays just as it is now, that would be fine with me. There is tremendous potential for harm in religious and theological discourse, due to the odd epistemology, in which invisible things and objectively non-verifiable assertions can have drastic consequences– purges, bigotry, holy wars. This blog is at least on the right track, as opposed to so much that seems to be on the wrong track today.
[First welcome back]
Point #1: Concerning occasional posts by other scholars:
My vote is (to the extent that it’s practical) keep it up.
In short, the broader the scope of topics and of information the better.
(Also, to the extent that such posts might give you the occasional break [which, for my own selfish reasons, I can only assume ultimately help you maintain the already excellent level of your posts[ I can only assume this is useful as well.)
Point #2: Concerning the concessional “more hard-core more scholarly” posts:
Speaking only for myself: These posts that give the reader a “peek behind the curtain” into the techniques of how such scholarly work proceeds, and the detail of how such work is done, is one of the primary reasons why I’ve read this ‘blog since the very beginning.
Point #3: Concerning the “Debate About Contradiction”:
I can appreciate how frustrating such an undertaking can be (as you you suggest, it’s unlikely anyone’s going to be –you should excuse the expression– converted) but I’m very much in favor of these for a somewhat specific reason.
It’s always good to hear voices which are “outside one’s bubble”, of course. But more to the point, for those of us who sometimes find ourselves in discussions with more conservative-oriented folks, its helpful to read good examples of 1] answering some specific objections and 2] seeing in detail how such a discussion should be approached and managed.
[I guess I like to think of these as a sort of mini-seminar in “Scholarly Apologetics”.]
I liked a lot the guest posts, although the main theme is early christinanity I woud like to know more of the old testament. Could you talk with Dr Israel Finkesltein or William Dever and could ask him to write in your blog? Well, I had to try.
I love the blog but I think would like the use of graphics or images to show technical information more easily. That would make a more didactical experience. Also If at the end of the post you could give us references to learn more of the topic. Congratulations for the blog.
My feedback: I don’t usually get to the blog on the weekends, so posting on most weekdays is enough for me. I like to hear the current (or past) scholarship about the Bible, that you don’t get in church. Debates, like the one about contradictions, are OK if you want to do that, but I’m not interested in that so much. Overall I’m quite happy with the blog – keep up the great work!
I like the guest posts. As much as I like and have benefited from your writings, it’s helpful to hear from other sources as well. I think the number of guest posts you’ve had is good.
I like the content, and am a relatively happy subscriber. I will admit to less interest in reposting stuff from years ago, if only because I have read pretty heavily through your back catalog, but I understand the pressures of posting new material daily! I also like the more scholarly posts (but then, I am literate in koine Greek so it’s not as much as a heavy lift for me).
I like the guest posts, and think they have added a lot to the blog. If I had to post a ‘wish list’, it would be more discussion of Early Christian writings outside the NT (Shepherd of Hermas, the Didache, the Epistula Apostolorum, etc.) — here the recent posts on Papias have been excellent. Also more discussion of the broader historical context, and how they interface with later Christian traditions — how reliable is Acts regarding the life of Paul? Is there any historical validity to traditions about Peter? Does the “Chrestus” episode in Suetonius have anything at all to do with Christians? Were Christians persecuted under Nero? How much of the history of the Church between c. 30 and 200 CE can be realistically reconstructed?
Can’t wait to read what you think of the Aeneid. Personally, I think it’s interesting that the ancient Romans would choose the Trojans to be descended from, considering that the Romans were mean, lean fighting machines obsessed with winning and victory and conquest, and ultimately, it was the Greeks who defeated the Trojans and destroyed the city. Just my quirky thoughts. Glad you had a great vacation! I envy your trip!!
It would be helpful to me if you would suggest a list of books to form a good personal library. Your favorite commentary, Bible dictionary, harmony of the gospel, and other books which you consider very helpful to those us us non-scholars.
In other words, a list of must-have books for the person wanting a useful stack of books to supplement your books, or which cover topics you have not written a book about.
I think the blog has been, and continues to be for me, stimulating, educational, and interesting. Even more, it can be likened to a voice of truth and reason crying in the wilderness of ignorance and misinformation running rampant these days. Add to that the fact that all monies raised go to charity, and I think the blog can even be seen to be necessary in our contemporary environment. I firmly believe that education is the only solution to solving most of our long-term societal problems.
I think the guest posts by other scholars are great, as long as they will also take the time to respond to readers’ questions as you do. The occasional technical scholarly posts or re-posts are good too, as long as they are that – occasional. It does help to sometimes actually see the level of detailed scholarly work and knowledge involved, but debating how a Greek word or phrase should be interpreted in a particular context does nothing for the reader who doesn’t know Greek.
Beyond that, in terms of increasing blog membership, the obvious thing that comes to mind is advertising (TV, radio, print, social media), but perhaps the cost of that would be prohibitive(?) I don’t know anything about advertising, but there are probably many free venues out there also. Perhaps someone on the blog has some ideas on this?
Just some of my thoughts, FWTW.
This blog is one of the best things ever for me. If only everyone could know about it, I believe the world would be a different place. From my years of membership here, I no longer believe every word in the Bible is inspired by God. I understand my faith and upbringing are the reasons for believing as I do and can respect other peoples’ beliefs. This blog has made that possible. Thank you, Dr. Ehrman.
Bart…. Being relatively new to the blog I appreciate it when you post things from the archives. I like the guest posts too. Technical posts are fine with me, as long as I’ve had a coffee fairly recently. I didn’t get much out of the debate with the conservative Christian. I’d be more interested in a debate with a fellow critical scholar. For example: someone who thinks 2 Thessalonians isn’t a forgery, or someone who has a different view from yours about the historical Jesus. [If I read you right, you think he was trying to be the Jewish messiah as well as an apocalyptic prophet, while others insist on the latter only but not the former.]
I liked the guest posts a lot and bought one of the books. Two of them are very expensive, but someday I’ll bite the bullet and get them because I’d like to read them. More guest posts are fine with me as are the technical ones. The debate was interesting, but having viewed some of your debates and then read this one, they all end the same way.They almost seem to be an exercise in futility. The ability to live in reality and not a dream of how I wish things are is important to me, so keep up your work and I’ll continue to support it.
Been a member for two years and I still check the blog every day. I feel like the content is just as strong now as it was when I joined.
The guest posts on Papias were fantastic. I’ve also enjoyed the recent technical posts on 2 Thessalonians with content from Forgery and Counterforgery. I’d encourage you to keep doing these kind of posts.
I’m a huuuuuuge fan of the guest posts, and the more technically oriented blog posts that dig down into the deeper details. But debating conservative Christians seems out of sync with the blog and us members, who I assume range from atheists like me to moderate Christians — or anyone, really, interested in the best scholarship on early church history. So I would guess most of us are way past being interested in the weak tea arguments from conservative believers. But maybe that’s a churlish view since we get so much value out of the normal posts and they do raise money for a good cause.
I love the blog! I don’t comment often, but I read it every day and think about what you’ve posted. Of recent stuff, I’ve especially appreciated the posts re 2 Thess and your persuading Brent Nongbri to post re his research (and book) about dating ancient Christian texts. Re 2 Thess, I liked seeing the arguments laid out systematically and I am pretty well convinced. Re Nongbri, I bought his book and read it. It was eye-opening to me, because I had thought from other reading that paleographic dating was pretty firm. How wrong I was! So, yeah, I love the blog. Ways to improve it? I’ll think about that; anything can be improved.
Yes please, I would welcome guest posts and the more scholarly offerings from time to time.
I’m a big fan of this blog. I’ve been reading it for a couple of years now and I’m really pleased I have. It’s changed my life for two reasons. Firstly, I was frustrated with the surface deep intellectual examination of my faith within local churches, but this blog has scratched that itch and I’ve been wading into deeper waters ever since.
Secondly, as my interest in theology and early church history eclipsed all other interests, I decided to change direction in life and I’ve recently been granted a place at Manchester University to study a Masters in Theology. If I do well enough at that, I hope to follow it up with a PhD. So I’m switching careers into the academic study of my faith and moving to Manchester this summer thanks to this blog.
As for more specific feedback. I think you’ve got the balance right in the number of guest posts and more technical examinations. I welcome both and think they’re both engaging and worthwhile. You struck a good note with your mini-rant about truth and the contemporary struggle over it. Although this blog is about Christianity in Antiquity I wonder if there is room to make the ancient more relevant to today?
I think you’re onto something with “the history and the literature of early Christianity is of vital importance for understanding our world, our culture, and our civilization.” I understand the American Churches are very powerful, and one of Trump’s biggest support base is found within the Evangelical Church. Perhaps you might be willing to be bolder in your criticism of how some sections of the church have badly misunderstood the message or thrust of Christianity? Maybe contrasting 1st century Christianity with that found in the 21st?
Taking a firmer stance against the constant deceit and misinformation that’s flying around worked wonders for Stephen Colbert’s ratings, and I should imagine the demographics of your readership would welcome it.
Finally, would you consider doing an AMA (Ask Me Anything) on the blog? You are a fascinating figure and I would be really interested to hear your views across a range of subjects, be it politics, scientific and technological advancement, how much of the world you’ve seen, your opinion on cats, Jordan Peterson, Joe Rogan etc.
How would an AMA work? I.e. how would we actually *do* it. Would it be one-sentence answers to a series of questions, or full length blog posts? I don’t think the former would satisfy and I think most readers would find the latter intrusive on the purpose of the blog. But I’m interested in hearing more. (I shy away from politics and social issues because I don’t want to offend potential readers, so that would be the other BIG problem)
I suppose an elegant solution may be to do an AMA on a different platform, like Reddit.
Bill Gates has done six of them on that platform (latest here) and as this will expose you to a wider audience, it would probably lead to more subscribers for the blog.
If anyone asks you questions you don’t want to answer (like politics) you could always skip those. So many questions get asked on AMAs and as no one can answer them all, you could safely avoid the ones you wish to skip. Remember, it’s Ask Me Anything, not I’ll Answer Everything!
You could advertise the AMA on your social media accounts and this blog, so your existing subscribers will get a chance to engage.
Interesting. I’ll mull it over.
> But what do you think of the idea of guest posts?
Love them, and leave the choosing to your expertise and taste. As for frequency, maybe one post for your 5 to 10-ish?
> much more technical scholarly posts
I really enjoy these, as they show how scholarly opinion in the field is argued and also teach me a bit about the techniques. Maybe a couple of them per month?
> Debate with conservative Christians
Meh. I don’t think they’re worth my time, but if it brings in money for a good cause…
Debates are great if centered on something relevant. For example, a debate on the existence or nonexistence of the Q source would be interesting. Debates with fundamentalists or evangelicals are for the most part, in my opinion, useless. They have the potential to change nothing. Guest columns are fine, if not done too often. I prefer your “trade book level” blogs to those at the “scholar level.” The later can get the non-professional bogged down in all the detail. I know that the focus of the blog is New Testament and early Christianity. However, I would welcome some occasional coverage of the Old Testament, and this might be a good place to use some guest columnists. I found your Old Testament portion of your Bible text to be very useful in understanding certain aspects of the New Testament portion. I realize some would not welcome inclusion of OT material, and I can certainly live without it.
The guest posts are great! I also like the more in depth posts. It really is a an amazing thing you’re doing here, not just educating people about NT history and exegesis, but doing this to help the poor and hungry.
Re: debates. Perhaps you could present a contrary viewpoint yourself, with a goal of passing the “Ideological Turing Test”. That is, your presentation should be indistinguishable from that of a genuine advocate for the position. So you take both sides of the debate, perhaps challenging us readers to tell which is your true opinion. You “win” if we can’t tell. I believe you do something similar in your college class. It might be easier than organizing a debate with another scholar, and perhaps more satisfying. You can insure that both sides honestly face the best arguments of the other.
Ha! That’s a great idea!
I apologize in advance but can’t help but to ask…
What is truth?
“truth and evidence and solid argumentation” suggests truth is something separate from (although perhaps related to) evidence and solid argumentation.
Yeah, Pilate wanted to know that too…
I truly enjoyed the 1 Thess. vs 2 Thess forgery proof even if it did make my eyes cross.
Guest blogs are always interesting.
Debates are interesting but probably in my opinion not going to convince people to change their minds. i.e. “my mind is made up don’t confuse me with facts” type of thinking.
Yes I think people are much less inclined to use their brains and prefer to be told what they are to believe because it so much simpler that way.
I can’t tell you how much I appreciate the fact that you are smart enough to agree with MY way of thinking.LOL
I like the guest posts.
For one, we get different viewpoints that way. I’m not an expert in the Bible but, having expertise in other matters, I know that experts can have different viewpoints. I don’t think that providing evidence and offering a “solid” argument guarantees you will agree with another person providing evidence and well thought out arguments. It’s also an alternative to the blast from the past posts you used to do. I don’t mind those but can look up old topics if I want. Something new is always good.
Do the guest posts also make the blog more manageable? I realize you still approve all the comments but have to write less posts and answer fewer questions. I’m not suggesting you are getting lazy (you obviously work very hard). Perhaps it gives you more time for all the other things you do, including those blog related?
Are the running posts new or old? I’m only going off of memory, but it seems you do more posts that are related to each other and less stand alone. I think that is a good thing. It’s nice to go a little deeper. The only problem with that is I (not sure about other blog members) don’t read the blog every day. Whether it’s due to being busy or just not feeling like it, I might read every day for a while and not for a week or two. I can read old posts if I want, I just don’t always chose to. That might disincline people to read or comment on a post in the middle of a series. And increase questions you have already answered.
Your posts are my favorites but I do enjoy the guest posts. The debate was enlightening but I would not recommend another any time soon. The rational part of my brain took a beating trying to follow the irrational gibberish.
I realize it’s very time-consuming to answer all the questions – but there are several occasions in which my question doesn’t really get answered. For example, I once asked if there were occasions in which a forgery did NOT fool its original audience – but fooled audiences decades or centuries later, who just naively assumed that Daniel or Enoch (or whoever) wrote these books, because they spoke from ancients’ perspectives. Your response was that we have examples of forgeries fooling the original audiences AND later audiences…which is not the question I was trying to answer. So…just maybe a little more time to fully understand the intent of the question.
Ah, I must have missed the point of your question. The answer is, we don’t know. In any instance in which we have a *record* of a forgery not fooling an original audience, it continued not to fool people (probalby because it was known then to be a forgery). But for most forgeries we don’t *have* any record of how it was originally received, so we simply don’t know. It may well be, for example, that the original readers of 1 Timothy knew full well that the author wasn’t Paul, but that this was local knowledge that wasn’t circulated, so that later readers assumed it was. Possible! But who knows?
When I attended a church back in the 80s, they often talked about postmodernism, and the idea that truth is completely subjective. Is that what postmodernism really is about? (For example, someone with a postmodern view might say ‘Christianity may be true for you, but it’s not MY truth.’) Is that too simplistic of an understanding of postmodern thought?
Yeah, it is *way* more complicated than that…. But it would take a whole lot of explaining. Still, it does often come down to a question of whether there is something that is “objectively” true apart from human interpretatoin.
DR Ehrman
Thank you for the chance to have a voice about the contents.
I´m almost new in the blog and I am really enjoying it. I joined basically for the pleasure of it but also because it helps. I realized about the posts from external contributors and I think that it makes it richer. The more the merrier.
It would be interesting inviting historians of Judaism and Islam concerning the very same issues of text transmission (for example) that you are dealing with regarding early christianity.
I would enjoy too if there were a list with recent book contributions organized by topic. But that´s a wish and a very selfish one.
As you have written above, the influence of religious issues (and identities) on politics is growing more and more dangerous even in distant Spain, where religious affiliation had not been a concern for decades.
Dr. Ehrman,
On the question of “guests posts” I think they are great. I enjoy seeing different views on the same subjects. It gives a better perspective. IMO, you can never have too many guest posts. I especially enjoy their view, & to see yours along with it. Again, different perspectives.
I like & have enjoyed all the different approaches to your blog. The guests, the deep scholar discussions, & the conservative preacher\Christian view. Being raised in the deep south & thinking everyday I was going to die & burn under the earth in hell, is one of the reasons I’m so attracted to your blog, & I especially enjoyed that one. I saw things from your angle, his angle, & my angle. GOOD STUFF!!
On your question of debating established scholars, I would like to see at least a little more. Especially if you could get by without doing al the deep research, & just shoot from the hip, so to speak. I think that would make for interesting conversation. I’m sure that’s not your style, but it would be interesting.
You are doing a great job. I am so thankful that I “stumbled” upon this blog, & became a member immediately. I’m trying to keep up & get the courage to become a regular responder. Sometimes I’m very far behind, & don’t comment because of that, & well, the other reasons is that I’m trying to get more confidence in my understanding & beliefs. I have been reading & studying rather diligently over the last 2 to 3 years. Your blog has been by far one of my favorite learning spots. Keep up the good work!!!
Oh, and I am so very impressed with how you take the time to answer questions & statements to your topics. It’s impressive, at least from where I’m sitting!!!
Thanks again!!!
MKG
I enjoyed the guest posts, the deeper dive, and the debate. I would say keep doing those as your time and interest allow.
I would like to see you to respond more often to the work of serious, secular scholars. Speaking of Virgil, it would be great if you could invite Dr. Dennis MacDonald to the Blog and let him explain his position about Homer’s influence on the Gospels in a guest post. I know you disagree with him on that matter but I would like to hear reasons for it, a proper criticue. I have not seen any strong critique of his work, from what’s I’ve read, the reception of his work is quite positive. He was well recived at SBL session dedicated to his work, reviews are mostly positive and there are even christian scholars who published a book that supports Dr. MacDonald’s work. From my understanding, there are many scholars who find his position plausible, like it’s a possible interpretation, they just don’t think it’s the right interpretation?
I’m personally tired of debates with conservative evangelicals and i would like to see you engage with work of serious scholars like Dr. MacDonald. Beside that, blog posts are mostly just fragments of your books which I’m already familiar with (and probably many other blog members as well).
Interesting idea. Thanks,
I always look forward to reading the blog and find the balance of new posts, re-posts, and guest posts just about right. The debate was something I would appreciate, but only rarely. I understand your frustration with it and agree that this kind of exercise is unlikely to open many closed minds.
I loved the debate
I enjoy the blog very much. The only facet of the blog that did not work for me was the “blog debate” and that was because his arguments were woefully weak. It was frustrating for me so I can only imagine how much more so it must have been for you. I like the occasional guest posts and find the “technical” posts very interesting. All in all, I would give the blog high marks; so much so that I plan on giving several blog memberships as Christmas gifts this year.
I prefer occasional guest posts much more than blog debates. As an Ehrman fan since 2012, I’ve never tired of reading your voice here on the blog.
I love your blog, Bart. Thank you so much for doing it!
1. Guest posts have been a nice addition. Carry on!
2. Jury’s still out on excerpts from your scholarly books. Ask me again in six months, lol.
3. I’d just as soon pass on more debates w the fundies. It was fine to try one. I don’t think you need to try another.
4. To raise more money, tier your membership, Bart: $25/year to read, but $50/year if you want to kibitz and ask questions. And $100/year if you just want to be a nice guy and “sustaining member”, $200 to be an “angel”, etc.. You’ve talked about doing this before. Seems to me it would raise more money *and* reduce your comments management workload. Time to *do* it, I’d say, lol.
Bless you in every way, Bart! 😀
As a pretty new member to the blog, I mostly enjoy it, I only have a few minor issues.
The first (and most important to me) is that there doesn’t seem to be an easy to access list of all blog posts by date, so that I can just F5 it every other day or so to see whether there is a new post.
Secondly, when it comes to guest post, I’d love a bit more of an introduction to the guest.
Lastly, more of a question than a suggestion, if I have a question that doesn’t have anything to do with any current topic, but is the kind of thing to answer on here, where exactly should I ask that question? Would a place for nothing but questions maybe be a good idea?
Ah! Yes, there is a way to find lists of blogs posts by date. On teh home page, on the right hand side (you may have to scroll down a bit) is a box for “archives.” Click on that!
Questions: simply ask a question based on any comment, whether it’s related or not.
I would start with I look forward to your blog every days, especially since I’ve been stuck home injured for so long. Definitely one of the highlights of my day.
As for debating with these conservative/fundamentalists, I’d say do whatever brings in more for your charity.
As for the guests posts- I definitely read them, especially when they’re of interest. I’d like to see you critique people like Michael Brown and Lee Stobel. Having read books of theirs I can see how many people get easily swayed to their uninformed takes and use of circular reasoning.
It would be very interesting if you would do some posts on your opinions of the books and ideas of other scholars, what you agree with and disagree with and your opinion of their level of scholarship etc. I am thinking of people like Paula Fredriksen, Crossan, Spong, Pagels, Schweitzer and many others. It would be really interesting why you think their ideas are different from yours.
Guest posts – yes, debate with conservative Christians – no.
Occasional guest posts, yes.
More technical posts, yes!
Online debates, yes. (I thought the last one could have been more focused. Perhaps it would have been more useful to discuss one contradiction and do a deep dive since the presentation is written rather than oral.)
Overall, no complaints.
Yes, yes and yes. The guest posts were fantastic. I’d love as many of them as you can get. Well, not ALL the time but as you’ve been doing them.
I also love the technical, in the weeds post! Certainly not all the time either but similar to the Thessalonians ones. They were fascinating.
Written debates are interesting and I do like the fact that one can re-read each post to better understand the rebuttal. These types are the ones that I would like to see but the least frequently…twice a year at most? I’d also like a scholar vs scholar one! Because those can get into the weeds via their nature, you’d be killing two birds with one stone.
I realize not everyone will like all three and may have to live with uninteresting, to them, posts for a few days but for those of us that love it? Heaven! (ha). Thanks for asking and thanks again for all you do. It’s been worth every penny I’ve sent and more.
Thank you for the invitation to provide feedback!
I have been following the blog and have now read two of your books (Apocalyptic Preacher and Lost Christianities). Yes, a serious rational attempt to establish the truth as far as possible is very important (post-modernism notwithstanding). I have found two particular things helpful:
1. Your explanation of the apocalyptic belief that underlay Jesus’s teaching on how life should be lived is convincing, and I still continue to find the message of his teaching inspirational. Of course many humanists and followers of other religions also share the same values. Not only is need increasing as you say, especially among refugees and displaced persons, but climate change and the risk of nuclear war also demand urgent attention and action, I believe.
2. Your explanations of the origins of doctrines and the reasons for the spread of Christianity also clarify how certain beliefs originated and become adopted. Having just been told on Trinity Sunday that “the Trinity cannot be understood, just believe it”, I find your historical explanation of its origin helpful and would prefer that we could have fewer of such meaningless statements and more engagement with the gospel of love from our leaders.
So I find the blog helpful in making me think about questions I had not explored before, and am happy to follow in whichever directions you feel moved to take it…..I am not sure that more debates with believers in biblical inerrancy would add much – maybe debates with other scholars who rationally interpret texts from a perspective different from your own would have value.
I hope this is helpful and many thanks again for sharing your insights, Andrew.
The best blog entry for me is one that takes one concept from the New or Old Testament and reveals what scholars know about it. Even an article that takes 1 verse, but then explains the background to it, why it may have been written, how it has been changed by scribes, which theological position it is taking, etc. As long as I take away something I didnt know before then I’m satisfied.
As a thought – maybe you could get your readers to go back over past posts and click the like button on their favourite posts ? That might reveal what we (the readers) are looking for.
I just changed my automatic monthly sustainer donation from $10 to $15, an increase of $60 a year. Over the last couple of years, I’ve enjoyed the mix with the debate being my least favorite. I would like a guest post from a respected Christian N.T. scholar like Jeff or Judy Yates Siker on the impact of scholarship on the doctrines and creeds of the church. How does it affect personal belief or unbelief?
Bless you! May your tribe increase. As it turns out, just yesterday I asked Judy if she would be willing to do a few posts on just such an issue!
Recognizing that in one way or another all your posts and all the guest articles relate in some way or other to Jesus, I would like to see more articles directly about Jesus. Not who this or that person thought he was, but who he actually was. Which I know very well is a torturous task at the best of times, but you’ve tackled it as well as any, and better than most.
Paul, for example, is a terrible guide to who Jesus was, because he never met him. We’re interested in him because he shaped the beliefs of future generations of Christians, and those beliefs are part of what is being studied here. But my personal interest is more focused on Jesus himself, and what he believed, and what we can know of his life, as opposed to his myth.
But it’s all good.
Hi Bart,
I’ve noticed that my comment, which I posted on June 19th, is still “awaiting moderation”, despite many other comments now showing up. This seems to have happened with several other comments I’ve left since I signed up a few weeks ago. Is there a problem?
I don’t know! I don’t recall not posting any comments from you. Send me a private email and we’ll try to figure it out. (Possibly include a copy of the post itself so I can see if there’s any reason it wouldn’t have been posted.
Concerning debates:
In addition to the debates with evangelical scholars, would you be interested in holding debates with critical scholars who hold serious objections to “standard mainline” views: for example scholars who, say, don’t accept the existence of Q? Or who might not accept the “standard” solution to the Synoptic problem).
I’m not sure I would expect to be convinced by their arguments. But I’d be very interested in reading a thoughtful, well-reasoned spelling out of such views by someone whose views on the topics that we might respect.
Yes, that’s what I was saying: this kind of back and forth would require an immense amount of work; I’d have to wait till I have the time to do it….
I’m very pleased with your blog and how you’re doing it.
I greatly appreciate this blog! I’d articulate more, but I’d easily hit the word limit, so will just leave at it this.
Well, just a quick addition: yes, more guest posts, please. I especially loved the ones on Papias. Debates with inerrantists and mythicists can be frustrating, but seeing other viewpoints articulated can help us build up our own, preferably based on facts and evidence. It was interesting to see the hair splitting going in on in the justifications that the Matthew/Luke infancy narratives don’t contradict each other. Worldviews can be really hard to change, regardless of the evidence against them, especially worldviews that are a deep part of our personal identity.
I enjoy the blog very much as it is. I enjoy the variety of topics you address. The occasional guest post is interesting and welcome; the recent debate not so much. The good reverend’s position was a textbook proof of Bonhoeffer’s thoughts on stupidity (ref. “Letters and Papers from Prison”). There’s little need to waste time on similar debates; I get enough of that from the daily news.
Personally I found the in-depth postings on second Thessalonians very educational and interesting. The material will be useful in discussions w some of my family and friends about being less dogmatic about the inerrancy of the Bible.
I’ve enjoyed the more scholarly exposition immensely! The level of detail and explanation of critical approach represented in, for instance, Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, is fascinating and a lot of fun. It’s encouraged me to get back into Greek these last several years and that’s been very rewarding.
I’ve also appreciated the guest posts. Brent Nongbri’s work I was familiar with before he posted here, but I then found out he had his own blog with a lot of awesome information on paleography, papyrology, archaeology and the like, so that’s always a fun surprise. I would for sure love to see more of this sort of input, especially the way the those disciplines inform (or are informed by) textual criticism etc.
This might be a terrible idea, but periodically choosing a publication that gets the whole subject *way* wrong to shed light on flawed thought processes and what should be fixed would be very entertaining. But then again I don’t know what that community is like; perhaps that material might be better left to debates 🙂
I enjoy the scholarly, technical posts very much and the occasional guest posts. I’m in favor of more debates even though the last one didn’t go so well. It brought in quite a bit of money in donations.
Suggestion for raising money: A LIVE YouTube debate (so much easier than physically traveling somewhere!) organized by a blog member. A proposal would need to be made first—such as you and Dennis MacDonald debating over Homer’s influence on the Gospels. The two of you agree to accept for a certain amount of donations to the blog. Keep us updated weekly until the goal is reached then set a time for the debate. Someone would probably volunteer to moderate it as well. I think that would be pretty fun to watch and a motivating goal for the blog.
The blog is fine with me just the way it is. I enjoy the guest posts also. The reason I signed up for the blog is because I like your books and your style of writing and your scholarly approach to Scripture. Thanks for writing it.
Dr. Ehrman,
Great job with the blog. It’s very helpful to be able to interact with you and also read about the intriguing topics you focus on. I’ve always admired your scholarship as critical yet fair.
I very much enjoy the guest posts and the occasional “in depth” analysis of a particular issue. With regard to the debate (or the prospect of more debates), believe that 2 rounds of posts per debater is sufficient. The third round seemed to be “more of the same.”
Thank you for your commitment to the blog and for sharing facts and ideas that are not addressed in the church. The material is interesting and the format allows us to interact with the expert.
Guest posts are great. While I of course enjoy Dr. Ehrman’s insights, a bit of variety here and there from guests is a bonus.
I’ve read and watched tons of debates over the years and feel like apologists don’t have much to offer. However, if Dr. Ehrman is willing to put in the time, I don’t mind reading more debates. However, I wouldn’t blame him if he didn’t want to.
Well, the “truth” does seem to be taking quite a beating these days as revealed in the recent Time magazine article about the widespread resistance to Measles immunizations. The “truth” about the other blog contributors and debaters, so far, is that none of them write as clearly as you do. It’s not even close. You have a gift my friend. I do think most blog readers are probably most interested in putting it all together into some kinds of view of life, God, Jesus, heaven, and so on and what it all means. Finally, your best blogs are those that mix your personal religious journey with your scholarship revealing how your scholarship has shaped that journey.
Could you write a blog on the book of James and why it is considered a forgery?
Good idea!
Love guests posts on new developing topics. Love being humblized (if that is not a word, it should be) by scholarly posts, which is what happens every time I read them and remind me what really goes behind all of your posts. I think a couple times a year is great.
I enjoy live debate more. Maybe a 30-minute audio debate/discussion between you and an established scholar available only to members or maybe available to download for a $5 donation to the blog?
I love the blog! I don’t comment often, but I read it every day and think about what you’ve posted. Of recent stuff, I’ve especially appreciated the posts re 2 Thess and your persuading Brent Nongbri to post re his research (and book) about dating ancient Christian texts. Re 2 Thess, I liked seeing the arguments laid out systematically and I am pretty well convinced. Re Nongbri, I bought his book and read it. It was eye-opening to me, because I had thought from other reading that paleographic dating was pretty firm. How wrong I was! So, yeah, I love the blog. Ways to improve it? I’ll think about that; anything can be improved”
I’ve been subscribed to the blog for a few years and I enjoy it very much. I usually read a weeks worth of posts (or so) at once rather than reading daily. I would be interested in a way to bookmark or ‘save’ posts that I may want to reread.
I’ve been an atheist since elementary school when I blurted out ‘That’s impossible’ in response to ‘the earth was created in 6 days’ etc. I enjoy your blog and books because of the historical explanation you provide to matters that are misinterpreted by scholars, the church etc decades later. Follow the evidence where it takes you! I’ve enjoyed the guest writers. A fresh perspective has been interesting too!
I agree with what arossi72 said. Like the guest posts as long as you are there to walk us thru any shady areas. Frankly I joined so I could donate to people in need–the blog is a great bonus. I enjoy learning something new although some of it is over my head & I get too busy to read it all that often.
Hi Bart– The guest posts I’ve heard are great. I am not remembering the more technical scholarly posts, but I’m a technical guy so maybe they just seemed like normal, deep, interesting stuff to me. Or maybe they weren’t turned into podcasts, which is the only way that I’m able to consume blog content. Anyway, I’m all for it. I also didn’t hear the actual arguments of the debate, again maybe because they didn’t make it to the podcasts.
As I’ve hassled you and John Mueller about before, my only way to consume the blog is by podcast — the only time I have is listening while I’m driving. So it’s pretty frustrating to me that the podcasts rely on the listener being able to go to blog posts by date — but the blog has no way that I can find to access a post by date. If I hear a great first post of a series (not an uncommon occurrence!) and manage to write down the date as John states it, then do make time to go to the blog to read the succeeding posts, I’m completely frustrated.
The other suggestion I have is to have member-only podcasts (naturally enough), though I expect that John just doesn’t have time to do additional podcasts, he’s so consumed by the superlative job he does already.
Thanks for all the good thoughts, good insights, and good Christian values.
Yes, it’s easy to access a post by date. On the homepage, go to the archive link, and you’ll find all the months going all the way back (April 2012); click on the month and find the right day. Hope this helps!