Posted on 02/25/2023 7:58:10 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Could two highly intelligent men with two entirely different perspectives possibly help you come to your own personal conclusion concerning the central figure of history? Perhaps. Let’s find out.
History’s central figure, of course, is Jesus Christ. And the two men I have in mind are American New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman and Canadian astrophysicist Hugh Ross.
Ehrman professed faith in Christ as a teenager but is now an atheist; whereas Ross grew up in a non-religious home but is now a Christian. One man abandoned Christianity, while the other embraced it.
Ross said, “I didn’t know any Christians or serious followers of any religion while growing up.” Ehrman, on the other hand, said, “For most of my life I was a devout and committed Christian.”
At age 17, Hugh Ross became the youngest person yet to serve as director of observations for Vancouver’s Royal Astronomical Society. And Bart Ehrman is the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Ross came to faith in Christ after first investigating the world’s major religions. Ross said, “I reasoned that if man invented a religion, it would reflect human error. But, if God communicated, His message would be error free and as consistent as the facts of nature. So, I used the facts of history and science to test each of the ‘holy’ books.”
He stated, “One by one each book failed the factuality test, and I gained confidence that my initial skepticism would be affirmed — until I picked up a Bible.” He found that the Bible “described the 4 fundamental features of big bang cosmology."
After much personal Bible study, Ross said, “I clearly understood that Jesus Christ was the Creator of the universe, that He paid the price only a sinless person could pay for all of my offenses against God, and that eternal life would be mine if I received his pardon and gave Him His rightful place of authority over my life.”
Bart Ehrman, on the other hand, reversed course from his earlier profession of faith. Ehrman said, “I had solid Christian credentials and knew about the Christian faith from the inside out … but then … I started to lose my faith. I now have lost it altogether. I no longer go to church, no longer believe, no longer consider myself a Christian.”
In my recent CP op-ed titled, “When Textual Variants are a Convenient Excuse,” I quoted Bart Ehrman in explaining what led him to walk away from Christ: “It wasn’t problems in the Bible I was wrestling with. It was why is there so much suffering in the world? That’s why I left the faith.”
Ehrman’s attitude toward Jesus became darkened, separating him from the One who said: “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life” (John 8:12).
Ehrman thinks the Bible misquoted Jesus. Hugh Ross disagrees, and says, “The fact that there is no historical record of called-out mistakes or corrections to the four Gospels by contemporaries of the gospel writers testifies to the accuracy of Jesus’ quotes within them.”
Bart Ehrman no longer believes Christ rose from the dead. Hugh Ross said, “Ehrman is also wrong about the evidence for the bodily resurrection of Jesus being based on visions alone. There is the empty tomb. The powerful enemies of the emergent Christian faith, the Jewish religious leaders and the Romans, were unable to produce the body of Jesus. Also, it would take more than visions to persuade the 10,000+ Jews living in Jerusalem at that time — more than a third of the total population — to become Christians in the few days that followed Jesus’ death on the cross.”
Bart Ehrman's unanswered questions about suffering in the world spawned his atheism, whereas Hugh Ross discovered that God’s book of nature is in alignment with God’s revelation in Scripture. This remarkable realization led Ross straight into the arms of our Creator.
Dr. John Lennox is a Northern Irish mathematician, bioethicist, and Christian apologist. Lennox said, “Faith is not a leap in the dark; it’s the exact opposite. It’s a commitment based on evidence … It is irrational to reduce all faith to blind faith and then subject it to ridicule. That provides a very anti-intellectual and convenient way of avoiding intelligent discussion.”
English theoretical physicist and cosmologist Stephen Hawking said, “Heaven is a fairy tale for people who are afraid of the dark.” John Lennox responded, “Atheism is a fairy story for those who are afraid of the light."
Hugh Ross has witnessed time and time again how the evidence in nature is fully consistent with the message of the Bible. Dr. Ross established Reasons to Believe in 1986. This ministry helps people “discover how scientific research and clear thinking consistently affirm the truth of the Bible and of the Good News it reveals.”
Bart Ehrman and Hugh Ross are heading in opposite directions. Jesus identified the wide road to Hell and the narrow road to Heaven in Matthew 7:14,13. You can either believe what Jesus said about these eternal destinations, or what Bart Ehrman says about them.
But know this: Your personal beliefs will not change God’s book of nature, Scripture, the good news of the Gospel, reality, truth, Heaven, Hell, etc. Your beliefs will only change your heart and your eternal destiny.
Bart Ehrman and Hugh Ross provide some context as you investigate the book of nature, the message of Scripture, and the historical facts of Christianity. Thankfully, there is still time for you to base your faith upon the breathtaking evidence God has graciously provided.
(In addition to Dr. Ross’s website, you could explore even more reasons to believe in Evidence that Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell.)
Dan Delzell is the pastor of Redeemer Lutheran Church in Papillion, Nebraska.
I think one grew up as a Christian and found that like living in a garage does not make you a car, attending Church does not make one a believer.
[[Could two highly intelligent men with two entirely different perspectives possibly help you come to your own personal conclusion concerning the central figure of history?]]
No but the Holy Spirit certainly can
I watched a video of Ehrman on YouTube. He took some digs at how Christians view the Bible, suggesting they aren’t too bright. The problem with believing the Bible according to him is that we don’t know what the original manuscripts said.
He described how our New Testament manuscripts are many copies removed from the originals, and we don’t know what alterations were made between the originals and the manuscripts we have. He implied that exactly one copy got made at each step of the process, which is false.
Multiple copies would have been made of each of the original Gospels. Then the first copies were recopied multiple times etc. The copies that survived came from different branches of the copying process. Because of that, alterations of the original text along the way are easy to spot. They show up in one manuscript but not any of the others.
I’ve enjoyed Hugh Ross’ ministry for decades.
Ehrman gives courses on Christianity as part of the Great Courses program.
I always wondered who he was. Now I know.
And it is no surprise that the 'Great Courses program' would have the Christianity module 'taught' by a Christ denying atheist.
Which is why I never subscribed or purchased their products
I would recommend that you read other scholarly rebuttals to Bart Ehrman, starting here:
Regarding multiple copies of manuscripts, The New Testament Scholar NT Wright has this response:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NQYOjRYQG8
Hugh Ross, in my opinion, is the greatest scientist who has ever lived, because he has reconciled science and the Bible, which no one else has accomplished as fully.
I have known him personally for forty-five years and cannot speak highly enough about his character.
Here are three links for those interested in learning more:
Books by Hugh Ross--about twenty now
Reasons to Believe's website
Paradoxes in Scripture, Hugh's Sunday School class, since c. 1980
Bookmark
Me too. I've read many of his books and the books of others from RTB, many of their articles, listened to their podcasts, and heard a couple of them speak in person (Ross and Rana).
Though admittedly, my friends and I have joked a few times about Ross' monotone. LOL
The ‘Jesus Papyrus’, by Carsten Peter Thiede, discussed evidence that the Gospel of Mark was in existence prior to 50 AD. Contrary to Ehrmann’s thesis that the Gospels weren’t written until the third century AD. I.e., made up fairy tells, as opposed to what they were in reality - first hand witnesses (and the Word of God).
We attended the same church, and hands down he is the worst singer I've ever heard who didn't care and sang with gusto anyway.
He is on the autism spectrum, and he credits his wife Kathy for enabling him to speak at all. Originally, he didn't even look at his audience while speaking. Kathy emphasized that and Hugh tried hard. But when he asked her how he had done, she said, "Fine. But you looked at the same man for the whole two hours!"
He objects to too much suffering in this world--the same malady that plagued Darwin. Wait until he finds out what awaits him....
Yes. Quite monotone.
Almost a stereotype of a scientist.
If one applied Ehrmans criteria to all historical documents, and many,many, contemporaneous documents, there would very little communication at all. Is Ehrman a fabrication? Did he use AI to come to his beliefs?
A year or so ago there was an article about new results from the Dead Sea scrolls, with the title being something like “Early Dead Sea Manuscripts show errors in the N.T.”
I don’t recall exactly what they were, but they were very minor.
“And Jesus gathered the disciples....” vs.
“And Jesus gathered his disciples...”. (I just made that sentence up - but it COULD be in the Bible!)
Thinking about it now, I wonder if it may be a translation error on our part?
My dad knew a great scientist (one of the inventors of radar) who was also a strong Christian. My dad (Christian) asked him how he was able to reconcile the science with God.
“The more I learn about how the earth works - science, it only reinforces the idea of a Creator God.”
BTW - the early scientists were motivated by their belief in a creator. The science was to help them understand not only the creation, but God the creator.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.