Misquoting Jesus

  • Thread starter Thread starter Todd520
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
One of the most informative books on the history and textual development of the New Testament I have ever read. I’ve read all of his books and I have his video series “Lost Christianities”.
 
Todd520 said:
An interesting video of Dr Bart Ehrman, a New Testament scholar.

Scribes Who Altered Scripture

He talks about how the Holy Scripture was tampered with by scribes throughout early church history
Click to expand...
I have read his book…doesn’t seem that he produced evidence of any tampering that is all that significant…for a different perspective you may wish to consider “Fabricating Jesus” by Craig A. Evans
 
Radical said:
I have read his book…doesn’t seem that he produced evidence of any tampering that is all that significant…for a different perspective you may wish to consider “Fabricating Jesus” by Craig A. Evans
Click to expand...
For anyone who believes the New Testament is without error and “infallible”, finding out that there are more variations between the manuscripts of the NT than there are words in the NT.

To claim that the original are without error isn’t much of a claim…since we do not have the original…but copies of copies of copies of copies of copies…hundreds of years removed from the time and events which took place…and there are numerous variations to the hundreds of NT manuscripts which survive and from which our modern xlations are made from.

To some…that info is shocking.
 
I have not read the book.

If one follows the underling theme in the whole of the bible, one will get enough evidence of what God has been doing all along.

There are four steps or points in which the whole of the bible is geared to:
  1. Introduction
  2. The fall
  3. Judgment
    4.Settlement
There may have been some adjusting, some tampering to the word, but do you possibly think that God did not know what might happen, and not make provisions for it?

Of course God knew and therefore, the whole bible would have to be completely tampered with in order to render it of no credibility.

There is nothing to fear about some tampering, for the word of God is very firm, true and in-destructive.

The altering, by interpretation for motives other than to please God by mankind are more dangerous and something to be on guard for.

The New Testament is our workbook.

Instructions were given for different issues as they came up and addressed.

Now, because Jesus took the penalty of eternal damnation away from us with God’s own righteousness, the only thing that remains is the consequences of our own behavior payable in the flesh.

If, one can see to accept Jesus for who was, and what He came here to do, believe Him when He said, I am resurrection of life,(Joh 11:25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: ) has nothing to worry about except for the will to do good.

Blessings, AJ
 
Publisher said:
For anyone who believes the New Testament is without error and “infallible”, finding out that there are more variations between the manuscripts of the NT than there are words in the NT.

To claim that the original are without error isn’t much of a claim…since we do not have the original…but copies of copies of copies of copies of copies…hundreds of years removed from the time and events which took place…and there are numerous variations to the hundreds of NT manuscripts which survive and from which our modern xlations are made from.
Click to expand...
agreed
To some…that info is shocking.
Click to expand...
for others it was old news. 😉
 
While I respect Ehrman as a scholar, one can certainly overstate the amount of “tampering” that went on. With three notable exceptions (that I am aware of), the changes have tended to be very minor. The three major exceptions don’t change the theology at all (by that I mean the theological beliefs are not based on those passages).

Of course if you are someone who, like Ehrman did, believes that the bible is completely infallible and is the basis of the Christian faith, then stuff like this should certainly shake your faith, they prove that it has been subjected to transcription by fallible humans, and that it is not the unmitigated word of God.

The three notable examples I mean by the way, are the end of Mark (there are three known endings to Mark. The basic ending, the short ending, and the long ending), the adulterous woman about to be stoned (“Let he who is without sin cast the first stone”), and the trinitarian formula found in one of the Epistles (I can’t remember which it is, KJV-onlyers cite this as proof that the KJV is the true bible).
 
Nine_Two said:
The three notable examples I mean by the way, are the end of Mark (there are three known endings to Mark. The basic ending, the short ending, and the long ending), the adulterous woman about to be stoned (“Let he who is without sin cast the first stone”), and the trinitarian formula found in one of the Epistles (I can’t remember which it is, KJV-onlyers cite this as proof that the KJV is the true bible).
Click to expand...
You’re thinking of Mark 16:9-20, Luke 7:53-8:11 (“Pericope Adulterae”), and 1 John 5:7-8 (“Comma Johnanneum”).

When I first came across the latter two, I immediately knew they didn’t really represent a problem. Know why? They had Latin nicknames. This indicated they have been known for a very long time, and if long known, then probably settled by now.

At any rate, all of these can be looked up.
 
Apollos said:
At any rate, all of these can be looked up.
Click to expand...
As noted above as well, this is old news to many people.
I posted it because it was news to me, and the subject does relate to many thread topics.
 
Apollos said:
You’re thinking of Mark 16:9-20, Luke 7:53-8:11 (“Pericope Adulterae”), and 1 John 5:7-8 (“Comma Johnanneum”).

When I first came across the latter two, I immediately knew they didn’t really represent a problem. Know why? They had Latin nicknames. This indicated they have been known for a very long time, and if long known, then probably settled by now.

At any rate, all of these can be looked up.
Click to expand...
Of course they’ve been known for a long time, that doesn’t mitigate them. I have plenty of issues with the Koran, for example, that have been known for a long time. That doesn’t make them alright and Islam the true faith.

People certainly should know of these, and know why they aren’t a big deal (although when you have Ehrman’s background, they certainly are a big deal), but they shouldn’t dismiss them because they’ve been known about for a long time.
 
I am not going to waste electrons critiquing his talk; I’m just going to say one name and leave it at that: Bruce Metzger
 
One of the other things that he overlooks is that while the earliest gospels come from the 3rd or 4th centuries we also have the extant letters of the ECF’s from the earlier centuries that have direct quotes from not only the gospels but also from much of the rest of the NT to compare to.

These along with other sources testify that what we have in the NT are the teachings of Jesus and the apostles faithfully transmitted.

To assume that God would allow “the gates of hell” to prevail against His Church through the means by which he asserts presumes too much.

Praise God for St. Jerome and his Vulgate translation.
 
Publisher said:
For anyone who believes the New Testament is without error and “infallible”, finding out that there are more variations between the manuscripts of the NT than there are words in the NT.
Click to expand...
The vast majority of “variations,” if not nearly all, are simply grammatical in nature, and have no direct affect upon the theology of the New Testament. If you want a greater example of this, pick up an NASB, based off the Alexandrian manuscripts, and then read a KJV, based off the Byzantine manuscripts. Unless you’re a wild-eyed KJV-Only fundamentalist, there is no essential difference between these two translations, despite the fact they’re based off two manuscripts some 700 years in difference.
Apollos said:
I am not going to waste electrons critiquing his talk; I’m just going to say one name and leave it at that: Bruce Metzger
Click to expand...
I got four words: UBS Greek New Testament. 😉
 
Nine_Two said:
What does it do for the major variations?
Click to expand...
What the UBS NT does is grade each verse, list all the various manuscripts that have it, etc., presenting a good study of how reliable most verses are and where we get them. There’s a commentary for it, which I also have. It goes into detail on the major variations, talking about the various patristic traditions and manuscripts.

It’s also based off the Alexandrian manuscripts, which the NASB, NIV, ESV and other translations are based off.
 
I was under the impression it was based off the Codex Sinaticus.

Good to know anyway.
 
Nine_Two said:
I was under the impression it was based off the Codex Sinaticus.

Good to know anyway.
Click to expand...
It mentions the Codex Sinaiticus a couple of times in the manuscript lists below the verses, but it’s not based solely off of it. That’s why when I talk to Muslims who try to jump to one isolated text that has one variant, I try to veer them to the rest of the manuscript family, from which most Bible translations come.
 
Publisher said:
One of the most informative books on the history and textual development of the New Testament I have ever read. I’ve read all of his books and I have his video series “Lost Christianities”.
Click to expand...
**So if Mr. Ehrman & all of the other “Jesus Seminar” type elite intellectuals are correct, then Christianity is false?

i submit that Jesus was talking about people like Mr. Ehrman when He said;

“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.” (Mt 7:15)

i’m so glad that Mr. Ehrman saved us from Jesus & all of the false interpretations that followed despite Jesus’ claim;

“And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.” (Mt 16:18)**

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

mark
 
Nine_Two said:
Of course they’ve been known for a long time, that doesn’t mitigate them. I have plenty of issues with the Koran, for example, that have been known for a long time. That doesn’t make them alright and Islam the true faith.

People certainly should know of these, and know why they aren’t a big deal (although when you have Ehrman’s background, they certainly are a big deal), but they shouldn’t dismiss them because they’ve been known about for a long time.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Most conservative Christians who are taught the Bible is divinely inspired AND without error are shocked…as was Mr. Erhman in his youth…to learn that the gospels give different accounts for the same events.

How many women showed up at the tomb?

Did the disciple go to Gallilee as instructed and “there they will see me”…or did they hang around in Jerusalem and see the risen Christ?

Why are the nativity stories contradictory? To Mr. Erhman’s point…do we believe Matthew or Luke? If we combine the stories…then we have a third version…a version NOT supported in either Matthew or Luke.

What about Paul…the story in Acts about events which included Paul are contradicted by Paul himself in his epistles…do we “combine” them for a “third version”…a version which is not supported in the text?

Is the story of the “woman caught in adultery” usually found in John…but in some manuscripts found in Luke…and in some…not at all…is this story actually “scripture” and “inspired” since it was “added” to later manuscripts and not in some of the earliest manuscripts?

Is the ending of Mark, which does not appear in most manuscripts, is it inspired or???

Issues like this DO mess with the minds of the very conservative who believe “the Bible is inspired cover to cover.”…I had a Missionary Baptist friend who said “I believe the Bible from cover to cover…I even believe in the cover.”

Mr. Erhman’s “Lost Christianities” and “Lost Scriptures” was a great read along with “Misquoting Jesus”.
 
Publisher said:
Agreed. Most conservative Christians who are taught the Bible is divinely inspired AND without error are shocked…as was Mr. Erhman in his youth…to learn that the gospels give different accounts for the same events.
Click to expand...
If one ignores everything they’re taught, certainly. Ehrmann’s former classmates have said that he must have been asleep if he’s now saying some of this stuff later took him off guard, as they were talked about in the classes he took before his apostasy (which was based more on an understanding of pain than it was scripture).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top