He remained a liberal Christian for 15 years but later became an agnostic atheist after struggling with the philosophical problems of evil and suffering. Ehrman has written widely on issues of the New Testament and early Christianity at both an academic and popular level, much of it based on textual criticism of the New Testament.Ehrman has taught at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill since 1988, after four years of teaching at Rutgers University. Pope "Spirit of Inquiry" Teaching Award, the 1993 UNC Undergraduate Student Teaching Award, the 1994 Phillip and Ruth Hettleman Prize for Artistic and Scholarly Achievement, and the Bowman and Gordon Gray Award for excellence in teaching. His thirty books include three college textbooks and six New York Times bestsellers: Misquoting Jesus, In The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, Ehrman argues that there was a close relationship between the social history of early Christianity and the textual tradition of the emerging New Testament.In 2014, Zondervan published How God Became Jesus: The Real Origins of Belief in Jesus' Divine Nature: A Response to Bart D. Evans, and Simon Gathercole—present Ehrman as "prone to profound confusion, botched readings and scholarly fictions." Bird writes, "For conservative Christians, Ehrman is a bit of a bogeyman, the Prof.Ehrman as a planned companion volume to Ehrman's How Jesus Became God. Moriarty of biblical studies, constantly pressing an attack on their long-held beliefs about God, Jesus, and the Bible....The Princeton Theological Seminary alumni has sparred with fellow New Testament textual critic Daniel B.Wallace over authorship and reliability of the Bible, and was mentioned by name in a comment from evangelical Christian minister John Piper in a video clip titled "unbiblical biblical scholarship.""Who Wrote The Bible and Why It Matters," in circulation again over the weekend, attracted thousands of comments and raised many questions when it was first published, and one Christian theologian reading the article for the first time suggested over the weekend that Ehrman "is progressively trading in his respect for some sort of crusade against Christianity" …He also comments on comparisons made of him and Metzger, a greatly admired and influential New Testament textual critic, as well as what contributed to his personal rejection of Christianity (after growing up as an evangelical and previously serving in ministry).
He has authored and edited more than two dozen books and is no stranger to criticism of his work, which focuses extensively on textual criticism of the New Testament and the historical Jesus.Why is it important to you to use "lies" as opposed to the term we most commonly hear in critical discussions, that is "pseudepigrapha?" What's your point in drawing a distinction between the two terms?The 2014 release of How Jesus Became God: The Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher from Galilee examines the historical Jesus, who according to Ehrman neither thought of himself as God nor claimed to be God, and proffers how he came to be thought of as the incarnation of God himself. Daniel Wallace has praised Ehrman as "one of North America’s leading textual critics" and describes him as "one of the most brilliant and creative textual critics I have ever known". Angered by what they took to be the book’s subversive import, they attacked it as exaggerated, unfair and lacking a devotional tone.Wallace argues, however, that in Misquoting Jesus Ehrman sometimes "overstates his case by assuming that his view is certainly correct." For example, Wallace asserts that Ehrman himself acknowledges the vast majority of textual variants are minor, but his popular writing and speaking sometimes makes the sheer number of them appear to be a major problem for getting to the original New Testament text. No less than three books were published in response to Ehrman’s tome".