The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings

Ehrman explains the New Testatment clearly from a historical point of view. He does not offer "faith-buster" arguments but takes all sides of the argument into consideration. This is extremely helpful while reading the New Testament, since it explains many of the nuances and wordings that you may not have otherwise understood or picked up. Even if you're not reading the New Testament, Ehrman gives you a strong understanding of the historical context of the New Testament, the differences and similarities among the Gospels, the possible rationales and theories behind those discrepancies, etc. Ehrman is not a difficult read and is actually quite fascinating, particularly for those who never considered Christianity in a historical light before.

Author Ehrman's "The New Testament" seems to be designed as a textbook for advanced undergraduates. Thus, the writing is accessible and informative rather than inciting and exciting. Ehrman goes through the books of the New Testament systematically, examining the origin and meaning of each. He looks also at some of the writings and traditions that didn't make the "cut" and were excluded. The book contains a goodly number of maps and illustrations. In the wake of the "Da Vinci Code" women will be pleased to see a chapter about women in early Christianity -- although the most famous of them, Mary Magdalene, gets only one mention. The book is clearly written; the author does not intrude his own beliefs; and the scholarship seems sound. Whether intended or not, Ehrman reinforces my suspicion that Christianity might better be called Paulism, as the Apostle seems to have taken the early Church in directions that its symbolic founder could hardly have envisioned -- and perhaps would not have sanctioned. For the believer, the greatest miracle of all is that this religion headed by an obscure Jewish peasant and his rag-tag followers survived and flourished. Ehrman offers some insight as to how this miraculous event might have transpired. "The New Testament" is worth your time and can be read cover to cover or dipped into for information on specific topics. Smallchief

In my view, Bart Ehrman writes with more clarity and strength than any other New Testament scholar. I have heard him speak, listened to his tapes and read his books. He exudes competency, frequently reminding us that his conclusions are those of a historian - then spends a little time explaining what that means. In the case of "The New Testament," it means he will examine authorship issues, content and revelancy of the various gospels, letters and apocolypses - inside or outside of the canon - differently than they might be examined from the pulpit. For example, issues of dogma are extensively discussed, but not endorsed nor advocated. Instead, they are examined for consistency within the whole context of the other books and the political setting in which the early church solidified its views. As a matter of fact, he is so non-committal it is impossible to tell exactly where he stands - although it is obvious he takes a liberal stance of some sort. I had more than my share of fundamentalist preaching, yet values at home were those of inquiry and evidence toward the world in general. Ehrman's approach is more to my liking than reiteration of a dogma I've already heard, documented by passages from scripture pre-selected to prove a certain view. He compares the gospels, discusses the nuances of their differing themes and considers their probable authorship. The letters are treated similarly and the book of Revelations is subjected to a fascinating analysis. Consider the New Testament subjected to the kind of scrutiny one of Shakespeare's plays might receive from a college professor of western world literature - in which speculation is kept to a minimum and explanation is made as to the historical context of the story. For example, he compares the teachings of the historical Jesus with the theological views of the apostle Paul: "Jesus proclaimed the imminent arrival of a cosmic judge from heaven, the Son of Man, and urged his followers to prepare by repenting and returning to a faithful adherence to God's law. Paul, on the other hand, insisted that following the Law would have no bearing on one's salvation, that in fact one could be saved only through faith in Christ's death and resurrection. Notwithstanding the broad similarities between these two men, both of them first-century apocalyptic Jews, their differences are striking. Do Jesus and Paul represent the same religion? Or has Paul transformed the religion OF Jesus into the religion ABOUT Jesus?" Perhaps not for all readers, but certainly for that segment of curious Christians or non-Christians who wish to be exposed to a scholarly account of issues surrounding the New Testament - from a historical point of view - this is your book.

What does Jesus mean to you and why is it important to you as a human being living 2000 years after the death of Jesus? Why is Jesus viewed and interpreted by scholars in so many different ways? How do the four Gospels of the New Testament explain the life and mysteries of Jesus as a man, prophet, messiah and divine being? These and a host of questions of this nature are clearly explained by Professor Bart D. Ehrman in his excellent book, The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings. This is a thorough examination of the New Testament. Although the title suggests a "historical introduction", it's that and much more.Too often, scholars tend to express historical events in high brow theoretical frameworks and confusing, elaborate paradigms. As a student or just someone who may be interested in learning about the New Testament, you're presented with a lucid, terse and imaginative outline on the New Testament reading Professor Ehrman's book. All 29 chapters are presented coherently with logical historical descriptions and analysis that clearly explains every facet of what it means to analyze a complex and controversial subject.It was such a pleasure to read through the material with ease, comfort and with clear explanations. Professor Ehrman carefully walks you step by step through non-canonical and canonical sources for the "creation" of the New Testament. In addition, you're given the ideas behind each gospel and what the "author" of each gospel portrayed using a variety of historical methodologies. You're given a succinct groundwork to help you understand how you get from point A to point B of each gospel and their connections. There are no quantum jumps in theoretical ideas to confuse the reader.I have thoroughly read 13 other books on the "Historical Jesus" and reviewed 43 other ones. Professor Ehrman's book is by far the best ever written on the subject. Although the book is used as a text book for the Historical Jesus and the New Testament for undergraduate students, it could easily be read as a book on it's own. You learn not only the history of Jesus; from varying sources, but you get in depth lessons on ancient history which connects everything together so well.I would highly recommend this book over Professors E.P. Sanders', The Historical Figure of Jesus (Penguin Books, 1993), which I feel is an excellent book on the same subject.The price of the book is worth every penny. You will never read the four Gospels the same way after reading Professor Ehrman's tremendous book. This book along with his other book, Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium (Oxford University Press, 1999) can only help the reader to clearly understand the Historical Jesus from so many perspectives with clarity beyond imagination. Any reader who does NOT enjoy this book and/or comes away with a better understanding of this subject has not read other convoluted books on this subject.The reader would do well to go th

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.