Rating: 
Summary: One sided
Review: As a student of professor Ehrman, I think that he does a terrific job of explaining *his* view of the NT documents, their context, and their importance. What it does not address is the opposite side of the issue such as a new book due out called "The Case against Q." Much of Ehrman's view is based on this Q source theory...and when/if it falls, then so do the claims in this book. Also, many of the claimed "contradictions" in the book are not actually contradictions. Some are paradox, and some are "contradictions" that have long ago been cleared up. However, if you are looking for an interesting read, I highly recommend this book...just not from a theological perspective(which was clearly not his aim). I would, however, take it all with a grain of salt. Make sure to read books on the other side, because you will not find the other side's views here.
Rating: 
Summary: Dream-textbook for teaching the New Testament
Review: Bart Ehrman's 'The New Testament' is a superb work for teachers seeking to assign their students a readable, reliable, and challenging introduction to the history of earliest Christianity and its literature. Incidentally, it would also be a fine first stop for intelligent readers who want to know what historians of early Christianity are saying about the birth of this religion and the origins of the New Testament. The work is engagingly written, with an occasional and not inappropriate first-person, and it has the merit of representing balanced, critical positions in the much debated-territory of New Testament studies. Ehrman's disinclination to accept a variety of trendy and dubious by-ways in New Testamental studies can be seen in his treatment of three areas. First, while not neglecting the Greco-Roman context, he positions Jesus squarely in the Jewish context and sees him as an apocalyptic teaching bent on internal reform of Judaism. Miracles are part of the picture, as they were for other charismatic Jewish teachers of the time (cf. the work of Geza Vermes). Ehrman declines to follow the scholars who with zeal and imagination claim to sort out editorial levels (and the communities or theological trajectories) in the hypothetical 'Q' document ('Q' = German 'Quelle' or 'source', i.e., the hypothetical sayings source lying behind the commonalities in Matthew and Luke and not in Mark). Thirdly in this regard, Ehrman refuses the common move of positing the existence of gnostic Christianity (or any 'gnosticism) prior to the first hard evidence for it in the late first or early second century. So this is a book that you can trust to pass on the generally accepted theories and to reject the more speculative moves of the field. For those interested in using this work as a textbook in a New Testament or Early Christianity course, I recommend it highly, having used it for two years in a row with excellent results. It is very readable, has something of a personal tone, and includes Ehrman's own attempts to explain the process of learning to students, e.g., his claim that one learn by comparison. There is a 'history of religions' strain to the book, which comes out in his insistence on religion as an aspect of culture and human life, as well as in his recognition (commonplace in the field) of early Christianity having consisted in a variety of early Christianities. The book comes with nice illustrations, maps, reproductions of ancient art, etc. (limited to B&W, no doubt to keep the price down). The book has what to me is the merit of posing challenging historical questions about early Christianity that make students think hard about religion. At the same time Ehrman, according to his own design, is theologically neutral. He does not feel compared to do theology (or undo theology!) for his readers; he merely states largely accepted theories which the reader or professor is free to use as a basis for developing his or her own questions, be they theological or historical. Would that we had a text of this sort for teaching an introduction to the Hebrew Bible!
Rating: 
Summary: Jesus is the Christ!
Review: I can't believe someone would try to write a book about the writings of the New Testament encompasing the Life of Jesus Christ who doesn't recognize that Jesus is the Christ -- the Son of God! It appears that Mr. Ehrman doesn't have a conviction that Jesus was divine -- that he was the literal Son of God and that his ministry encompased more than good teachings; the ministry of Jesus brought about the atonement -- which gives man the freedom from sin. (I guess if you don't recognize that man is burdened by sin, then you don't need a redemtion (a Sacrifice) from sin). Well, there are too many good books about the REAL Teachings of Jesus Christ, that you don't need to waste your time reading about the Teachings of Jesus from a non-believer!
Rating:
Summary: One sided
Review: I have been rather actively reading Early Christian and New Testament books over the past five years or so and this book is far and away THE best in its class!It's introductory but not shallow, historical not dogmatic, attempts to summarize many viewpoints without bogging down, and is an easy read. I cannot recommend this book enough to anyone who wants a historical introduction to the New Testament.
Rating:
Summary: If you like this book, you're NOT a Christian
Review: I just can't believe so many people would recommend this book over other (more conservative) NT intro books. Ehrman obviously has an agenda: to repudiate the teachings of the Christian Church (Roman Catholic or Protestant) regarding Jesus, the Apostles, and Paul. Thinking that the NT is another uninspired historical document he laughs off many beliefs that the Church has held throughout the ages regarding the latter half of the Bible. If a seminary or Bible college uses this text in their classrooms they are promoting anti-Christian teachings and should be censured by the larger believing community. Sorry, but if you want a good NT intro text try ones by Carson/Moo/Morris, Robert H. Gundry, or Achtemeier/Green/Thompson.
Rating: 
Summary: Everything Put into One Nice Volumne
Review: I loved this book because it put everything so much into what is being researched about the bible into one volumue. Normally, one has to stife through loads of different books, to get a sense of what everyone is arguing about. This book makes that task so much easier.
Rating:
Summary: Help for a doubting Thomas
Review: I loved this book! It enabled me to understand why there are so many contradictions in the bible. I was a fundalmentalist, but I couldn't accept the explanations that I was hearing about why there were numerous contradictions in the bible. I was taught that God doesn't make mistakes, so why were there contradictions in the bible? It seemed to me that too many Christians just accept what they hear/read without really questioning what they are hearing/reading. It was enlightening to discover Ehrman, who takes a practical approach towards reading scripture and asks questions that many might shy away from. Mark's gospel always shows Jesus asking "WHAT DO YOU THINK?". I believe that God wants human beings to think and Ehrman does just that: think. However, Ehrman just doesn't think alone, he actually researches the many points of views and other data available regarding scripture to build a framework for better understanding the new testament. I am in my twenties and like many other younger people today, I am searching for a deeper meaning to life and a better way to live it. A literal reading of scripture just doesn't cut it for a lot of us. Maybe it's because we were brought up to question things. Mistrust is prevalent throughtout our American society today. Ehrman enables those who are skeptical about the gospels to better understand them. Hopefully, this understanding will lead the individual(s) reading it in the best direction for them. Thank you Mr. Ehrman!
Rating:
Summary: The New Testament
Review: I thought that overall the book was OK because it gets readers to thinking about many issues that perhaps they had never thought of. The problem I had with this book is that like most books about religion it is biased with half truths and faulty logic that you would need to study further and know alot about history to find them. The arguments he poses are also nothing new. For example, he mentions Apollonius of Tyana as if he was considered another Jesus but he left out the fact that the story about Apollonius was written by one source (Philostratus)in the third century by someone who had financial gain to write a good story. To imply that Jesus was considered just another Apollonius type of wonder worker is just not historically accurate. There are many other examples of stuff that was just left out of the book which should have been included. The author takes from the New Testament statements he wants to use that imply Jesus thought the end was near and that he never thought he was the messiah etc. but other statements that contradict his theory he discounts as being non-reliable. When he states that "most scholars agree..." or according to most scholars ... this I don't think is the case. I recommend this book but only if the reader also looks at other books with different points of view and decides for him/herself which sounds the most logical.
Rating:
Summary: This is an excellent intro to the New Testament
Review: I'm an undergraduate who had to buy this text for a course last year, and still find myself turning back to it months after the course has finished. Ehrman writes with great clarity, and covers a lot of territory. He tends to take the mainstream position on a number of issues (Markan priority, the Two-Source hypothesis, etc). An exception to this, perhaps, is his insistence that Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet (which Ehrman has written an entire book about). I totally disagree with him on that one. Ehrman also provides a good overview of the debate over the alleged Pauline authorship of 2 Thessalonians, Colossians, and Ephesians, and his explanation of why Paul could not have written the Pastoral epistles should leave no one unconvinced.
Rating:
Summary: Misplaced historical references and interpretations
Review: In reading Ehrman's textbook, it became quickly obvious that the genre is New Testament criticism. Not criticism in exegetical terms, but criticism in downgrading terms. Ehrman posits many positions of his own by shrewdly engaging in verbal "gimicktry". His implicit comments regarding aspects of Christianity when compared to Greco-Roman practices are unfounded in fact. Like a courtroom lawyer, he makes statments that can't be substantiated under cross. In one section of the text he describes, Christian practices as rituals that have the same words repeated over and over again in the same manner and that they have been conducted in this way for centuries. The context being any Christian celebration of significance, but clearly aimed at the Catholic Christian Mass. Having made his comment about the duration of the same words invoked for so long during similar celebrations, he leaves the reader with an implied misdirected sense of purpose for the celebrations. He never commits to the question, "Is this a good thing or a bad thing that the same words have been used for centuries? Indeed one would wonder if Ehrman would have his readers ask the question; "Is the existence of a God, a good thing or a bad thing? His text would resound with his answer, it doesn't matter. And since it apparently doesn't matter to Ehrman, what ultimately is his point in writing this text. An impressionable young student would be ripe for noncritical acceptance of his interpretation of events in history. The text does not list specific sources for his suppositions, but rather provides a litany of whole books to read of the same genre. I doubt that this text would standup under cross by other theologians like N.T. Wright. Wright's writings counter modern historians methodologies of review of the ancient texts.
|
