The Insincerity and Delusional Mind of Bart Ehrman
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart D. Ehrman
I’ve just decided that you’re not really interested in looking at evidence, only in backing up what you already think; so there’s not much point going on any more about it. Best,
- BDE
Bart D. Ehrman
James A. Gray Professor
Department of Religious Studies
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Please Join My New Blog: Christianity in Antiquity (CIA): The Bart Ehrman Blog
At www.ehrmanblog.org
SUMMARY
MISTAKEN ASSUMPTION #1 - Bart's specific insincerity is to claim Christians are not interested in the evidence.
MISTAKEN ASSUMPTION #2 - That Bart is only interested in the evidence either way for his conclusion Jesus did not resurrect to prove He is God.
TRUTH OF HIS MISTAKEN ASSUMPTIONS - Bart doesn't care about the evidence, remaining hostile and independent of his Creator, thus, bound for Hell.
When we scan all the information in the human record the past 2000 years, nobody has been able to come up with a naturalistic explanation to account for the eyewitness testimony of the Apostles, so shouldn't you give into this evidence rather than assume there is still something out there to prove otherwise? I consider this an overwhelming preponderance of evidence beyond a reasonable so isn't the opposite of your claim true? That being, you are not interested in the evidence even though you really have seen it all?
Between us, you still haven't come up with a naturalistic explanation to account for the eyewitness testimony of the Apostles. All I am doing is placing the burden on you to come up with something viable, but instead of doing so, you accuse me of being not interested in the evidence. That seems insincere to me to accuse like that. We are examining naturalistic explanations so you should be able to come up with one to explain away the resurrection claim; if you fail to do so, then give your life to Christ and then you wouldn't go to Hell. Let go of the control of self and the independency you erect in hostility to God to let Him being your guiding light instead of the evil spirit in your innerman. Then the Holy Spirit would come in to indwell your spirit and receive a new life.
Are you a deist like Antony Flew (believe God exists but is an absentee landlord)? Because the evidence I see is that that which does not exist can't cause anything because it doesn't exist, so nature needs a cause outside of itself something, outside of time and space, being uncreated. This uncreated Creator is whom we call God. And there cannot be an infinite regress of cause and effects, because if there was you would, by that definition, have had an eternity to come into being before now, so you should have happened already, having had an eternity to do; so again, nature needs a cause outside of itself, outside of time and space, being uncreated.
At least you can see why I believe what I believe and the evidence I stand on. A reasonable person should not have me think otherwise because you give no evidence to the contrary. I just wished you would come to the table and at least have something for evidence for your belief, because so far you haven't any yet cling to your idea. I am personal, made in God's image, challenging you personally. May you operate in kind.
If you sense an authority in my words it is because I know that I have been chosen before the foundations of the world, and knowing this, because I was born-again Jan. 2001. When that happened my spirit was quickened, I received a new life -- eternal life. I received forgiveness of all my sins though still had much to overcome -- many crosses yet to bear. I died on the cross with Christ (called co-death) to my old man. And now live in my new man -- a new creation! I was once like you Bart lost, but now I'm found! The Holy Spirit came to indwell my spirit and so I became a member of the body of Christ. I can never lose salvation (John 10.28). I can not become like you, but you can yet become like me. The evidence is overwhelming to this fact. You have this one life to decide.
The lawyer in the Guinness Book of Records who won 245 cases in a row said the best case evidentially he has ever seen in his life was the life, death, burial, resurrection and deity of Christ. If evidence is something you value then why do you think the two best evidentialists in history (including Simon Greenleaf) are wrong and you are right? The greatest scientist who ever lived Albert Einstein was atheist and possibly a Christian (as discerned from quoting him). Why is he wrong and you are right? Why is the most published atheist of the 20th century Antony Flew wrong (he became a theist in 2004) and you are right? Perhaps you are just interested in the love of money from your book sales and speaking engagements so if you remain controversial it will put more money in your pocket.
I don't believe you care about evidence, but you do care about continuing to propagate your independency and hostility to God by your work, all the while never coming up with a viable naturalistic explanation to account for the eyewitness testimony of the Apostles. You leave it out there like a cliff hanger. I believe you keep searching for that ever elusive naturalistic explanation, but you have had already more than enough time and should have found it by now if it existed.
