Presents a logical development of Christianity outside of the "magic" view. Like all religion a need that developed into an answer. Which also best out the alternative answers proposed by fellow human thinkers.
This book will be good for those who do not already have an in depth knowledge of the Bible. However, if you have studied the Bible in detail this will be a real waste of your time. If you have a degree in religious studies or have been to seminary, don't waste your money.
I have been a fan of Ehrman's, but this book has really let me down. He is talking about Christian mythology here without making that clear. Christians, it is true, do not want to admit they have a mythology, but the New Testament is just that--with a little historical material mixed into it.
The writers of the New Testament were not interested in historical accuracy, the idea was foreign to them. They were used to the Jewish tradition of religious writing, which became the Christian tradition too. In this tradition the desired result is a story with maximum impact and appeal--which then becomes accepted as the truth, the logic being that if it feels right, it must be right.
Ehrman seems intent on creating new stories about Peter, Paul, and Mary (Magdalen), working over the informal oral source material in the Bible--but ignoring the fact that this kind of material is inconsistent by its very nature. No matter, he will make it consistent anyway, and pretend it is history. This might be acceptable for a run-of-the mill religious writer. But it is inexcusable for a scholar of his standing.
He tells a story that is entertaining and uplifting, suitable for a Christian TV series or a church school. His analogy to the folks singers Peter, Paul and Mary is deliberate and glib.
Anyone who is either having trouble sleeping or is looking for material to engage the falsely religiose in tiresome conversation about "why" the Bible and other writings about Peter, Paul, and Mary were written.
Nasally voice was not a positive feature of this audiobook, but the narrator could not detract more from this book/topic than the author.
1/1000 sentences was edifying.