Below you will find links to all five posts in the series “Hopelessly Confused: Heather Schuldt Takes on Bart Ehrman.” I suggest that to get a full grasp of the just how confused Schuldt is that the reader have a look at her post “5 Examples Why Bart Ehrman Is Not a Gospel Expert.”
It should also be noted that Schuldt and I had a brief email exchange wherein we discussed topics for discussion and venue. However, she has not responded to my last email and as of the date of this writing has blocked me on Twitter.
Part 1 – In this post I examine issues surrounding the dating of the Gospel accounts. I take a brief look at the Synoptic Gospels specifically and discuss the reasons many scholars date them to the 70s and 80s CE.
Part 2 – In this post I examine issues surrounding the authorship of the Gospel accounts. I discuss Papias on Mark and Matthew, the “We Passages” in Acts, and the “Beloved Disciple” in John.
Part 3 – In this post I examine the relationship of the oral tradition behind the Gospels and the Gospels themselves. Particularly, I consider whether or not we have evidence for Schuldt’s claim that written forms are not malleable.
Part 4 – In this post I examine the Passion Week in both Mark and John. I discuss how the two versions do not sync as Schuldt hoped they would.
Part 5 – In this post I examine the timing of Jesus’ death in Mark and John and how John has strategically placed Jesus’ crucifixion at the time he does for theological reasons. I also summarize the series and offer some thoughts on Schuldt’s approach.
Featured image: Wikimedia Commons.