you keep repeating this i keep explaining it and you keep ignoring the explanation and repeating the same complaint ehrman is not a reliable source on what all scholars believe he is a borderline source on what historians believe since he is not a historian he is a religion professor as editors it should seem questionable that it is a fact all scholars agree on something when that something isn't supported by a single peer reviewed secular journal none of those concerns require sources there are other things that matter to an encyclopedia