This is my concluding review of Ehrman’s How Jesus Became God, giving a summary of the book and my overall impressions. For a slower in-depth walk through the book, its arguments, and the reply book How God Became Jesus, check out my series Ehrman’s Christology War.
» Read the entire post: Review: How Jesus Became God by Bart Ehrman »
I’m continuing to work through Ehrman’s How Jesus Became God and Bird’s (et al.) How God Became Jesus. You can find each part in the series here. Now we’re turning to the Christology debates in the early centuries.
» Read the entire post: Ehrman’s Christology War #6: Church Debates & Heresies »
I’m continuing to work through Ehrman’s How Jesus Became God and Bird’s (et al.) How God Became Jesus. You can find each part in the series here.
» Read the entire post: Ehrman’s Christology War #5b: Jesus as God »
I’m continuing to work through Ehrman’s How Jesus Became God and Bird’s (et al.) How God Became Jesus. You can find each part in the series here.
» Read the entire post: Ehrman’s Christology War #5a: Jesus as God »
I’m continuing to work through Ehrman’s How Jesus Became God and Bird’s (et al.) How God Became Jesus. You can find each piece in the series here. Due to the size of this summary, I will offer my response and Simon Gathercole’s in a future post.
» Read the entire post: Ehrman’s Christology War #4a: Earliest Christology »
In How Jesus Became God Bart Ehrman cites a number of “doubting texts”: texts where the disciples apparently didn’t believe Jesus’ resurrection appearances. Erhman’s conclusion, on the basis of these (below) texts, is that probably only a few disciples experienced “visions” of Jesus, and that these “doubting texts” were included to represent the reaction of those who heard of the visions, not the reaction of those who experienced them. I didn’t have space in my last post, so I want to briefly examine the texts he uses as support of this idea.
© 2023 My Digital Seminary. All rights reserved.
Theme by Anders Norén.
