A remarkable look at early Christianity.

This is the second set of lectures I have listened to by Professor Bart D. Ehrman. The lectures were excellent. My time was well spent in familiarizing myself with the various controversies such as was Jesus really born in Bethlehem (unlikely) or that contrary to what many modern readers think, the Book of Revelation is not unique and the subject was the Roman Empire.

This book is not for all people - some have no interest in ancient history and for others, their faith may make this too sensitive a topic. Ehrman states early on:

"In these lectures, we will approach controversies of early Christianity not from the perspective of faith but from the perspective of history. We will not deny or affirm Christian belief or the approach to the Bible by faith; instead, we will take the approach of the historian— one who tries to reconstruct what actually happened in the past without assuming any particular faith commitments.

You may or may not feel that the conclusions we reach about controversial issues will have any bearing on your faith. But the fact that so many issues have been in dispute in Christianity from the earliest days of the faith is interesting in itself. What makes Christianity so subject to controversy on so many points? Why have those issues persisted for so long, and why have they so often been divisive? As we look for ways to resolve the disputes that are the subject of this course, we’ll look for answers to those fundamental questions, as well

14 people found this helpful

Essential early Christian history

Ehrman is an erudite scholar of Biblical history, especially as it pertains to early Christian history. This course was so interesting and informative that when I finished it, I started it again. If you are interested in the topics in the above description, listen to this course.

Note: This is not a devotional course. It covers the topics from the perspective of a historian, not from a theologian.

19 people found this helpful

Not even-handed

The professor has a strong bias against Christianity that shows in how he selectively uses material. He frequently tries to place the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John in the same category as clearly spurious non-canonical gospels that were written much later and rejected by the Church.

He completely ignores the widely-accepted Q Hypothesis in order to claim that the Canonical Gospels were based purely on oral tradition rather than on any pre-existing written sources. Therefore he accepts the writings of Josephus while rejecting anything in the Canonical Gospels as "not historical".

He also uses the lack of literacy in the ancient world as an argument to support the idea that the early Christian Church could not have had written records, but many historical people dictated to scribes, and anyway he accepts several of Paul's letters as historical. Why would Paul be writing to churches if no one could read?

9 people found this helpful

Historical Christianity

Excellent information for those who honestly seek truth. Very well presented by Professor Ehrman.

1 person found this helpful

Fascinating journey through Early Christianity

This series of lectures explores some of the biggest controversies of early Christianity, ranging from the serious questions (do we still have the original New Testament?) to the borderline crazy (did Jesus have a twin brother?)

If you take it with a grain of salt, it's an interesting journey through some of the most hotly debated issues of the faith.

9 people found this helpful

And the Controversies Go On!

The Great Courses offers several lecture series by Bart Ehrman and I have enjoyed each one I've encountered. He has great command of the subjects of early Christianity, and his approach is clear and understandable.

Ehrman begins the course with an explanation of his purpose. Not a religious interpretation, this is an attempt to explore the historical realities and the context in which early Christians lived, told their stories, and advanced their faith.

So the controversies include not only the questions Ehrman confronts about the historical probabilities of the Christian Bible and beliefs, but also about how listeners will react to the approach itself. As a scholar, the Professor challenges areas which most of us have encountered only in a religious context. If the listener's mind is not open to different ways of looking at Christianity, he/she will most likely not appreciate this course.

Anyone willing to listen will learn a lot.

8 people found this helpful

Excellent Ehrman

If you are already familiar with Dr Ehrman's work, nothing really stands out here. It's excellent work, but most of the information can be found in some of his other works.

4 people found this helpful

Entertaining and Informative

Everything you ever wanted to know about Christian controversies is here in this excellent course from The Great Courses.

A course like this is exactly what is needed to break the stranglehold that religious fundamentalism still holds on certain aspects of American life. Greatly encouraged!

2 people found this helpful

Very Interesting

This is a very interesting topic and the speaker is excellent and obviously knowledgeable. There are, however, some flaws in his arguments. At points he uses parts of the biblical text to make arguments that undermine his earlier conclusions. Otherwise, excellent.

2 people found this helpful

Very solid course with a good technique

If you could sum up The Greatest Controversies of Early Christian History in three words, what would they be?

Pluses:
• The bookend approach of focusing on one controversy/question per lecture was an excellent presentation technique
• Caused one to ponder Christianity and Jesus’ divinity with an open-mind
• The convalescing of Christianity doctrine/theology in the early days of the religion was covered well

Minuses:
• While it was good to view Christianity from an open-minded perspective, I got the sense the professor slanted a little too much to the other side and sounded pessimistic at times in faith with almost a hint of a Christian who became disillusioned/disgruntled over time

3 people found this helpful