Critical Evaluation of Jesus, Interrupted
&
Rational Reasons to have Hope in Jesus Christ
Ehrman, Bart D. Jesus, Interrupted. New
York, NY: Harper Collins, 2009.
In Jesus, Interrupted Bart D. Ehrman
begins by expressing concern for those ignorant of Jesus and unaware of the
variants in the New Testament. The skeptic set on
doubting the validity of the Scriptures will feel inspired by this book, the
Christian may feel led to study more, ultimately the key arguments are
unimpressive. Readers recognize Ehrman wants people to accept Church
leaders have been hiding the truth about the Bible from the
congregation. After accepting the historical-critical method for studying the
Bible readers can begin to discover all the textual contradictions such as
those presented in the second chapter. For those curious about who the
historical Jesus was if He was not the risen Lord, Ehrman provides his
scholarly opinion in the fifth chapter of this cash grab book. However,
according to the leading critical scholar’s view on ancient historical texts
the account of Jesus promoted in this book is highly improbable. Ehrman writes
about how readers can discover some truths about the historical Jesus but
ultimately tries and fails to explain how and why the Gospel writers changed
the truth.
Summary of Jesus, Interrupted
In the first chapter Ehrman provides a decent
summary of the historical-critical method, which focusses on questions like who
the original writers were and what the message was initially intended to say.
Apparently, students are in for a shock upon receiving answers to some of the
questions shared by Ehrman.[1] After briefly explaining how to find
discrepancies in the Bible, Ehrman goes on to provide multiple examples. A
personal story is shared about an older woman who was frustrated to learn this
knowledge was being kept from so many Christians.[2] Apparently, readers are intended to be
disturbed by this news, and maybe many are. Ehrman was certainly disturbed upon
first learning about the discrepancies in the Scriptures. Ehrman was a
fundamentalist when first going to seminary, so naturally he went from one extreme
to the next after learning about textual criticism. As a fundamentalist Ehrman
believed in the more Western view that the English translation of the Bible
must be taken literally, all of it! Regardless of what truly motivates this
scholar, essentially Ehrman is just wanting students to be critical thinkers
when analyzing the Scriptures, and indeed they should be.[3]
If the goal set forth in the second chapter is
met, by the end readers will recognize and accept the Biblical discrepancies
Ehrman feels are the "most interesting or important ones."[4] Readers will learn the value of
"horizontal reading" where the Gospels are compared to discover
similarities and differences between the texts.[5] From the Gospels to the alleged writings of
the Apostle Paul, Ehrman seeks to enlighten readers to some of the more
apparent and troubling contradictions in the New Testament. Evidently Ehrman
wants readers to conclude the Bible is not truly inerrant, each Gospel must be
read as a separate message from the others in the Bible, and the discrepancies
make it difficult to find the truth in these accounts.[6]
Readers are called to reconsider C.S. Lewis
point regarding whether Jesus was a lunatic, a liar, or the Lord. Ehrman
believes these are not the only options and the more reasonable conclusion is
the Jesus of the Bible is more legend than truth.[7] Apparently, after years of research Ehrman came to believe Jesus never
actually claimed to be divine, and according to Ehrman this is evident in the
synoptic Gospels.[8] Even if this were true, Ehrman, (along with
every other scholar), knows Jesus was sentenced to die because the Pharisees
believed He claimed to be equal with God (Mark 14:61-64). Readers are
consistently reminded on how inconsistent the texts are, however Ehrman still
tries to explain who the historical Jesus probably was.[9] Big reveal is when readers are informed on
how the "majority of scholars" have concluded Jesus was an
apocalyptic prophet who believed the Son of Man was coming to judge the world.[10] Obviously, if Christ did not actually claim
to be divine readers must question the actual purpose of Christ death and
resurrection, and of course readers must wonder if these miracles ever even
occurred.
Before addressing the resurrection and other
miracles attributed to Christ readers are reminded on how Ehrman is simply
sharing what has been taught in seminary for almost a century.[11] Considering these methods Ehrman argues
according to the criterion for dissimilarity the miracles attributed to Jesus,
especially the resurrection, do not pass the test.[12] According to Ehrman, "Historians can only establish what probably
happened in the past, and by definition, miracles are the least probable of
occurrences."[13] Readers are left with the impression that the
views shared in this book are accepted by most who received the same education.
Based on this book it would seem after learning about the discrepancies in the
Bible most graduating seminary will either lose their faith, or whatever faith
left is so blind they are in denial and delusional.
Evaluation
In Jesus, Interrupted, Ehrman shared a
personal conviction all Christians should value, being that if one is committed
to God, one must also be committed to the truth.[14] Ehrman intentionally gives the impression
that the historical-critical method is valuable because the focus is on finding
discrepancies in the Bible.[15] The impressive number of early manuscripts
and the significant lack of discrepancies inspired former atheist and
sceptic homicide detective J. Warner Wallace to believe in the incarnation and
the resurrection. Strange how after using similar investigative methods as this
cold case detective the once faithful Ehrman came to such different
conclusions, resulting in a loss of faith. The truth proves compelling enough
to have convinced numerous intellectuals the disciples were not lying, and the
resurrection occurred, thus modern scholars who claim the evidence is not
substantial are either in denial or intentionally lying.[16]
After reading the first chapter titled "A
Historical Assault on Faith," readers will know Ehrman enjoys finding
discrepancies in the Bible, as he even shares his favorite mistake from the
Gospel of John.[17] Ehrman refers to this favored discrepancy as being “strange” because
the contradiction comes directly from the words of Christ.[18] Oh dear. Did Jesus forget both Thomas and Peter had asked Him where He
was going (John 13:36, 14:5)? Well, readers need only look at the end of the
chapter to see the context changes as Christ stated, “Come now, let us leave”
(John 14:31). Where Christ commented on how His disciples did not ask Him where
He was going in chapter sixteen this is not the same day as the prior chapter.
Furthermore, the proper reading of the word “asks” in the Greek as quoted by
Christ in chapter sixteen is in the present tense. Ehrman leaves readers
thinking there are some serious contradictions in the text, but if this
apparent discrepancy found in John is as serious as they come the faithful
readers need not be discouraged in the least.
If one believed the writer to be an unbiased
seeker of historical truth there might be confusion after reading Ehrman state,
"These mistakes involved discrepancies and contradictions, but they also
involved mistaken notions about God, who he really was and what he really
wanted."[19] Apparently, after a "close reading"
of the Bible one may be shocked to discover the questionable character of God,
like in the case where He commands the killing of all who lived in Jericho.[20] An unimpressive argument is presented when Ehrman judges God as
immoral for sending people to Hell, as any seminary graduate can explain why a
holy God punishes unrepentant sinners. Apparently, the problem of evil is the
real reason Ehrman is agnostic, and according to Ehrman the Bible does not
provide a clear answer to this problem. There are unanswered questions, but in
Christ God demonstrated His powerful Love, thus trying to understand His grace
proves more difficult than understanding His judgement (1 Cor. 1:18, John 3:16
NIV). Ultimately, Jesus, Interrupted successfully provides a clearer
understanding on why seminary graduates like Ehrman distrust the Bible and God.
Sadly, to those perishing the message of the cross is absurd, thus the love of
God cannot be seen (1 Cor. 1:18).
Considering the problem of evil and the
trustworthiness of the Scriptures there is no other religious text that
provides such a personal and satisfying response as the Bible. Is truly too bad
Ehrman gave up so soon, for now his potential wisdom and insight is quite
limited without spiritual growth. Personally, recognizing my limitations often
leads me to the Scriptures for answers, and more often I feel led to read the
words of Christ. Would be foolish to cease trusting in the Scriptures because
of what I do not understand. One believes everything is a meaningless accident
starting with an impossibly but luckily fine-tuned universe that randomly
appeared, and another believes in the God of the Bible. Either view is going to
take a degree of faith. Rational faith will always be necessary, but it is
unreasonable to believe absolute proof is essential before one can trust in the
Bible, hence why blessed are those who have not seen but still believe (John
20:29).[21] The Bible provides answers to the bigger
questions, from the cause of the universe to the meaning of life. There are key
Biblical doctrinal revelations seemingly beyond human imagination,
extradimensional concepts like Christ being the Word, Truth, Life, God being
Love, multiple members in the Church making up the one Body of Christ, and of
course the Trinity (John 14:6, 1:1, Rom. 12:5, 1 John 4:8, 2 Cor. 13:14 NIV).
Discoveries in astrophysics prove valuable because these Biblical doctrines are
best explained as coming from an extradimensional reality.[22] When considering the limits of human
imagination, the selfish nature of humanity, and psychic numbing it is highly
unlikely ancient humans would make up the Triune nature of God or the
sacrificial love of Christ. Humans can imagine aliens with humanoid or animal
like characteristics or imagine morally flawed selfish gods but whatever one
imagines is in some way inspired by what has been observed. Though one may have
the audacity to argue otherwise, no man can imagine what a mother experiences when
giving birth to a child.
The Scriptures provide valuable knowledge
about the love shared between the Father and Son, knowledge inspiring the human
imagination to reconsider the question of suffering. One of the biggest reasons
one can trust in the Bible is because Christ provides the most logical answer
to the apparent problem of evil. Those who judge God for allowing so much evil
and suffering should feel satisfied to know He took direct responsibility for
what came of His creation.[23] Jesus told His disciples the reason He was going to be given over to
the prince of this world was because the world had to know how much the Son
loves the Father, and how He obeys the Father (John 14:31, 6:38). Everything
the enemy did, every evil God tolerated, these were necessary sacrifices
leading up to the cross, where Christ love for the Father, and God’s love for
humanity is made known. With this Biblical truth one can imagine a reality
before space and time where numerous manifestations of love were shared within the
Trinity.
Different manifestations of beauty and love
were only feelings or thoughts in the mind of God before becoming real for any
created being. There is a unique sensation of love and peace the weeping father
feels when listening to his daughters’ beating heart in the chest of the one
who lives because the daughter died. Another unique sensation of love and peace
is felt by two siblings who forgive each other and are united after losing
their mother. There is also the unique love mixed with pride a soldier feels
for their brother in arms who dies in the battlefield after fighting bravely
and saving lives. Before creation there could have been individual words to
describe each of these deeply loving sensations in the mind of God. If the
Bible were not true the greatest example of love would be a lie, and any sense
of hope during suffering is an illusion. For if only death is certain, life is
meaningless. The greatest truths in life are fully recognized and appreciated
because of a knowledge of suffering. The crucifix is beautiful today and is
seen as a symbol of hope. The horror of Christ on the cross suffering and dying
for the sins of fallen humans is at the same time a beautiful truth one must be
most grateful for. If the idea of sacrificial love were only real in the
imagination, such a thought would not truly be as great as the reality of the
person, or the God, who lays down their life for others (John 15:13).
The one who loves the Lord will relate with
Peter after Jesus weeded out many of His disciples, for though there is much we
do not understand I would not know where to go and I would have no life if not
for Christ (John 6:69). If one were to accuse me of presenting a wishful
thinking theodicy lacking in evidence, there are several other legitimate
reasons for trusting in the Bible. Certain critical scholars claim Christians
are like desperate children with blind faith, but this label should inspire the
faithful to investigate the reasons why the skeptic feels this way.[24] Main reasons for rejecting Christianity
usually spawn from a lack of knowledge or for emotional reasons. Naturally,
those ignorant of the facts and driven by emotions before logic will be easier
to manipulate. This is a truth every professor must know on some level, and
this is a truth every college student must keep in mind. Hence the critical
scholar who claims the deified Jesus is based on legend is being dishonest as
the evidence for the earliest witnesses worshiping Christ as the risen Savior
is a historical fact acknowledged by most scholars.[25] Discoveries in archeology add to the
credibility of the Bible, and discoveries in physics can help the apologist
form rational arguments for Biblical miracles and even for the Triune nature of
God. However, the faithful know only those drawn by the Father will come to
Christ and accept His love (John 6:44, 6:65).
Ehrman would rather focus on the limited
discrepancies as listed in his book and claims these are the most significant
ones.[26] If these are the most daunting
inconsistencies then the faithful must study these passages more carefully. The
criteria provided to help one argue for the veracity of a historical account
will prove useful when studying the New Testament, especially considering the
value of earlier sources, and comparing multiple sources.[27] For example Ehrman points out a contradiction
between two Gospel accounts where a father named Jairus in one account states
his daughter was dying, but in another he said she was dead. When comparing the
accounts of Jairus daughter in Matthew and Mark readers discover according to
Jesus whoever believed the girl to be dead was wrong (Matt. 9:24, Mark 5:39).
In both documents the father believed if Jesus touched the child she would
live, and both record Jesus healing a woman on the way to Jairus house (Matt.
9:18, Mark 5:23). Where Ehrman looks for mistakes and contradictions the
faithful historian is more fascinated by the similarities. The “criterion for
dissimilarity” comes to mind when considering why early Christians would imagine
an account where Jesus accidently heals some woman before turning to the
crowd and asking, “Who touched my clothes” (Mark 5:30)?[28]
Regarding the resurrection account it is
curious that Ehrman questions whether the tomb was even empty.[29] Scholars know Paul believed the resurrected
Christ encountered him, and he went to meet with other key witnesses including
Jesus’ brother James, who would have known where the tomb was located (1 Cor.
15: 1-9). According to Ehrman Christians do not want to accept there could be
more reasonable explanations for the empty tomb, yet after sharing a couple of
alternate theories he rightly confesses all such explanations are improbable.[30] This book does well to remind the faithful to
remain humble and grateful for God’s grace. The Scriptures were formed to bring
life to those who would appreciate the sweet aroma of the knowledge of God,
however it is no accident that for the boastful this is an aroma of death (2
Cor. 2:14-16, 1 John 2:15-17). Christ did not hide why He spoke in parables,
and where many disciples left after hearing a hard teaching, for those who
trusted in Christ the mystery of the kingdom of God was revealed (John 6:66,
Mark 4:10-12). Thus, the faithful humble seeker of truth will not be surprised
if there are some variations in the text and maybe even insignificant
contradictions. Seeing how God interacts with His people in the Scriptures, and
considering the character of Christ and His teachings, the seeker of truth will
not be surprised by how the mystery of the kingdom of God is revealed (1 Cor.
3:18-20, 1:18-20, Matt. 11:25, Luke 10:21-22, Job 37:24, 1 Cor. 1:26, 2:10,
Prov. 21:30). For a more thorough refutation of the claims and arguments
presented by Ehrman Truth in a Culture of Doubt is recommended, as well
as Jesus and the Eyewitnesses by scholar Richard Bauckham.[31]
Conclusion
Ehrman does well to relate with the layman
readers, and the Christian readers will more clearly understand the educated
skeptics’ position. The skeptic will have much to gain from this book for
surely the average Christian is not prepared for the arguments presented in
this text. Even the most faithful Christians who read this book may feel led to
study more, and this can never be a bad thing. Ultimately, it is sad the Church
has reached such a low point where someone like Ehrman has become so successful
at intimidating Christians and inspiring young sceptics by appealing to the
ignorance of the majority.
Notes:
Throughout history the Bible withstands every
attack, and this will not change, as the truth continues to spread. Many
archeologists depend on the Bible because the text proves most reliable for
those seeking a guide to finding lost cities and kingdoms.[32] The skeptical scholar is being dishonest if
claiming the formulation of the New Testament happened many years after the
events. One is being dishonest if claiming the early Church did not believe
Christ was risen and seated by the Father. Scholars know the early accounts
from Paul, Barnabas, and Ignatius, to name a few, proves the early Church was
aware a New Testament was forming to complete the Scriptures.[33] Ehrman claims he along with other critical
scholars believe Jesus was misunderstood and never actually claimed to be equal
with God.[34] Multiple leading scholars recognize when
Christ referred to Himself as the Son of Man this was equivalent to being
identified as Divine by nature, hence why the Pharisees charged Christ with
heresy.[35] Indeed, the evidence God has left for us provides enough reason to
trust in the Scriptures, most importantly how He has revealed Himself through
the incarnation and resurrection (John 1:9, 1:14, 14:9,1 John 4:2, Mark 16:6,
Matt. 28:5-6 NIV).
