Misquoting Jesus

[andrewstx]

I recently got this book as a gift on Kindle. I know nothing about the author or even who he is and I have just started the book.

I was raised a Protestant Fundamentalist and this book raised questions for me. He says the bible cannot be innert becuause all we have are copies of copies of copies, not the original manuscripts. That makes sense to me.

But who is the author, is he Catholic? Is the book even ‘kosher’ to read? I have no idea. The gifter is a very liberal Episcopalian.

 

[po18guy]

I recently got this book as a gift on Kindle. I know nothing about the author or even who he is and I have just started the book.

I was raised a Protestant Fundamentalist and this book raised questions for me. He says the bible cannot be innert becuause all we have are copies of copies of copies, not the original manuscripts. That makes sense to me.

But who is the author, is he Catholic? Is the book even ‘kosher’ to read? I have no idea. The gifter is a very liberal Episcopalian.

Which book/author? With “errant” scriptures, and no central authority to interpret, that leaves the doctrinal field wide open to man’s itching ears. Not good.

 

[Gorgias]

I was raised a Protestant Fundamentalist and this book raised questions for me. He says the bible cannot be innert becuause all we have are copies of copies of copies, not the original manuscripts. That makes sense to me.

Fair enough. Be forewarned, though: in one broad stroke, you’ve disenfranchised the world of all the books of antiquity, and more or less, everything that’s been written up until, maybe, the last couple hundred years. Is that really an argument that makes sense, then?

But who is the author, is he Catholic? Is the book even ‘kosher’ to read? I have no idea. The gifter is a very liberal Episcopalian.

It’s not ‘kosher’ by any stretch. I have the book, too, and have been wanting to sit down and dive into it, but haven’t had the chance to do so yet…

 

[po18guy]

Which book/author? With “errant” scriptures, and no central authority to interpret, that leaves the doctrinal field wide open to man’s itching ears. Not good.

Never mind! I see the title in the thread title. Bart Ehrman? Avoid.

 

[RPRPsych]

I recently got this book as a gift on Kindle. I know nothing about the author or even who he is and I have just started the book.

I was raised a Protestant Fundamentalist and this book raised questions for me. He says the bible cannot be innert becuause all we have are copies of copies of copies, not the original manuscripts. That makes sense to me.

But who is the author, is he Catholic? Is the book even ‘kosher’ to read? I have no idea. The gifter is a very liberal Episcopalian.

Bart Ehrman is an agnostic who believes that very liberal historical-critical analysis and exegesis is the Way, the Truth and the Life.

St. Pius X had a nice name for folks like him.

Ignore the book, unless you’re planning to work on apologetics.

 

[Petaro]

The author is an evangelical professor, who’s main claim to fame is wring books, putting forward the thesis that the Bible has been forged, mistranslated and copied incorrectly from the time of the Apostles.
Where is leads us is anyone’s guess, however for the protestant who espouses the bible alone, it is a frightening prospect.
Leave it alone.

 

[RPRPsych]

The author is an evangelical professor, who’s main claim to fame is wring books, putting forward the thesis that the Bible has been forged, mistranslated and copied incorrectly from the time of the Apostles.
Where is leads us is anyone’s guess, however for the protestant who espouses the bible alone, it is a frightening prospect.
Leave it alone.

Sounds like a disciple of St. Alfred Loisy, but minus the “Church” bit.

 

[HCTC]

Because different parts of the Bible were originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek, translation into various successive languages could be an issue.

 

[andrewstx]

Never mind! I see the title in the thread title. Bart Ehrman? Avoid.

I read Wicki on Erhman and I will pass.

When I was a fundamentalist Innerent meant that every word of the bible is littertal fact, including science and history. I passed on that too. years ago.

 

[dzheremi]

Ehrman’s hypothesis is basically a modern retelling/reinforcement of the Bauer approach to historical-critical readings of the Bible, and is just as bankrupt as Bauer’s was back in the 1930s. The fact that Ehrman puts it in terms that are ‘sexy’ (from a marketing perspective) doesn’t make it any less wrong.

For more on this, see Kostenberger and Kruger’s excellent 2010 book The Heresy of Orthodoxy: How Contemporary Culture’s Fascination with Diversity Has Reshaped Our Understanding of Early Christianity (available on Amazon here). While the authors themselves are not Orthodox Christians (just a clarification, in light of the title), their approach to this topic is compelling, and really shows Ehrman and Co’s “revolution” in thinking about early Christianity to be quite worn and devoid of anything much new, interesting, or (above all) trustworthy to say about the subjects in which they are considered to be ‘experts’.

 

[Darryl1958]

Reviews generally speak of the book as having an agenda. The bigger criticism is that it is directed at a lay audience, and that agenda is to provoke doubt through overstatement, whereas proper modern scholarship is built upon nuance and recognition of how little there is that can be said with certainty either way.

 

[Petaro]

I have a lot of his books and think they are extremely well done and very, very interesting and illuminating.

He’s a former Christian, now agnostic. He is considered to be a highly-respected New Testament scholar for the last 25-plus years. He’s a distinguished, award-winning Professor of Religious Studies at North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
He is a historian who studied fluent Greek and Latin in order to read the earliest manuscripts of the bible, and has degrees from Princeton Theological Seminary and Moody Bible College, among others.
He discusses and researches biblical topics as a historian, not leaning in any biased direction…he has no interest in convincing someone away from their religion.

He’s taken part in many riveting debates, which you can find on youtube, and is often consulted as an expert.

His next book coming out in April is called “How Jesus Became God” and I’m looking forward to that one.

I don’t know why one would be “frightened” to read his books unless learning new information is scary to a person.
Much of what he says makes a lot of sense and many scholars agree with him.

The information and thoughts he presents don’t need to be incongruent with a person’s religious beliefs.

.

Do you not think that it is so sad to see a supposedly erudite biblical scholar formally a Christian, allowing his intellectual pride drive him away from his Christ, to the detriment of his immortal soul?
I would prefer to lose my intellect than my Faith. We must pray for him and pray also that his works do not deceive anyone away from the Truth of the Bible and our God. AMDG

 

[thistle]

I recently got this book as a gift on Kindle. I know nothing about the author or even who he is and I have just started the book.

I was raised a Protestant Fundamentalist and this book raised questions for me. He says the bible cannot be innert becuause all we have are copies of copies of copies, not the original manuscripts. That makes sense to me.

But who is the author, is he Catholic? Is the book even ‘kosher’ to read? I have no idea. The gifter is a very liberal Episcopalian.

The Dead Sea Scrolls prove that Scripture has been accurately copied.

 

[CalCatholic]

Reviews generally speak of the book as having an agenda. The bigger criticism is that it is directed at a lay audience, and that agenda is to provoke doubt through overstatement, whereas proper modern scholarship is built upon nuance and recognition of how little there is that can be said with certainty either way.

Does he have an agenda? I think he does, just look at the titles of some of his books:

**Misquoting Jesus, The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why

Forged: Writing in the Name of God – Why the Bible’s Authors Are Not Who We Think They Are

Lost Scriptures: Books that Did Not Make it into the New Testament

Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and Faiths We Never Knew

Jesus, Interrupted, Revealing the Hidden Contradictions of the Bible

Forgery and Counterforgery: The Use of Literary Deceit in Early Christian Polemics
**
I read ‘Jesus, Interrupted, Revealing the Hidden Contradictions of the Bible’ and there is nothing in that book that had not already been brought up in earlier New Testament classes that I had attended, years before that book came out. Bart Ehrman takes existing modern historical-critical ‘theories’ and puts a sinister title on them to sell books!

For instance, The Second Letter of Peter, many modern scholars beleive this book was written by an anonymous Christian but that it was attributed to St. Peter. Now (whether you believe this or not), this was not uncommon in ancient times (and accepted), that a disciple would write in tribute in their master’s name and authority. In modern scholarship this is called a pseudonymous work (read the introduction to 2 Peter in the NAB). But that does not sell books, so Bart Ehrman takes the already established theory and spices it up with a sinister title and calls this a forgery! Using a 21st century interpretation of ‘plagiarism’ and applying it to a 1st century practice that was considered acceptable. I don’t know if he does this to persuade people not to become Christians, or he does this to sell more books, or both!

 

[Darryl1958]

Does he have an agenda? I think he does, just look at the titles of some of his books:

**Misquoting Jesus, The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why

Forged: Writing in the Name of God – Why the Bible’s Authors Are Not Who We Think They Are

Lost Scriptures: Books that Did Not Make it into the New Testament

Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and Faiths We Never Knew

Jesus, Interrupted, Revealing the Hidden Contradictions of the Bible

Forgery and Counterforgery: The Use of Literary Deceit in Early Christian Polemics
**
I read ‘Jesus, Interrupted, Revealing the Hidden Contradictions of the Bible’ and there is nothing in that book that had not already been brought up in earlier New Testament classes that I had attended, years before that book came out. Bart Ehrman takes existing modern historical-critical ‘theories’ and puts a sinister title on them to sell books!

For instance, The Second Letter of Peter, many modern scholars beleive this book was written by an anonymous Christian but that it was attributed to St. Peter. Now (whether you believe this or not), this was not uncommon in ancient times (and accepted), that a disciple would write in tribute in their master’s name and authority. In modern scholarship this is called a pseudonymous work (read the introduction to 2 Peter in the NAB). But that does not sell books, so Bart Ehrman takes the already established theory and spices it up with a sinister title and calls this a forgery! Using a 21st century interpretation of ‘plagiarism’ and applying it to a 1st century practice that was considered acceptable. I don’t know if he does this to persuade people not to become Christians, or he does this to sell more books, or both!

A lot of people are looking for reasons not to believe, and Bart Ehrman delivers his product to laymen in a calculated way that allows them to do so.
I don’t see that as an intellectually honest way for a scholar to behave.

 

[CalCatholic]

A lot of people are looking for reasons not to believe, and Bart Ehrman delivers his product to laymen in a calculated way that allows them to do so.
I don’t see that as an intellectually honest way for a scholar to behave.

I don’t know what is in his heart, but a verse from scripture keep popping into to my head when I think of this possibility:

"Who ever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him if a great millstone were hung round his neck and he were thrown into the sea." (Mark 9:42)

I’ll pray for Bart Ehrman!

 

[PJM]

=andrewstx;11729953]I recently got this book as a gift on Kindle. I know nothing about the author or even who he is and I have just started the book.

I was raised a Protestant Fundamentalist and this book raised questions for me. He says the bible cannot be innert becuause all we have are copies of copies of copies, not the original manuscripts. That makes sense to me.

But who is the author, is he Catholic? Is the book even ‘kosher’ to read? I have no idea. The gifter is a very liberal Episcopalian.

Sorry; I don’t know

HOWEVER, the Founder of CAF; Karl Keeting authored an EXCELLENT book on this very topic entitled:

---

CATHOLICISM AND FUNDAMENTALISM***

GOOGLE IT,

It;s an exceptional explanation of both catholic and Fundamental Beliefs.

God Bless you,
Patrick

 

[andrewstx]

Sorry; I don’t know

HOWEVER, the Founder of CAF; Karl Keeting authored an EXCELLENT book on this very topic entitled:

---

CATHOLICISM AND FUNDAMENTALISM***

GOOGLE IT,

It;s an exceptional explanation of both catholic and Fundamental Beliefs.

God Bless you,
Patrick

I think instead of googling I will order it from Leaflet Missal, it will be a huge and better choice to misquoting Jesus I am sure.

 

[PJM]

=andrewstx;11732562]i think instead of googling i will order it from leaflet missal, it will be a huge and better choice to misquoting jesus i am sure.

amen!:d

 

[johnwl]

daddygirl: Why can’t a person have both faith and intellectual curiosity?
A person can have faith and still read the findings of one of the top biblical scholars of this country. (A lot of what he learned, by the way, was in the seminary)
Is faith so shaky that one historical book by a revered professor would change a person’s entire life’s belief system?
If so, that would say a lot about the person’s faith.

Hi. Well, where to begin? As far an intellectual anything, I would point out the Catholic church invented the university system, the scientific method, and has been a leader in intellectual inquiry for 2,000 years.

I would never call Ehrman a ‘top biblical scholar’. And his thesis (which he derived from Pagels, who in turn derived it from Bauer) is wrong. Here are some decent scholars and books that refute the thesis:

Memory and Manuscript with Tradition and Transmission in Early Christianity by Mr. Birger Gerhardsson

The Bauer Thesis Examined: The Geography of Heresy in the Early Christian Church . by Thomas A. Robinson

Judaism and Hellenism by Martin Hengel

These are difficult book by actual scholars. For a popular presentation:

Fabricating Jesus: How Modern Scholars Distort the Gospels by Craig A. Evans

God’s blessings upon you, Johnwl