Seeking Books that refute bart d ehrman

http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/p96.htm

Before Logos adds anti-Ehrman books to its stable, they need to resolve the problem of not offering an Ehrman Collection. There is a cottage industry of anti-Ehrman books out there from which to choose, but without having the documents themselves to compare with (Bart's books), I don't see the point.

Floyd Johnson

Not a book, but on topic is this debate:

Sorry for the link, but that is the format in which it comes.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/595974#Comment_595974

Yes, JoshRI ... you're instituting a debate.

And even worse, there was already a thread suggesting two well-grounded resources on Ehrman. Not a month ago? Trying searching 'Ehrman'.

Why not skip the 'in-debate-denial' and get down to business?

JoshInRI

I found one...yay.

https://www.logos.com/product/36453/fabricating-jesus-how-modern-scholars-distort-the-gospels

I wish they had put in one more page of preview....shucks

https://www.logos.com/images/PageScans/17716pages/001/17716_001_07.jpg

Anyone got others?

NB.Mick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596039#Comment_596039

I found one...yay.

https://www.logos.com/product/36453/fabricating-jesus-how-modern-scholars-distort-the-gospels

I wish they had put in one more page of preview....shucks

https://www.logos.com/images/PageScans/17716pages/001/17716_001_07.jpg

Anyone got others?

three mention him with name, see https://vyrso.com/products/search?q=bart+ehrman

and I think it's difficult to give advice regarding the setting you described in the first post. Bart Ehrman is a scholar who seems to adress various (related) questions and thereby makes use of a number of arguments, many of which will have been adressed / refuted by christian apologists. His various books have sparked respective counter-books by reputed NT scholars.

However, I personally wouldn't see "refuting Ehrman" as a good topic for a church setting. I'd go for one of the many topics at a time (and expect you'll find lots of resources in Logos and even Vyrso) such as

Can we trust the NT, especially: Is the Greek NT reliably transmitted?
What about the non-biblical documents - why aren't they Scripture and what can we learn from them (or not)
What about this "historical Jesus" - is he God?

tom

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596054#Comment_596054

However, I personally wouldn't see "refuting Ehrman" as a good topic for a church setting.

[y]

tom

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/595968#Comment_595968

Before Logos adds anti-Ehrman books to its stable, they need to resolve the problem of not offering an Ehrman Collection.

[y][y][y]

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596069#Comment_596069

If you are genuinely interested in the topic, go to the largest nearby library with a large collection of academic journals - look for reviews and replies related to Bart Ehrman. BTW I assume that you mean refuting particular arguments of Ehrman; some of his work is solid and you'd look the fool trying to refute it.

I am interested in any LOGOS protestant inexpensive, easy to read, easily shared at Bible Study, Biblically focused books that refute bart d ehrman.

You might try this one. It refutes him easily and lends itself well to church group studies. [:D]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596133#Comment_596133

Plus it's been approved for publication by King James. I don't think a single Ehrman volume has yet been approved by King James. And for good reason.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596157#Comment_596157

Plus it's been approved for publication by King James. I don't think a single Ehrman volume has yet been approved by King James. And for good reason.

[B][:D]

Mitchell

"Refute" was a bad choice of words if you don't want to start a debate, since it begs the question by assuming refutation is possible and available. Perhaps you're looking for books that "interact with" Ehrman from a conservative perspective?

tom

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596173#Comment_596173

"Refute" was a bad choice of words if you don't want to start a debate, since it begs the question by assuming refutation is possible and available. Perhaps you're looking for books that "interact with" Ehrman from a conservative perspective?

A very good way to articulate it. Agree or disagree, Ehrman knows his stuff!

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596257#Comment_596257

As the guys like to say 'Iron sharpens iron' as long as it's not too sharp.

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596269#Comment_596269

As the guys like to say 'Iron sharpens iron' as long as it's not too sharp.

Got a band-aid? [;)]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596257#Comment_596257

Ehrman knows his stuff!

And God knows God's stuff.

There is a lot of hair splitting for what was a very clear and simple request.

If the OP has asked for a work that refutes Arian, Celsus, the Mormons, or the Jehovah Witnesses, there would have been little debate about the appropriateness (or lack there of) of “refutes” versus “interacts” or the need to differentiate between “Arian” and “particular arguments of Arian”, or even wonder if the OP is genuinely interested in the subject matter. No one would have argued that without the primary sources about these unorthodox figures or organizations, there is no point having books in Logos that refute them as if Logos is the only place where these works are available and one cannot choose to borrow books instead of buying those that one deems doctrinally unsound (thus not supporting the “offender” financially).

It is not as if the OP has called Ehrman heretic and apostate (although there is an argument to be made about that in the context of historical Christianity). He just want books that do not merely interact with his controversial ideas but specifically refute them (let the OP be the judge if the refutation is successful or not). This is a legitimate request that should not lead to theological debates but only to suggestions for those who know about such resources.

If unlike the OP, you believe that Erhman is the best thing since sliced bread, please feel free to create another thread and request his resources and those of like minded authors as they refute traditional Christian doctrines and views of Scripture.

As a response to the OP, I suggest

How God Became Jesus: The Real Origins of Belief in Jesus' Divine Nature---A Response to Bart Ehrman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596289#Comment_596289

Alain, you must be a bit on the naive side.

You missed David's point that Logos is afraid to add Ehrman books due to the iron-sharpeners whose swords aren't quite up to Ehrman's level. The 'situation' is not unlike your example of Arian, Celcus, the Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses. In their time, the iron-sharpeners were death on them too.

Now for a great resource on iron: https://www.logos.com/product/9396/midian-moab-and-edom-the-history-and-archaeology-of-late-bronze-and-iron-age-jordan-and-north-west-arabia

Any geologists and especially pottery afficiendados will enjoy this resource. Metalurgy was in its infancy, trying to create an edge on swords.

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596293#Comment_596293

Any geologists and especially pottery afficiendados will enjoy this resource. Metalurgy was in its infancy, trying to create an edge on swords.

I thought they did that in Westfall. [;)]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596293#Comment_596293

Denise,

This might surprise you, but “naivety” and “missing the point” are not the only alternatives when someone does not see things as you do. David did not mention Logos’ motives and the reason why they do not offer Erhman’s work. I do not like speculating on what was not stated and will let you be the interpreter of David. The fact remains that Logos’ offering of resources on one side of the debate should not be contingent on offering resources from the other side as there are many other ways to get acquainted with the arguments from the other side outside Logos. One could argue that Ehrman’s resources are desirable in Logos. However, it should not be a prerequisite for books refuting Ehrman.

Logos is not the only Blacksmith in town, some workshops even rent iron for free to those who want to practice without buying. I would know, I am a regular customer.

But what does my naïve self know?

Doc B

Please note I am not initiating a debate

Sorry, Joshua, but you can't actually state an opinion in these forums without getting hammered from one side or the other. Ya gotta have some thick skin sometimes.It is unfortunate, but it is the forums. I'm as guilty as others sometimes.

As to your request, please jump on the bandwagon to get Michael Kruger's books on the Canon into Logos...they are tremendously valuable for the task you seek (but are not necessarily accessible to all ages and abilities). There are several Suggestions threads mentioning these books.

(BTW: The books are titled, "The Question of Canon" and "Canon Revisited", IIRC)

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596289#Comment_596289

or the need to differentiate between “Arian” and “particular arguments of Arian”,

Sorry, Alain, here you are wrong. There is always a need to distinguish between what is right and what is wrong in any study of the Bible or doctrine. Basic logic. Basic fairness. Basic awareness that God values every individual. It would be even more important were it Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses. And although it has not been Logos' policy, I personally believe that one should read the literature of the Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Northern Free Will Baptists, Catholics, Church of Christ before reading the literature that debunks them. Why? Because I have found that literature debunking others is among the most unreliable literature - factually and logically - available. So yes, I do think Logos needs both sides of each contraversial figure, sect or doctrine.

Doc B.'s suggestion to look at books on the creation of the canon is a very good one. Kruger isn't the only possibilty. The Canon of Scripture by F. F. Bruce is already in Logos.

David Ames

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596316#Comment_596316

I personally believe that one should read the literature of (...) before reading the literature that debunks them. Why? Because I have found that literature debunking others is among the most unreliable literature - factually and logically - available.

Amen! My Logos Library has shown that what X says about W is often not factual when I review the true teachings of W.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596316#Comment_596316

M.J.

I do not disagree with what you wrote above. My point was that the OP post was very clear and did not need all the disclaimers and tangents that many volunteered despite being kindly asked by the OP to refrain from doing it.

It was obvious to me that refuting “Bart Ehrman” meant refuting his controversial ideas not everything he has possibly written or said. The same would be true for Arian any other author out there.

No one is suggesting that fairness and consideration (and even love) should not be applied to all, since all (even the apostates and heretics) are made in the image of God.

The very narrow and specific request of the OP was not about the proper procedure in studying the people we disagree with, what should be read first, or what should be available in Logos for the sake of a balanced presentation of the views. While worth discussing, it was not in my view the point of the OP and does not belong in this thread without hijacking it.

The OP just wants to know what works are available (preferably in Logos)refuting Erhman. This simple request does not tell us if he has access to works by Erhman, if he has read them, and so on (and to be frank, it is none of our business unless he asked for advice on the proper procedure).

As such, the question was not about what Logos’ policy should be, what would be fair and balanced, but simply whether works taking a particular position from a particular perspective are available.

One should be able to make suggestions or requests without being subjected to lectures and sometimes demeaning comments about things that were not included in the original request especially when many of the respondent did little to answer the question of the OP. This is increasingly an issue in the Forums and some of us should know better.

JoshInRI

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596334#Comment_596334

Thanks Alain.[:)]

SineNomine

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596334#Comment_596334

Alain, I really appreciate your contributions to this discussion thus far.

(If, however, I may be allowed one tangential nitpick, it is that the man Arianism was named after was a priest named Arius, not Arian.)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596355#Comment_596355

SineNomine,

You are correct. I cannot believe myself that I have repeatedly called "our" North African Presbyter "Arian" (I would not have believed it if I didn't have my posts to prove it ). I guess I might have been Thinking about Bruce Arians of the Cardinals.

Shame on me especially since I deal with Arius, my second favorite heretic at least twice every semester.

I guess doing yard work in the afternoon under the Texas sun is not a good idea after all

Thanks for the correction!

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596350#Comment_596350

Thanks Alain.

My pleasure. [;)]

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596334#Comment_596334

One should be able to make suggestions or requests without being subjected to lectures and sometimes demeaning comments about things that were not included in the original request especially when many of the respondent did little to answer the question of the OP. This is increasingly an issue in the Forums and some of us should know better.

You are absolutely correct. In my defense, sometimes one responds not to the post in isolation but to the post in the context of their other posts. Sometimes this is obvious as in George and interlinears, Denise on post-2nd century, MJ on canon and Eastern rite. Sometimes it is based on knowledge that is not public as in XX's stroke damage or XX's mental disability . . . Sometimes it is less obvious. I should be careful to consider how a post will be read by someone new to the forums or unfamiliar with the individuals involved in the discussion

David Ames

I am interested in any LOGOS protestant inexpensive, easy to read, easily shared at Bible Study, Biblically focused books that refute bart d ehrman.

Does he need refuting?

"I do not take a stand on the theological question of Jesus’s divine status. I am instead interested in the historical development that led to the affirmation that he is God."

Ehrman, Bart D. (2014-03-25). How Jesus Became God: The Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher from Galilee (p. 3). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition.

Has he not thus taken himself out of the theological debate? Do his readers remember that this is what he said on page 3 when they get to the last page of the book?

Doc B

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596334#Comment_596334

One should be able to make suggestions or requests without being subjected to lectures and sometimes demeaning comments

[y][y][y][y][y][y][y][y][y][y][y][y][y][y][y][y][y][y]

It's really simple, people. Answer the question that was asked, or ignore it.

I have to keep telling myself that, because I've been part of the problem before. But if we would grant this basic courtesy to folks on the forums, they would be such a better place to come for help.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596621#Comment_596621

One should be able to make suggestions or requests without being subjected to lectures and sometimes demeaning comments

It's really simple, people. Answer the question that was asked, or ignore it.

You might try leading by example. (I see you are all thumbs.)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596623#Comment_596623

This reminds me of Bible study class. People should be able to ask their offending question without others being offended.

But no sooner is the offending question asked, then the offended have to 'ask back'. It just seems so wrong.

But to be more exacting, Josh is a big boy.

He put his query in the Suggestions forum. Which ALSO means other forum members are quite free to add their two cents concerning other resources contra the suggested, as well as point out other avenues of access (e.g. threads not weeks old, libraries, and old VWs that might have the desired resource in the front boot).

Some people enjoy back and forth. Others just feel it's so .... well, uncomfortable. Then there's the ones that like to light the fire cracker and ask everyone to ignore it.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596626#Comment_596626

[B][:D]

Just to let you know, Denise...I have a strict limit of three beers per thread. You have one more--use it wisely. [:P]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596621#Comment_596621

One should be able to make suggestions or requests without being subjected to lectures and sometimes demeaning comments

It's really simple, people. Answer the question that was asked, or ignore it.

I see you are all thumbs.

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/596054#Comment_596054

three mention him with name, see https://vyrso.com/products/search?q=bart+ehrman

Logos.com search has 15 resources => https://www.logos.com/products/search?q=bart+ehrman

including one co-edited by Bart Ehrman in 1995 => https://www.logos.com/product/7492/the-text-of-the-new-testament-in-contemporary-research that has Chapter 22 written by Bart Ehrman

Suggest searching Logos for:

Bart NEAR Ehrman

Found a personal book => Huge encyclopaedia: The Dictionary of Christianity and the Bible has 1,214 search results.

One Vyrso eBook => https://vyrso.com/product/28950/cold-case-christianity-a-homicide-detective-investigates-the-claims-of-the-gospels mentions Bart Erhman in three chapters

Another Vyrso eBook => https://vyrso.com/product/19565/godforsaken-bad-things-happen-is-there-a-god-who-cares-yes-heres-proof has 9 search results.

Thankful for these two Vyrso eBooks having been offered for $ 0.00 along with 745 others since Thanksgiving 2011.

If you are genuinely interested in the topic, go to the largest nearby library with a large collection of academic journals - look for reviews and replies related to Bart Ehrman. BTW I assume that you mean refuting particular arguments of Ehrman; some of his work is solid and you'd look the fool trying to refute it.

Logos offers => https://www.logos.com/product/15633/journal-of-modern-ministry-vol-4-issue-1-winter-2007 that has a critical review of Misquoting Jesus.

JETS volume 49 has a Misquoting Jesus review by Daniel B Wallace => https://www.logos.com/product/4624/journal-of-the-evangelical-theological-society

Theological Journal Library, vols. 1–15 => https://www.logos.com/product/33619/theological-journal-library-vols-1-15 includes JETS volume 54:
Chatraw, J. (2011). Disunity and Diversity: The Biblical Theology of Bart Ehrman. Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 54(3), 449.

Journal of Biblical Literature => https://www.logos.com/product/3626/the-journal-of-biblical-literature is included in Diamond and Portfolio

Search results included more journals so sorted results By Count:

Keep Smiling [:)]