@JonEricson Bart Ehrman ... le sigh.

@swasheck Yeah. I enjoy reading his popular books because he has such good insights 90% of the time (even when I disagree with him). But the other 10% is head-scratching.

Might be a source for more questions. ;-)

Thanks for your answer, by the way. It's almost certain to be the one I accept.

Ehrman is one of the more influential "scholars" followed by pop media.

He's like the Dan Brown of non-fiction.

He's very smart, and very influential ... but severely misguided.

@swasheck Oh, I wouldn't say that. He's a better story teller. ;-)

As such, I think that questions based on Ehrman are a good idea. However, he publishes a bunch of his own retreads. He's very keen on casting doubt on the oral tradition and manuscript transmission.

@JonEricson Hah. True. But Brown captivated the national audience with fiction that had this air of mystery and history that made it just plausible to question "everything" about Christianity.

@swasheck I can think of a couple more question based on Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code.

Ehrman, for his part, masks his present publications in past research :)

@JonEricson Have at it. I'm not familiar with that.

@swasheck I think it's interesting that he's been called out on his logical and historical mistakes, yet keeps on repeating the same arguments.

I was, however, going to recommend The Historical Reliability of the Gospels by Craig Blomberg. It's a good read - and he was my thesis adviser :)

@JonEricson He holds popular sway which is far more important and relevant than rational thought and logic. See: Outrage at "You Are Not Special" commencement speech

@swasheck Awesome. I'll see if I can dig up a copy.

@JonEricson I live in Colorado so this article is pretty interesting. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts:

relevantmagazine.com/current/nation/…

@swasheck I love Colorado! My son was born in Denver while we were visiting for my brother's graduation from the Air Force Academy. My heart broke when I heard the Flying W was burned.

@swasheck I'm starting to read it. I'll let you know.

@swasheck In the midst of the Colorado fires, and any disaster, the first response of Christians should be to reflect the grace, compassion and mercy of Jesus. We are called to care for all who—regardless of their opinions, affiliations, beliefs—have lost everything. Perhaps, if we do this this, people will see and know God is not angry.

I really agree with the article. I don't know why Christians (and especially us Evangelicals) are so quick to blame disasters on sinfulness.

What do you think?

Yeah. He's a pastor at a local church in Denver. I completely agree. The Haiti thing just really set me on edge. If that's the sort of leadership that is being given to the Evangelical community, I want new leadership/

It completely distorts the gospel saying, "You're too far gone for the Gospel to have any influence in your life and community. Therefore, God is punishing you."

But it's conspicuously absent in these fires - especially in such a hotbed of Evangelicalism

@swasheck I agree. I've been writing the "Evangelical" position on the Christianity blog and I keep running across reasons to disassociate myself with the movement.

But I can't get past the notion that it's built on a solid foundation. Most of what we see in the "leadership" is actually fringe players, in my opinion.

(But I guess it doesn't sell books/make the news to be sensible.)

@JonEricson The reality is that every "movement" has its flaws.

Yep.