Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (And Why We Don't Know About Them) Paperback – February 2, 2010

Having been educated, at least at the Undergraduate level, in history and having earlier learned the Jewish Writngs in Hebrew I have been been interested in the origin and the formation of two faiths -- that being the faith and belief system of the Jewish People and that of the Christian religion. This book's discussion and presentation of the development of the religious texts of the Christian faith, and the contraditions and course changes therein, are particularly informative, clearly written, supported by specific references, etc. The author's detailed references to and discussions about the writings of the Church Fathers and the (key) role they played in the development of the Christian belief system is particularly informative. Few realize whom were the Church Fathers and the role they played in the development of what became mainsream Christianity. This is a demonstration of the Historical Critical method at its best. I am sure I would find the author's lectures fascinating.

I very much enjoyed the historical information included in the book. I Like that the author gives reasons for his coming to the conclusions that he has backed up with theory and or fact. I learned new information and am searching for answers and found this to be helpful in that search

Once again Bart has added well researched insight into the life of Jesus and early Christian doctrine. His writing style is smooth and easy to read.
I would highly recommend this book to anyone wanting to learn more about the man called "Jesus".

I can't recommend this book because there is a far better book on this same subject matter: Scripting Jesus by L. Michael White. The common subject is the nature of the gospel accounts, as well as the nature of other Christian writings, including the canonical epistles and the non-canonical gospels and letters. Ehrman has correct facts, for the most part, but his interpretation of them is distressed. He is a noted scholar of the early Christian texts, yet he goes about presenting his findings in a less than professional manner (as I see it). There are two annoying repetitions throughout: he reminds the reader endlessly that he teaches what is contained in this book to students, and each time he does so I feel sorry for the students who are subjected to the approach he has taken; and he repeats frequently that the material he is presenting is taught at all the seminaries (what he fails to point out is that the subject matter is secondary to other aspects of biblical analysis in seminary teaching and that other instructors do not present the information in this same impassioned and negative way). Ehrman assures the reader that he did not become agnostic because of what he presents here, but rather because of the problem of suffering, and also that those who learn from him do not give up the faith, which he presents as evidence that this subject matter can be handled by faithful Christians. Nonetheless, the way he goes about speaking of the differences among the four canonical gospels is like throwing punches: here's a contradiction; here's another contradiction; and another, so take that! By contrast, White's Scripting Jesus shows how and why the stories come out differently (same facts, very different way of interpreting) in a manner that illuminates effectively. As Ehrman gets into the problem of authorship of the epistles and the numerous non-canonical gospels, he seems to be flailing rather than punching, finding them just out of reach of simple explanation that would knock down everything at once. Then, as he attacks the development of an orthodoxy about Jesus, he comes across as intent upon trashing the efforts of the Church fathers (the ones on the orthodox side) rather than using his talents to uncover with less bias the details of their efforts; Dan Brown (of Da Vinci Code fame) would like this part. Ehrman's selection of canonical gospel passages to compare and contrast is quite good, and he takes care to elaborate well the divergence between the gospel of John and the synoptics in terms of the "last supper:" Jesus is killed after the Passover in the synoptics but before the Passover in John (where he dies as the "lamb of God" at the same time the lambs are sacrificed for the Passover meal to come), and I would say that this early part of the book, though presented with an awkward attitude (if you thought the gospels were historic accounts of what Jesus said and did, he will make sure you are corrected) is the best part for those who are studying the ways the gospel accounts developed. After that early section of the book, the application of his strong knowledge base becomes weaker and weaker, he is increasingly selective in presenting materials for making his key point, and so the book can not be recommended on that basis too. Ehrman wonders aloud in his book why what he is teaching about the New Testament isn't relayed by all those who attend seminary and then serve as pastors and preachers. I believe they don't because they are avoiding doing what Ehrman has just done in this book: taken a complex subject and "attacking" (the easier route) rather than explaining (an ongoing process as we look further into it). How does one go from thinking of the New Testament as a strictly historical document (a fundamentalist approach to the bible) to thinking of it as something else, without turning to disparagement? It is no easy task.

Loved the book. If the bible holds interest for you, you should read it.

Some practical ideas to consider. Much to think about.

very infromative and an eas read

Solid scholarship easily understood. Raises important issues that must be addressed by Christians. Honesty regarding author's own faith journey is helpful.