Q&A Society of Biblical Literature 2011 – San Francisco: CROSSAN, EHRMAN, LEVINE, WRIGHT (partial)


for our panelists to ask questions or rebuttals
to one another.
0:00:20.639, reviews premises guys
0:00:26.980, uses
0:00:33.030, women
0:00:35.250, easiest
0:00:39.520, teases
0:00:42.260, srs
0:00:56.860, sold
0:01:03.440, brothers excuses
0:01:06.150, bruises
0:01:07.800, water
0:01:11.970, odd
0:01:20.750, historians the
0:01:26.390, you
0:01:30.650, reason
0:01:34.630, d’amato
0:01:39.790, accuses
0:01:41.500, mclaughlin on tuesday larson would be
interested
0:01:47.570, related issue
0:01:49.960, with it
0:01:56.640,

8 thoughts on “Q&A Society of Biblical Literature 2011 – San Francisco: CROSSAN, EHRMAN, LEVINE, WRIGHT (partial)

  1. On your question, I agree with what NT Wright said, who (w)rightly corrected the implication I guess Ehrman tried to make at the end of his statement (an unspoken "that didn't happen, did it."). Though I don't think I could phrase it as well. I'd have answered more personal, something like "you are my god, my savior, my only hope".

    I'm curious whether the "I AM" in the question you wrote is in caps because it's meant to refer to "ego eimi"? ;o)

  2. Here you have a bunch of major bible scholars apparently agreeing that Jesus was not divine from a historical perspective yet only 2000 views :O. Great video anyway and the annotations are very helpful and well done.

  3. I would have to say, why didn't you make it so obvious that you were the Messiah that even a 5 year old would understand? Also why wasn't the bible perfect in it's writing's since it was inspired by God.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *