Have you published a book, an article, an essay, or a poem (or something else) — either privately, or on the internet in some form, or with a journal/publishing company — that you would like more people to know about? Something you would like to share with other members of the blog? I have decided to allow blog members to make their work known to others who might be interested.
I will not be publishing the works here, or reprinting them. I will be allowing blog members to write brief descriptions of what they have produced, with a link that allows other blog members to have access either to the work itself or to a site that describes it and/or allows them to access (or purchase) it. For now this offer applies only to *written* materials (not artwork or other visual forms).
This is how it will work. First, requirements.
- You must be a member of the blog
- The writing needs to be related in SOME broad way with the interests of the blog. I say “broad” way because the way is indeed broad (even if the path is not easy), and there are many that go that way. For example, your writing could involve such topics as:
- The Bible in any sense (but see below, note 2 iii !!)
- Religion in any sense
- The obvious ones are Christianity and Judaism, but also other religions from, say Islam to Buddhism, so long as the *issues* you are addressing are relevant to the kinds of issues we deal with on the blog.
- Religious practices and beliefs in the modern world; or ancient; or medieval; etc.
- PLEASE NOTE. A very important I will not be posting anything that is trying to convert others to your religious views; or demonstrating the superiority of your religion to others (Mormonism is THE ONLY TRUTH! Islam is SUPERIOR TO ALL OTHER RELIGIONS! If you are not a Christian YOU WILL GO TO HELL! Nothing like that please).
- Ethics/Morality
- The Ancient World as connected with the Bible (so anything, for example, on Greece, Rome, Israel, etc., but probably not Japan. Unless you have some idea that, well, links Japan to the interests of the blog).
- Anything else of relevance. NOTE: I will NOT be posting anything that is inflammatory or irrelevant, for example, an essay devoted to pleading for the removal of Donald Trump or Nancy Pelosi from office; or to research focused on the reproductive systems of earthworms; or to the hunting practices of pre-colonial Australian Aborigines. These are all important topics, but not so much for the blog, unless your writing somehow shows its relevance. But even then, I’m not going to be posting divisive and partisan political rants, even though I myself am regularly tempted to make some.
- The writing has to be something that has already appeared in the public sphere in some form and is accessible on the internet – i.e., either available to be read there or accessed in some other way there (e.g., for purchase).
- It has to be by produced by you yourself, not your cousin or neighbor’s best friend.
- It can be any form of written communication, but I prefer it be something substantial – that can be described in two or three sentences.
Still interested? Here is what you need to do. (Please follow these instructions closely; those who deviate will be thrown into the outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth.)
- Send me a private email at [email protected]
- The Subject Line of your email should say: “Blog Writing Submission.”
- The Body of the email should include the following information, numbered:|
- The kind of writing it is (book, article, poem, song, whatever); the title; and the name, if any, under which it has been published (some people, of course, publish pseudonymously. I’ve always wanted to….)
- A link that either takes a person to the writing itself or to a site where it can be purchased or otherwise accessed.
- A description of two to four sentences of what the piece is (I give an example below); the description may not exceed 125 words.
- Any other information you would like me to have.
- IMPORTANT POINT. Your email should contain only ONE of your written works. You *can* however later send another submission two weeks later, and then another two weeks after that. Note: I will accept only one from you every two weeks, max.
Here is how I will proceed once I get some submissions. I will make a series of separate blog posts, to be posted over time (till eternity if necessary), each of which will include a number of the submissions I have received. Depending on what I receive, the posts could assume different shapes – e.g., I could post a bunch of submissions that are all books for purchase, or essays that have been privately distributed to family members, or whatever; or a bunch of submissions that are all about, say modern atheism, or the use of the Bible in America, etc.
In the post I will give the information you provide. That means that if you really want to achieve your goal of having people read your work, you need to make your description attractive and accurate.
If you send a highly inaccurate or misleading description – for example, if you describe your post as being about the understanding of the Bible’s views of homosexuality, but in fact it is a plea that Biden chooses Stacey Abrams as his running mate – then I will not accept any further submissions from you. Or, well, post that one! So keep the descriptions accurate, to the point, and enticing.
I imagine I will be encountering problems with this system, and so I reserve the right to scratch it or to make up more rules from time to time. Possibly starting tomorrow
OK, here is an example of the kind of submission I have in mind, based on my first trade book:
- Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millenium, by Bart D. Ehrman
- Available at: https://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Apocalyptic-Prophet-New-Millennium/dp/0195124731/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1592144351&sr=1-3
- This book focuses on what we can know about the historical Jesus – what he said, did, and experienced; how he died; and what happened next. The book also explains how we can know about him: what sources of information are available, within and outside the New Testament; why our most valuable sources, the Gospels, are also historically problematic, and what methods scholars have devised to study them. My thesis is that Jesus is best understood as an “apocalyptic prophet” who, like so many other Jews of his time, believed God was soon to intervene in history to overthrow the forces of evil and bring in his kingdom here on earth, with Jesus himself as its messianic king – all to happen within his own generation. (125 words)
- Nada
I’m looking forward to see what other blog-members have produced!
In a previous post, you concluded Paul viewed Jesus as an angel of God based on a close reading of Galatians 4:14. Does this mean Jesus was initially a lesser God and inconsistent with Jesus’ divinity as described in John 1?
Is this consistent with the four times an angel appeared in the old testament which many teach as being Jesus?
Yes, he thought Jesus began as a lower divine being but that at the resurrection he had been made equal with God himself. I talk about this at length in my book How Jesus Became God.
An ingenious idea!
The blog is fantastic and engaging as it is for readers. I am not keen to read advertising in the blog. Perhaps the advertising could be put in the forums or somewhere else? Is this really free advertising? Any thoughts on asking for donations for each advertisement to support charities?
This is not advertising in the normal sense, at all! It is people letting others know what they have written of relevance to the blog. Blog advertising would involve promoting products in order to generate revenue (for us). I’ve steadfastly refused to do so. My sense from the feedback I’ve been getting is that people would like to know what others on the blog have written. We’ll see if that’s true or not!
I love this initiative. I hope it will be extended to other forms of content in the future, like podcasts.
Anyway, I am looking forward to the submissions people do, I am sure we will discover great blogs and content when the compilation is ready 😀
Hi Bart
The writer of Acts, whether it be Luke or someone else, records the Apostle Paul defending the gospel at least three separate times with an apologetic that appears to be repetitive. How does a Biblical scholar address this situation, and does this speak to more than one original source?
Paul
The historian Thucydides tells us that since writers living later have no access to what was actually said on a particular occasion by the person they are describing in their historical account, they, the authors, have to make up the speeches as best they can, to indicate what in their judgment the person probably would have said. More or less. That’s what Luke is doing. He’s using the apologetic speeches in line with his own viwe of Paul, that he never did anything wrong, that he never violated any of the laws or customs of Judaism, that he was no threat to the Romans, and the only reason he has been arrested is because the recalcitrant Jews have risen up against him.
Would be interesting to see contributions by William Lane Craig to the blog.
I won’t be having him, but I’m having another extremely conservative evangelical do a guest post very soon, taking me on!
Hi Professor,
Is there any plans to translate your books to Arabic?
I have been involved into a lot of discussions with Arabic speakers but and I am sure your books can and will help a lot of people there.
I do speak Arabic and studied Translation as well, so I am happy to help
Please let me know
Thanks,
Emad
Yes, three of my books are in Arabic: Misquoting Jesus; Jesus Interrupted; and Forged.
Thanks 🙂
Hi Bart: Do you know at what point in history people stopped thinking of Eros in terms of a God that controlled their feelings and determined who they liked and who liked them as their essential identity, and morphed that initial understanding into marital commitment as the only way to experience any Eros at all?
Kathy Gaca, in her book “The Making of Fornication” (UCal, 2003) says that when men first heard they should regulate their sexuality as told to, they “howled with laughter.” Can you possibly key me in to how they changed their minds, or had it changed for them (a transformation of some sort) and just when that occurred in society? Thank you SO much! (even references for me to read will help)
I don’t think I know of that view (that it had to be in marriage) outside of Judaism and Christianity in the western world. (And I have no clue about the eastern). In the Greek and Roman worlds (and apparently elsewhere in the west before there was Greece and Rome) it was widely assumed that men, at least, would legitimately pursue eros outside of the bonds of traditional marriage (both before and while married). Not women though!