
Prof. Ehrman’s forum is a good place for novices and lay people to exchange opinions and ideas. If anyone is interested in how people a little more informed, although not always correct in what they believe (ie. not in agreement with Prof Ehrman lol!), you might be interested in this subreddit: ** you do not have permission to see this link **. There are a lot of progressive ministers, undergrad and PhD level theology folks, and secular scholars on there who toss around some of the exact same ideas that are discussed on here. I don’t agree with 75% of what I read on there, but at least I get to read about prevailing theories whether they are secular or religious. I’m on there as well and post a lot, but I’m not going to say what my reddit handle is 

Greg Matthews said
Prof. Ehrman’s forum is a good place for novices and lay people to exchange opinions and ideas. If anyone is interested in how people a little more informed, although not always correct in what they believe (ie. not in agreement with Prof Ehrman lol!), you might be interested in this subreddit: ** you do not have permission to see this link **. There are a lot of progressive ministers, undergrad and PhD level theology folks, and secular scholars on there who toss around some of the exact same ideas that are discussed on here. I don’t agree with 75% of what I read on there, but at least I get to read about prevailing theories whether they are secular or religious. I’m on there as well and post a lot, but I’m not going to say what my reddit handle is![]()
Thanks for the link. I might check it out. I’m not very knowledgeable about the New Testament compared to many people who comment on Dr. Ehrman’s blog. Right now I am interesting in learning more about how Christians can argue that Christians are required to adhere to the ethical aspects of the Jewish law but not the ritual aspects. I see nothing in the New Testament where that distinction was made.

“Thanks for the link. I might check it out. I’m not very knowledgeable about the New Testament compared to many people who comment on Dr. Ehrman’s blog. Right now I am interesting in learning more about how Christians can argue that Christians are required to adhere to the ethical aspects of the Jewish law but not the ritual aspects. I see nothing in the New Testament where that distinction was made.”
Everything is permissible for me, but not all things are beneficial.
Paul. 1 Corinthians 10:23.
That is coming from one claiming he was a Pharisee, and the son of a Pharisee, who were a group of people who felt the Law had to be followed.

It’s generally a good place to engage, but it is led by a very anti-Christian guy. He is very combative and is a sworn atheist. Generally for me that is a turn off. I have no problem with atheists at all, but when Bible scholars act like that, I can’t stand it. Bart is fine, though. His blog is much more neutral and relaxed. The subreddit itself is relaxed too, its just the top mod who is an extreme anti-Christian
Damian King said
It’s generally a good place to engage, but it is led by a very anti-Christian guy. He is very combative and is a sworn atheist. Generally for me that is a turn off. I have no problem with atheists at all, but when Bible scholars act like that, I can’t stand it. Bart is fine, though. His blog is much more neutral and relaxed. The subreddit itself is relaxed too, its just the top mod who is an extreme anti-Christian
I will assume your use of the term “sworn atheist” is simply a euphemism for someone who publicly self-identifies as an atheist rather than someone who has actually gone to the trouble to take out an affidavit. As far as I know I’m the only one on this forum who has so identified and that was in response to some expressed misapprehensions about the subject. I do feel a responsibility to correct misinformation but I’m hardly a militant. It’s an opinion based on my knowledge and experience. I am interested in the philosophical problems that flow from both belief and its lack but I have zero interest in converting anyone to my point of view.
If I am militant at all it’s about church/state separation issues. If religious believers were content to simply practice their religion and not insist that their beliefs be privileged in our culture and politics and law you would hear nothing from me unless you wanted to have an argument over a beer which can be fun.
The misapprehensions can be puzzling. It seems that many people have an innate host of associations with the word “atheist” that they insist on projecting onto people who so identify. Our character and motives become suspect. For some reason we are expected to justify every comment and opinion made by some celebrity atheist. (This doesn’t happen quite so frequently since the heyday of the so-called New Atheists but it does still happen occasionally.) Sometimes there are hints of incipient Stalinism. Occasionally someone will hit you with an argument they find convincing but with no consciousness that this conversation has been going on for hundreds of years. What seldom happens strangely enough is for someone to ask me what I mean by “atheism”.
I can only be described as “anti-Christian” in the sense that I think its truth claims are false and that it is better to believe true things than false ones.
I am not aware of too many bible scholars who self-identify as atheists although I certainly haven’t taken a poll. Aside from Prof Ehrman the only other one I’m sure of is Gerd Ludemman.

Christians aren’t one big amorphous glob, anymore than atheists are. Your own experience was very negative, and whether you admit it or not, that colors everything you say here and no doubt everywhere else. “Some of my best friends” is never terribly convincing, no matter how you finish the sentence.
It’s nice of you to say you don’t have a problem with people being religious when you can’t do a damn thing about it. It’s about as convincing as Damian saying he doesn’t have a problem with atheists, then talking about how oppressed he feels by them. It’s precisely the same thing. Talking about equal time when what you really want is to dictate the terms of the discussion.
Where atheists are the majority, they dont’ tend to be tolerant at all. Everybody at my workplace had to take a harassment webinar. One of the real-life cases we had to answer questions about involved a woman working at a lab. She wore a crucifix to work. She was mocked and belittled for her private beliefs that she never at any time tried to push on others. She sued and won. Now you don’t have to tell me atheists have had similar problems in places like the bible belt–but that’s the point. It’s the same exact thing–the majority harassing the minority–demanding conformity. It’s wrong no matter who does it. And sadly, it’s human nature, and would be if religion had never existed. Don’t change your beliefs. Change your behavior.
Why aren’t atheists well-liked on the whole, even though fewer and fewer people identify as part of a specific religion? Because many of them act like they’re already the boss of everything, and expect to be treated as if only they know ‘The Truth’–which is precisely what is driving people away from religion. See the problem? Of course not. So let me explain it–atheism is a shadow of religion. An overreaction to it. So rather than avoiding its worst problems, it imitates them. Like an abused child growing up to be an abuser himself.
And speaking of changed behavior, didn’t you just offer to stop posting here if I did? Was that for real?
godspell, simple courtesy would have been to give Damian ample time to respond to my comments (since they were directed to him) before you landed on this thread with your usual lack of circumspection and tact. It is impossible for me to have a conversation with you and now it seems impossible to have one without you. This narrows my options considerably.
Apologies everyone. It’s a cruel thing to leave you with godspell. But he didn’t arrive with me and he can’t follow me where I go now.

Nor would I.
But honestly, you greatly overestimate my attachment to this place I had never posted at a few months ago–if you want to blame someone, blame bren, who invited me here.
You know the guy you have spent untold hours of your life arguing Greek and Hebrew with?
This place isn’t a discussion forum. It’s an asylum. Congrats on busting out. But something tells me you’ll be back.
As for me, I’m not renewing my subscription when it lapses next year.
I’ve learned a lot at this blog.
But all I’ve learned at this forum attached to it is that there’s a lot of nutty people obsessed with early Christianity, and they come in all different flavors. All with the same weird aftertaste. Which is known as ‘dishonesty.’

Correct. Not my fault you both close such bland posting names, which are, for all I know, your own. But it is my fault I drank espresso at lunch yesterday.
Stephen was talking about some grand bargain, where I’d leave if he would, and I expressed openness to it, but he never stuck around to seal the deal.
Possibly I should leave anyway.
It really is crazy in here, and I do not mean you specifically, Robert, but then again, I don’t not mean you either. 😉

godspell said
It really is crazy in here, and I do not mean you specifically, Robert, but then again, I don’t not mean you either. 😉
Not crazy at all! Remarkable, I’m thinking! Religion is being discussed and often those discussions are most interesting and enlightening for those such as me who has much to learn.
Reared by a grandmother who taught us we could be pleasant if it killed us :-), my beloved sister and I dare not ever – under any circumstances whatsoever – even come close to religion and/or politics. Not wanting to cause a heart attack or stroke for ourselves or one another, we know that’s a serious risk.
Just know it’s a marvel the way The Forum often works for those who want to discuss religion. I send salutes to you all.
Robert said
Sorry to see you go, Stephen. I was hoping to eventually get around to discussing the relative uniqueness and originality of some of Jesus’ views with you.
Robert I’m not stepping off a cliff or moving to Mars. It’s just I feel this constant back and forth with godspell will have the effect of preventing new subscribers from feeling comfortable contributing to the blog. I’m not butthurt or pissed off just weary of having to correct g’s lack of understanding. I enjoy this blog and will look forward to enjoying it again.

I think you greatly overestimate my influence, not to mention your own.
And this is a discussion forum, not a blog. We have never clashed in the blog comments section, that I recall.
It’s weird that you didn’t see your fights with religious people here as a problem. I think you actually liked having them around, because you wanted somebody to take shots at.
I was a tougher problem, and you’re walking away from it. Your call. Forum’s going to have about the same amount of activity, with or without either of us.

Judith said
Not crazy at all! Remarkable, I’m thinking! Religion is being discussed and often those discussions are most interesting and enlightening for those such as me who has much to learn.
Reared by a grandmother who taught us we could be pleasant if it killed us :-), my beloved sister and I dare not ever – under any circumstances whatsoever – even come close to religion and/or politics. Not wanting to cause a heart attack or stroke for ourselves or one another, we know that’s a serious risk.
Just know it’s a marvel the way The Forum often works for those who want to discuss religion. I send salutes to you all.
Strangely, on a forum devoted to Christianity, you seem to be one of the few who takes its ethical precepts seriously. And I blush a bit while saying that.

godspell said
Strangely, on a forum devoted to Christianity, you seem to be one of the few who takes its ethical precepts seriously. And I blush a bit while saying that.
I very much appreciate what you’ve said but maybe I did not convey very well the point I was trying to make. My sister and I are southern women who tend to be pleasant at all times and under all circumstances but not when we try to discuss religion or politics with one another. It is impossible. Dr. Ehrman posted about the difficulties of discussing religion with his family now. He actually said he and his beloved mother no longer discuss religion together. That’s why it’s astounding to me The Forum works.

You can have good conversations on both subjects, but not with someone who is overly emotional on either subject. Both tend to invoke strong likes and dislikes. Mind you, discussing movies and TV shows can be worse in some cases. Incidentally, I think the Game of Thrones finale was brilliant. 🙂

It’s been a busy few days, and I think I missed the full implications of Stephen’s farewell.
He finds this lightly populated unmoderated forum with a paywall too abrasive because I’m here.
So his remedy is to go to a Reddit forum?
I’ve never visited one of those. He has no need to fear my ever turning up there. So there’s that.
But based on what I’ve read, Reddit is not without its problems.
Anyway, hope it works out for him. My guess is he knows people there, and he’ll feel better with a posse at his back.
I see somebody just started a topic there inquiring why if Noah had all the animals in the ark with him, there’s no Hebrew word for kangaroo.
Sounds–stimulating.
🙄

Stephen said
I will assume your use of the term “sworn atheist” is simply a euphemism for someone who publicly self-identifies as an atheist rather than someone who has actually gone to the trouble to take out an affidavit. As far as I know I’m the only one on this forum who has so identified and that was in response to some expressed misapprehensions about the subject. I do feel a responsibility to correct misinformation but I’m hardly a militant. It’s an opinion based on my knowledge and experience. I am interested in the philosophical problems that flow from both belief and its lack but I have zero interest in converting anyone to my point of view.
If I am militant at all it’s about church/state separation issues. If religious believers were content to simply practice their religion and not insist that their beliefs be privileged in our culture and politics and law you would hear nothing from me unless you wanted to have an argument over a beer which can be fun.
The misapprehensions can be puzzling. It seems that many people have an innate host of associations with the word “atheist” that they insist on projecting onto people who so identify. Our character and motives become suspect. For some reason we are expected to justify every comment and opinion made by some celebrity atheist. (This doesn’t happen quite so frequently since the heyday of the so-called New Atheists but it does still happen occasionally.) Sometimes there are hints of incipient Stalinism. Occasionally someone will hit you with an argument they find convincing but with no consciousness that this conversation has been going on for hundreds of years. What seldom happens strangely enough is for someone to ask me what I mean by “atheism”.
I can only be described as “anti-Christian” in the sense that I think its truth claims are false and that it is better to believe true things than false ones.
I am not aware of too many bible scholars who self-identify as atheists although I certainly haven’t taken a poll. Aside from Prof Ehrman the only other one I’m sure of is Gerd Ludemman.
I was not talking about you or this forum. I was talking about the subreddit. It’s called r/AcademicBiblical. And there is one guy, his name is something like “koine lingua”and he is extremely anti-religious. He does not like Catholics specifically and always hangs around Christian subreddits trying to tell people how stupid they are that they dare believe in such a “corrupt” book as the Bible.
I usually have no problem with people not being Christian or with people having negative opinions about either Christianity or the Bible, but this guy kind of goes overboard. The subreddit itself is good
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)
