Dr. Hugh Ross and Bart Ehrman: A Christian turned atheist vs. atheist turned Christian

Christian Post ^ | 02/25/2023 | Dan Delzell

[SeekAndFind]

Could two highly intelligent men with two entirely different perspectives possibly help you come to your own personal conclusion concerning the central figure of history? Perhaps. Let’s find out.

History’s central figure, of course, is Jesus Christ. And the two men I have in mind are American New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman and Canadian astrophysicist Hugh Ross.

Ehrman professed faith in Christ as a teenager but is now an atheist; whereas Ross grew up in a non-religious home but is now a Christian. One man abandoned Christianity, while the other embraced it.

Ross said, “I didn’t know any Christians or serious followers of any religion while growing up.” Ehrman, on the other hand, said, “For most of my life I was a devout and committed Christian.”

At age 17, Hugh Ross became the youngest person yet to serve as director of observations for Vancouver’s Royal Astronomical Society. And Bart Ehrman is the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Ross came to faith in Christ after first investigating the world’s major religions. Ross said, “I reasoned that if man invented a religion, it would reflect human error. But, if God communicated, His message would be error free and as consistent as the facts of nature. So, I used the facts of history and science to test each of the ‘holy’ books.”

He stated, “One by one each book failed the factuality test, and I gained confidence that my initial skepticism would be affirmed — until I picked up a Bible.” He found that the Bible “described the 4 fundamental features of big bang cosmology."

1. The beginning of space and time coincident with the beginning of matter and energy.
2. Continual expansion of the universe from the cosmic beginning.
3. The constancy of physical laws, and
4. The pervasiveness of entropy (decay).

After much personal Bible study, Ross said, “I clearly understood that Jesus Christ was the Creator of the universe, that He paid the price only a sinless person could pay for all of my offenses against God, and that eternal life would be mine if I received his pardon and gave Him His rightful place of authority over my life.”

Bart Ehrman, on the other hand, reversed course from his earlier profession of faith. Ehrman said, “I had solid Christian credentials and knew about the Christian faith from the inside out … but then … I started to lose my faith. I now have lost it altogether. I no longer go to church, no longer believe, no longer consider myself a Christian.”

In my recent CP op-ed titled, “When Textual Variants are a Convenient Excuse,” I quoted Bart Ehrman in explaining what led him to walk away from Christ: “It wasn’t problems in the Bible I was wrestling with. It was why is there so much suffering in the world? That’s why I left the faith.”

Ehrman’s attitude toward Jesus became darkened, separating him from the One who said: “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life” (John 8:12).

Ehrman thinks the Bible misquoted Jesus. Hugh Ross disagrees, and says, “The fact that there is no historical record of called-out mistakes or corrections to the four Gospels by contemporaries of the gospel writers testifies to the accuracy of Jesus’ quotes within them.”

Bart Ehrman no longer believes Christ rose from the dead. Hugh Ross said, “Ehrman is also wrong about the evidence for the bodily resurrection of Jesus being based on visions alone. There is the empty tomb. The powerful enemies of the emergent Christian faith, the Jewish religious leaders and the Romans, were unable to produce the body of Jesus. Also, it would take more than visions to persuade the 10,000+ Jews living in Jerusalem at that time — more than a third of the total population — to become Christians in the few days that followed Jesus’ death on the cross.”

Bart Ehrman's unanswered questions about suffering in the world spawned his atheism, whereas Hugh Ross discovered that God’s book of nature is in alignment with God’s revelation in Scripture. This remarkable realization led Ross straight into the arms of our Creator.

Dr. John Lennox is a Northern Irish mathematician, bioethicist, and Christian apologist. Lennox said, “Faith is not a leap in the dark; it’s the exact opposite. It’s a commitment based on evidence … It is irrational to reduce all faith to blind faith and then subject it to ridicule. That provides a very anti-intellectual and convenient way of avoiding intelligent discussion.”

English theoretical physicist and cosmologist Stephen Hawking said, “Heaven is a fairy tale for people who are afraid of the dark.” John Lennox responded, “Atheism is a fairy story for those who are afraid of the light."

Hugh Ross has witnessed time and time again how the evidence in nature is fully consistent with the message of the Bible. Dr. Ross established Reasons to Believe in 1986. This ministry helps people “discover how scientific research and clear thinking consistently affirm the truth of the Bible and of the Good News it reveals.”

Bart Ehrman and Hugh Ross are heading in opposite directions. Jesus identified the wide road to Hell and the narrow road to Heaven in Matthew 7:14,13. You can either believe what Jesus said about these eternal destinations, or what Bart Ehrman says about them.

But know this: Your personal beliefs will not change God’s book of nature, Scripture, the good news of the Gospel, reality, truth, Heaven, Hell, etc. Your beliefs will only change your heart and your eternal destiny.

Bart Ehrman and Hugh Ross provide some context as you investigate the book of nature, the message of Scripture, and the historical facts of Christianity. Thankfully, there is still time for you to base your faith upon the breathtaking evidence God has graciously provided.

(In addition to Dr. Ross’s website, you could explore even more reasons to believe in Evidence that Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell.)

---

Dan Delzell is the pastor of Redeemer Lutheran Church in Papillion, Nebraska.

[QBFimi]

Fellow FReepers - if you’ve got this far down in the thread, two suggestions: 1. Look for Dr. Daniel Wallace on YouTube, and 2. Google up “CSNTM”, the Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts. Fascinating.

[A_perfect_lady]

“Atheism is a fairy story for those who are afraid of the light."

That's a cute comeback, but the atheist is saying that gods, angels, demons, devils, etc are all fairies: fictional creatures. Who are the fairies of atheism?

[metmom]

There is also Gerald Schroeder.

Here he reconciles the Genesis account using time dilation.

The Age of the Universe

http://geraldschroeder.com/wordpress/the-age-of-the-universe/

[SeekAndFind]

RE: atheist is saying that gods, angels, demons, devils, etc are all fairies

How does he know that they are fairies, therefore, non-exitent? Has he exhaustively researched them in history?

RE: Who are the fairies of atheism?

That matter could magically assemble itself to form the solar system, the earth and every single omplex, reasoning human being on earth.

[A_perfect_lady]

That matter could magically assemble itself to form the solar system, the earth and every single omplex, reasoning human being on earth.

That's not fairies, that's a process. Who are the fairies?

[Hebrews 11:6]

Reasons.org articles referencing time dilation.

[Taxman]

Ping

[Hebrews 11:6]

Well stated—thanks.

[daniel1212]

“It wasn’t problems in the Bible I was wrestling with. It was why is there so much suffering in the world? That’s why I left the faith.”

Meaning he has a problem with:

A creator proving man with every good thing He has;

Including the ability to make choices;

And allowing alternatives to choose btwn:

And consequences of choices;

And allowing the consequences to produce effects, varying in degree;

While restraining evil to some degree so that the whole world is not one giant North Korea, yet still allowing man to misuse and abuse what God gave him;

Knowing every single one of the effects of every single choice of man, as well as His own;

And in omniscience and omnipotence making all to work out for what is Good, that of the good of those who choose light over darkness, wanting God over evil and thus come to Christ (Jn. 3:19-21) and justice for those who do not, with varying degrees of punishment relative to accountability.

For God could have created the greatest robots, with the greatest computing ability, endurance, etc. and that could never make a wrong choice, but had no ability to make choices.

God could have,

• 1. made us (and angels) with no moral standard or sense or deprived us from the moral ability to respond to or choose good [morally insensible].

• 2. granted us free moral agency, but never have given us anything to choose between [negation of moral choices].

• 3. called man to make the Creator their ultimate object of spiritual affection and allegiance and source of security is what is right and what is best for man, versus finite created beings or things, and provided moral revelation and influences. But always have moved us to do good, and never have allowed us to choose evil (such as make believing in God and choosing good so utterly compelling — like God appearing daily and doing miracles on demand, and preventing any seeming evidence to the contrary so that no man could attempt excuses [effective negation of any freedom to choose]).

• 4. allowed us to do evil, but immediately reversed any effects [negation of moral consequences].

• 5. allowed us to do bad, but restricted us to a place where it would harm no one but ourselves [restriction of moral consequences].

• 6. allowed us to choose between good and evil, and to affect others by it, but not ultimately reward or punish us accordingly [negation of eternal consequences, positive or negative].

• 7. given us the ability to choose, and alternatives to chose from, and to face and overcome evil or be overcome by it, with the ability to effect others and things by our choices, and to exercise some reward or punishment in this life for morality, and ultimately reward or punishment all accordingly [pure justice].

• 8. restrained evil to some degree, while making the evil that man does to work out for the good of those who want good, and who thus love God, who is good.

• 9. in accordance with 8, the Creator could have chose to manifest Himself in the flesh, and by Him to provide man a means of escaping the ultimate retribution of Divine justice, and instead receive unmerited eternal favor, at God's own expense and credit, appropriated by a repentant obedient faith, in addition to the loss or gaining of certain rewards based on one's quality of work as a child of God. And eternally punish, to varying degrees, those whose response to God's revelation manifested they want evil, [justice maintained while mercy and grace given]. - https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Theodicy

[daniel1212]

To believe that an exceedingly vast, systematically ordered universe, exquisitely finely tuned for life with intricate astounding complexity, can be all a result of purely natural processes requires much faith, more so than that the universe logically testifies to design, requiring a First Cause (at the least), that of a powerful being of supreme intelligence being behind the existence of energy and organization of matter.

Dawkins [essentially] Admits Nothing Can Persuade Him God Exists

It’s Almost Impossible to Understand How Unfathomably Massive Our Universe Truly Is

The Privileged Planet

Design from Fine-Tuning | Reasonable Faith

'God: new evidence' - the fine tuning of the universe - part 1

When science and philosophy collide in a 'fine-tuned' universe

We Live in a Very Fortunate Universe

Can DNA Prove the Existence of an Intelligent Designer?

82 Mind-Blowing Facts about DNA | FactRetriever.com

Extra-Biblical Historical Evidence for Christianity

Is There Any Evidence for Jesus Outside the Bible?

Amazing Stories, Christian Testimonies, Healing Miracles and Inspirational Stories

[daniel1212]

That's not fairies, that's a process. Who are the fairies?

That is faith (which in the Bible is confidence based upon a degree of evidential warrant). The very thing atheists attack. See post above.

[daniel1212]

There is also Gerald Schroeder. Here he reconciles the Genesis account using time dilation. The Age of the Universe http://geraldschroeder.com/wordpress/the-age-of-the-universe/

Try to read later, thanks.

Without much of it, I will say that while "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" (Genesis 1:1) may be read as separate from days in which order and then life on earth was formed, and Genesis 2:4 refers to a day as a collective, and a solar "day" in Gn. 1:1-3 as meaning our sunset to sunrise did not exist, since there was no sun until sometime during the 4th day, and thus some other source of light provided night and day for a rotating earth. Yet this would have to be a slow an exceedingly rotation for million-year day. Or as Schroeder says of even the five and a half days" before man was formed, "How would we see those days stretched by a million million?" [via time dilation] However, since vegetation began on the the third day then night could not have been exceeding long.

The latter seems to be a problem with what Schroeder says: "The biblical text shows us (and the Talmud confirms) that the soul of Adam was created five and a half days after the big bang creation. That is a half day before the termination of the sixth day. At that moment the cosmic calendar ceases and an earth based calendar starts. How would we see those days stretched by a million million? Five and a half days times a million million, gives us five and a half million million days." That would mean long darkness for vegetation.

And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the third day. (Genesis 1:11-13)

Yet if Schroeder moves his million million days back to before day 3 then it would mess up his calculations.

[mdmathis6]

I wonder if Darwinism/survival of the fittest in nature is what we were left with...AFTER, the fall of man in Eden when sin entered the world. I’m talking about entropic process...not buried dinosaur bones and eroded canyons and all that jazz and the issue we find in trying to “age” all that.

[Hebrews 11:6]

the issue we find in trying to “age” all that

Science has aged it successfully. What Dr. Ross has done is to demonstrate comprehensively why a literal, consistent reading of Scripture describes an old universe and earth, fully consistent with scientific ageing.

[Hebrews 11:6]

Psalm 104 describes how God replaced obsolete species with new ones suited to the conditions on the earth as He transitioned it gradually from 5-hour days and 2% atmospheric oxygen to our present 24-hours and 20%:

All creatures look to you to give them their food at the proper time.
When you give it to them, they gather it up;
when you open your hand, they are satisfied with good things.
When you hide your face, they are terrified;
when you take away their breath, they die and return to the dust.
When you send your Spirit, they are created, and you renew the face of the ground.

In the "Cambrian Explosion", at 538 million years ago, God suddenly introduced all the major phyla in a geologic instant, far too briefly for natural process to explain it.

[Honest Nigerian]

Hugh Ross is such a disgrace.
But he does think highly of himself and his own conclusions.

[Honest Nigerian]

The single biggest thing wrong with Hugh Ross: he believes in evolution. The molecules-to-microbes-to-man kind of evolution.
That is not supportable scientifically or Biblically.

[A_perfect_lady]

That is faith (which in the Bible is confidence based upon a degree of evidential warrant). The very thing atheists attack. See post above.

I don't see this as an answer to my question. I'm not attacking faith, I'm just saying that the retort that atheism is "a fairy story" is not well supported. Where are the fairies?

[lasereye]

I don’t believe there is any overlap between the DSS and the NT. The early DSS were written well before the 1st century so it’s not possible for those to cast any doubt on the NT.

[Hebrews 11:6]

You are mistaken. Hugh Ross most emphatically does not believe in evolution. Nothing could be further from the truth.