Looking forward to reading your new book! I'm now more than halfway through your Heaven and Hell book.
On Our Controversial Sources About the Controversial Paul
It seems to me that it is fair to say that the book of Acts has parts of it that…
On A Self-Evaluation of My Self-Debate: Is the Book of Acts Historically Reliable?
I found it!!! The use of “many days” to mean a period of years is on the Meshe stele —…
On The Book of Acts is NOT RELIABLE! The Negative Case
Hi Dr. Bart, Long before I joined the blog--several years ago I recall--I e-mailed you personally about Dr. Eisenman. You…
On Who Cares if the Book of Acts is Historical??
Is it fair to say that Acts is somewhat reliable in at least giving us a window into the general…
On A Self-Evaluation of My Self-Debate: Is the Book of Acts Historically Reliable?
RE: "Titus" was merely Timothy's praenomen? Other than the two not ever being placed in the same exact settings, Paul's…
On The Book of Acts IS HISTORICAL! The Affirmative Argument
Right, I just wrote without doing research or clearly thinking about it. Nag Hammadi was 1945. I knew it was…
On What is the Book of Acts About?
Amen, Bart. Fact or fiction? Rhetoric or logic? Knowledge or faith? Truth or propaganda? Open mindedness or prejudice? Humanity will…
On A Self-Evaluation of My Self-Debate: Is the Book of Acts Historically Reliable?
Hi Bart. The problem with your affirmative team is not only that they have used this bogus argument about the…
On A Self-Evaluation of My Self-Debate: Is the Book of Acts Historically Reliable?
Dr. Ehrman, Several days ago you had a post about if there's any point to you doing public debates. I…
On A Self-Evaluation of My Self-Debate: Is the Book of Acts Historically Reliable?