5 ms·

I love this area of study. Bart Ehrman has very interesting books on the topic.

freedomben 2y ago
Second this. If you have any interest in the scholarship behind the ancient world, Bart Ehrman's books are phenomenal. He is one of the few people who can be both world leading scholar, and great writer who can really connect with a layperson and academic alike. He is also genuinely one of the best human beings I know, and I don't say that lightly. I also really enjoyed his book about suffering. If you've struggled with your faith over the amount of suffering in the world, and/or yearn for answers to those hard questions, I highly recommend "God's Problem: The Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question - Why We Suffer." It actually goes far beyond just the Bible (though that is covered very, very well) and includes much philosophy and other things. It's a deeply personal book where he opens up about his own struggle and really allows himself to be vulnerable. For me, I was struggling deeply with these questions and had nobody to talk to. Everyone close to me in life had strong faith and was perfectly satisfied with dismissing the problem as "God knows. He is perfect. That's enough for me." The book was like having a brilliant and deeply thoughtful friend to have a conversation with, and it was an important point in my life. I'll be forever grateful to Bart for writing it. Disclaimer: Bart is a friend of mine, but I read most of his books before meeting him.
- wahern 2y ago
  Related Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_evil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_evil The question is a central one in Western philosophy and religion. Less so in some other traditions. But it predates Christianity.
  - PittleyDunkin 2y ago
    It's certainly touched on in Ecclesiastes, albeit more obliquely than presented in the wikipedia article.
prophesi 2y ago
ReligionForBreakfast is a Youtube channel I'd also recommend. Henry has hosted Bart Ehrman several times.
- berkeleynerd 2y ago
  Seconded. Great scholarship is represented on this channel.
david927 2y ago
Me too. I can recommend Dan McClellan, who's an Oxford-education biblical scholar and has some books and makes videos on the topic.
EdwardDiego 2y ago
I also recommend Pheme Perkins.
runjake 2y ago
For others that may be curious: https://www.amazon.com/stores/Bart-D.-Ehrman/author/B001I9RR7G https://www.amazon.com/stores/Bart-D.-Ehrman/author/B001I9RR...
azangru 2y ago
Richard Carrier's "On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt" is great. He wrote about Q (he isn't a fan) in his blog, which seems to be struggling at the moment. https://www.richardcarrier.info https://www.richardcarrier.info
- nemo 2y ago
  For the record, Carrier is a crank who you should have also many good reasons to doubt his word on topics in ancient history since he always works with an agenda, evidence for him is only useful when it fits. Contemporary historians don't take him seriously, and no one really should, his work isn't serious.
- PittleyDunkin 2y ago
  No serious historian of which i'm aware questions the existence of Jesus despite the apparent dearth of any contemporaneous evidence. His divinity? Sure, absolutely. But he's hardly the only radical eschatological/messianic jew to emerge from the period, and believing he was fabricated involves making even larger assumptions that there also isn't contemporaneous evidence for. Occam's razor points pretty clearly towards a historical Jesus (as unsatisfying as that answer is).
  - azangru 2y ago
    > No serious historian of which i'm aware questions the existence of Jesus I am not sure what makes Carrier a non-serious historian. He is trained in ancient history and applies conventional historical methodology to his studies (perhaps the only non-conventional addition is that he tries to add Bayesian statistics to it). He studies and cites the available primary sources. He researches and cites the available scholarly literature. He lays out his arguments both in his book (published under peer review, which he will be the first to inform his audience :-) and now in its second edition) and in various talks. He has participated in a number of debates, in which supposedly serious historians had a chance to demonstrate, with evidence, the error of his ways; yet, to my knowledge, none ever did. Bart Ehrman refuses to engage with him directly; so they resort to sniping at each other in their blogs or youtube appearances. > But he's hardly the only radical eschatological/messianic jew to emerge from the period, and believing he was fabricated involves making even larger assumptions that there also isn't contemporaneous evidence for. As Carrier would point out, Jesus wouldn't be the first figure thought to be historical, who, upon further scrutiny, would turn out to be fictional. Moses is one example of such a figure who was believed to have existed; yet, it seems that the consensus among modern historians is that he was an invention. Another example much closer to us is Ned Ludd, the supposed originator of the Luddite movement, whom many treated as historical (see e.g. Encyclopædia Britannica from 1911), yet who now, historians agree, was fictional. Also, Carrier doesn't claim to have disproven the historicity of Jesus. What he is saying is that he thinks there is a pretty strong case to be made against it, and that he would give about a 60% chance to him being a myth.

Second this. If you have any interest in the scholarship behind the ancient world, Bart Ehrman's books are phenomenal. He is one of the few people who can be both world leading scholar, and great writer who can really connect with a layperson and academic alike. He is also genuinely one of the best human beings I know, and I don't say that lightly. I also really enjoyed his book about suffering. If you've struggled with your faith over the amount of suffering in the world, and/or yearn for answers to those hard questions, I highly recommend "God's Problem: The Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question - Why We Suffer." It actually goes far beyond just the Bible (though that is covered very, very well) and includes much philosophy and other things. It's a deeply personal book where he opens up about his own struggle and really allows himself to be vulnerable. For me, I was struggling deeply with these questions and had nobody to talk to. Everyone close to me in life had strong faith and was perfectly satisfied with dismissing the problem as "God knows. He is perfect. That's enough for me." The book was like having a brilliant and deeply thoughtful friend to have a conversation with, and it was an important point in my life. I'll be forever grateful to Bart for writing it. Disclaimer: Bart is a friend of mine, but I read most of his books before meeting him.

wahern 2y ago
Related Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_evil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_evil The question is a central one in Western philosophy and religion. Less so in some other traditions. But it predates Christianity.
- PittleyDunkin 2y ago
  It's certainly touched on in Ecclesiastes, albeit more obliquely than presented in the wikipedia article.

prophesi 2y ago

ReligionForBreakfast is a Youtube channel I'd also recommend. Henry has hosted Bart Ehrman several times.

berkeleynerd 2y ago
Seconded. Great scholarship is represented on this channel.

david927 2y ago

Me too. I can recommend Dan McClellan, who's an Oxford-education biblical scholar and has some books and makes videos on the topic.

EdwardDiego 2y ago

I also recommend Pheme Perkins.

runjake 2y ago

For others that may be curious: https://www.amazon.com/stores/Bart-D.-Ehrman/author/B001I9RR7G https://www.amazon.com/stores/Bart-D.-Ehrman/author/B001I9RR...

azangru 2y ago

Richard Carrier's "On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt" is great. He wrote about Q (he isn't a fan) in his blog, which seems to be struggling at the moment. https://www.richardcarrier.info https://www.richardcarrier.info

nemo 2y ago
For the record, Carrier is a crank who you should have also many good reasons to doubt his word on topics in ancient history since he always works with an agenda, evidence for him is only useful when it fits. Contemporary historians don't take him seriously, and no one really should, his work isn't serious.
PittleyDunkin 2y ago
No serious historian of which i'm aware questions the existence of Jesus despite the apparent dearth of any contemporaneous evidence. His divinity? Sure, absolutely. But he's hardly the only radical eschatological/messianic jew to emerge from the period, and believing he was fabricated involves making even larger assumptions that there also isn't contemporaneous evidence for. Occam's razor points pretty clearly towards a historical Jesus (as unsatisfying as that answer is).
- azangru 2y ago
  > No serious historian of which i'm aware questions the existence of Jesus I am not sure what makes Carrier a non-serious historian. He is trained in ancient history and applies conventional historical methodology to his studies (perhaps the only non-conventional addition is that he tries to add Bayesian statistics to it). He studies and cites the available primary sources. He researches and cites the available scholarly literature. He lays out his arguments both in his book (published under peer review, which he will be the first to inform his audience :-) and now in its second edition) and in various talks. He has participated in a number of debates, in which supposedly serious historians had a chance to demonstrate, with evidence, the error of his ways; yet, to my knowledge, none ever did. Bart Ehrman refuses to engage with him directly; so they resort to sniping at each other in their blogs or youtube appearances. > But he's hardly the only radical eschatological/messianic jew to emerge from the period, and believing he was fabricated involves making even larger assumptions that there also isn't contemporaneous evidence for. As Carrier would point out, Jesus wouldn't be the first figure thought to be historical, who, upon further scrutiny, would turn out to be fictional. Moses is one example of such a figure who was believed to have existed; yet, it seems that the consensus among modern historians is that he was an invention. Another example much closer to us is Ned Ludd, the supposed originator of the Luddite movement, whom many treated as historical (see e.g. Encyclopædia Britannica from 1911), yet who now, historians agree, was fictional. Also, Carrier doesn't claim to have disproven the historicity of Jesus. What he is saying is that he thinks there is a pretty strong case to be made against it, and that he would give about a 60% chance to him being a myth.