How often do we hear people “explaining” religious beliefs by stating “The Bible says so,” as if the Bible fell out of the sky, pre-translated to English by God Himself? It’s not that simple, according to an impressive and clearly-written book that should be required reading for anyone who claims to know “what the Bible says.”
Bart Ehrman’s Exploration: Who Changed the Bible and Why?
The 2005 bestseller, Misquoting Jesus, was not written by a raving atheist. Rather, it was written by a fellow who had a born-again experience in high school, then went on to attend the ultraconservative Moody Bible Institute in Chicago. Bart Ehrman didn’t stop there, however. He wanted to become an evangelical voice with credentials that would enable him to teach in secular settings. It was for this reason that he continued his education at Wheaton and, eventually, Princeton, picking up the ability to read the New Testament in its original Greek in the process.
As a result of his disciplined study, Ehrman increasingly questioned the fundamentalist approach that the “Bible is the inerrant Word of God. It contains no mistakes.” Through his studies, Ehrman determined that the Bible was not free of mistakes:
We have only error ridden copies, and the vast majority of these are centuries removed from the originals and different from them, evidently, in thousands of ways.
(Page 7). At Princeton, Ehrman learned that mistakes had been made in the copying of the New Testament over the centuries. Upon realizing this, “the floodgates opened.” In Mark 4, for example, Jesus allegedly stated that the mustard seed is “the smallest of all seeds on the earth.” Ehrman knew that this simply was not true. The more he studied the early manuscripts, the more he realized that the Bible was full of contradictions. For instance, Mark writes that Jesus was crucified the day after the Passover meal (Mark 14:12; 15:25) while John says Jesus died the day before the Passover meal (John 19:14).
Ehrman often heard that the words of the Bible were inspired. Obviously, the Bible was not originally written in English. Perhaps, suggests Ehrman, the full meaning and nuance of the New Testament could only be grasped when it was read in its original Greek (and the Old Testament could be fully appreciated only when studied in its original Hebrew) (page 6).
Because of these language barriers and the undeniable mistakes and contradictions, Ehrman realized that the Bible could not be the “fully inspired, inerrant Word of God.” Instead, it appeared to him to be a “very human book.” Human authors had originally written the text at different times and in different places to address different needs. Certainly, the Bible does not provide an an “errant guide as to how we should live. This is the shift in my own thinking that I ended up making, and to which I am now fully committed.”
How pervasive is the belief that the Bible is inerrant, that every word of the Bible is precise and true?
Occasionally I see a bumper sticker that reads: “God said it, I believe it, and that settles it.” My response is always, what if God didn’t say it? What if the book you take as giving you God’s words instead contains human words. What if the Bible doesn’t give a foolproof answer to the questions of the modern age-abortion, women’s rights, gay rights, religious and supremacy, western style democracy and the like? What if we have to figure out how to live and what to believe on our own, without setting up the Bible as a false idol–or an oracle that gives us a direct line of communication with the Almighty.
(Page 14). Ehrman continues to appreciate the Bible as an important collection of writings, but urges that it needs to be read and understood in the context of textual criticism, “a compelling and intriguing field of study of real importance not just to scholars but to everyone with an interest in the Bible.” Ehrman finds it striking that most readers of the Bible know almost nothing about textual criticism. He comments that this is not surprising, in that very few books have been written about textual criticism for a lay audience (namely, “those who know nothing about it, who don’t have the Greek and other languages necessary for the in-depth study of it who do not realize there is even any “problem” with the text).
Misquoting Jesus provides much background into how the Bible became the Bible. It happened through numerous human decisions over the centuries. For instance, the first time any Christian of record listed the 27 books of the New Testament as the books of the New Testament was 300 years after the books have been written (page 36). And those works have been radically altered over the years at the hands of the scribes “who were not only conserving scripture but also changing it.” Ehrman points out that most of the hundreds of thousands of textual changes found among the manuscripts were “completely insignificant, immaterial, of no real importance.” In short, they were innocent mistakes involving misspelling or inadvertence.
On the other hand, the very meaning of the text changed in some instances. Some Bible scholars have even concluded that it makes no sense to talk about the “original” text of the Bible. (Page 210). As a result of studying surviving Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, Ehrman concluded that we simply don’t have the original words constituting the New Testament.
Not only do we not have the originals, we don’t have the first copies of the originals. We don’t even have copies of the copies of the originals, or copies of the copies of the copies of the originals. What we have are copies made later-much later. In most instances, they are copies made many centuries later. And these copies all differ from one another, and many thousands of places . . . Possibly it is easiest to put it in comparative terms: there are more differences among our manuscripts and there are words in the New Testament.
In Misquoting Jesus Bart Ehrman spells out the ways in which several critical passages of the New Testament were changed or concocted. They are startling examples:
A.) Everyone knows the story about Jesus and the woman about to be stoned by the mob. This account is only found in John 7:53-8:12. The mob asked Jesus whether they should stone the woman (the punishment required by the Old Testament) or show her mercy. Jesus doesn’t fall for this trap. Jesus allegedly states “Let the one who is without sin among you be the first to cast a stone at her.”
The crowd dissipates out of shame. Ehrman states that this brilliant story was not originally in the Gospel of John or in any of the Gospels. “It was added by later scribes.” The story is not found in “our oldest and best manuscripts of the Gospel of John. Nor does its writing style comport with the rest of John. Most serious textual critics state that this story should not be considered part of the Bible (page 65).
B) after Jesus died, Mary Magdalene and two other women came back to the tomb to anoint the body of Jesus, according to Mark 16:1-2). They were met by a man in a white robe who told them that Jesus had been raised and was no longer there. The women fled and said nothing more to anyone out of fear (16:4-8). Everyone knows the rest of Mark’s Gospel, of course. The problem with the remainder of the story is that none of it was originally in the Gospel of Mark. It was added by a later scribe. Those additions include all of the following:
Jesus himself appeared to Mary Magdalene. She told the eleven apostles (minus Judas) about this vision, but they did not believe her. Jesus then appeared to the apostles, chastising them for failing to believe. He tells them that those who believe will be saved and those who don’t will be condemned. Then follows a critically important passage of the Bible.
And these are the signs that will accompany those who believe: they will cast out demons in my name; they will speak in new tongues; and they will take up snakes in their hands; and if they drink any poison, it will not harm them; they will place their hands upon the sick and heal them.
Jesus is then allegedly taken up into heaven and sits at the right hand of God, while the disciples go forth into the world to proclaim the Gospel in miraculous fashion.
Without the above passages (which, again, were not written by Mark) the Pentecostals lose their justification for speaking in “tongues.” And the Appalachian snake handlers have no basis for their dangerous practices.
C) John 5:7-8 is the only passage in the entire Bible “that explicitly delineates the doctrine of the Trinity (that there are three persons and God but that all three constitute a single God):
There are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Spirit and these three are one; and there are three that bear witness on earth, the spirit, the water, and the blood, and these three are one.
Ehrman cites strong evidence that this Trinity passage was entirely concocted and foisted upon Erasmus by outraged theologians who needed support for their prized theological doctrine (page 81).
—
Ehrman reveals numerous other difficulties with the popular assumption that the Bible was perfectly handed down from its original written expression.
Many believers rely fervently on the King James version of the Bible, for instance. They sometimes even say “If the King James was good enough for St. Paul, it’s good enough for me.” Ehrman points out many problems with the King James version, warning that “we need to face up to the facts.”
The King James was not given by God but was a translation by a group of scholars in the early 17th century who based their rendition on a faulty Greek text.
(Page 209).
So what should we make of the Bible? Ehrman argues that the attacks of the New Testament are not simply collections of obvious, self-interpreting words. It’s the same problem we have with other important documents, such as the United States Constitution:
Texts do not simply reveal their own meanings to honest inquirers. Texts are interpreted and they are interpreted (just as they were written) by living, breathing human beings, who can make sense of texts only by explaining them in light of other other knowledge, explicating their meaning, putting the words of the text “in other words.”
(Page 217) The scribes changed the original words of the New Testament by putting them in other words.
In my experience, many people who cherry pick excerpts from the Bible as the proper way to determine what is moral are in utter denial that we don’t have accurate copies of the original writings. Most of them refuse to acknowledge that current popular versions of the Bible contain numerous discrepancies, even compared to the earliest manuscripts we do have. This is on top of the fact that their are hundreds of patent contradictions in the English version of the Bible. To most believers, none of this matters. Stay the course! In fact, in my experience most believers rarely read what the consider to be God’s own inspired word.
Ehrman’s book points out numerous troublesome issues that demand attention even assuming that the original writers of the Bible accurately reported the events described in their original writings (whatever those writings were). The elephant in the room, however, is that none of the authors of the Gospels ever claimed to witness any of the events they were reporting. Further, the extraodinary nature of Biblical claims demands extraordinary proof that ancient self-contradictory writings are simply incapable of providing, except to those of us who believe that the Bible is completely true “because it says so in the Bible.”
For all of those people who continue to go around clentching and thumping those Bibles they bought at Wal-Mart, and for all the rest of us who want to get the story straight, Ehrman’s Misquoting Jesus should be required reading.
[Administrator’s Note: More than 540 comments were quickly contributed to this post, making this page too long to download and display. Therefore, on March 23, 2007, I closed off new comments. Last night (February 4, 2009), I discovered a WordPress plugin that allows me to paginate comments, thereby protecting the site from the sudden and repeated load of 540 comments.
Here’s the good news, then. Anyone who has not yet had his or her say on Bart Ehrman’s book may now jump in at the original post and post a comment. That’s right! If none of the 540 comments that have come before you didn’t address an important aspect of Bart Ehrman’s book, you may now remedy that omission, right here in the comments to this original post. Godspeed. ]
Ray says:
"1) God is love. For love to work, you need more than one person.
"2) God is also perfect and holy and just. We have rebelled against Him, therefore incurred His wrath. As a just God, justice demands satisfaction. Or else he wouldn’t be just. He loved us so much, He delivered His only Son to satisfy the judgement. He placed on Jesus the burden of us all (that is, of those that accept this substitution)."
As regards point 1: Imagine you are an early Christian Believer trying to gain followers for your religion. What better way would there be for you to generate support for your new religion than by listing the best pre-existing human behaviors (e.g., selflessness, altruism, generosity, fairness, justice, forgiveness, etc.) and emotions (e.g., love) and then claiming that your god is the source of all of those qualities? Let's get beyond the "God is love" soundbites, shall we?
As regards point 2: again, let's get past the regurgitated soundbites. If God exists and is all powerful, then he can simply absolve the human race of its sins without all that nonsense about sending Jesus to die for us. You say that "As a just God, justice demands satisfaction. Or else he wouldn’t be just. He loved us so much, He delivered His only Son to satisfy the judgement." But that is self-contradictory. You say that justice demands satisfaction or else God would not be just, but then you state that Jesus, an innocent person, satisfied the judgment. You are saying that a judge who sentences an innocent man to death, while knowingly letting the guilty man go free, is a fair judge. Plainly that is not justice at all. Indeed, that is the opposite of justice. To say that God "loved us so much" that he "delivered his only son to satisfy the judgment" is equally nonsensical. No loving father would ever kill his own son to allow a guilty man go free. That isn't love at all; it's infanticide.
No one can speak for God; anything man writes has to be taken with a grain of salt!
Anyone who says the Bible is crap, let me tell you something. I am a believer. I have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. I talk to Him every day and He talks to me. I'm telling you if you ever have got close to Jesus you would not be turned away from Christianity. All you had was a religious expirience, dead human doctrines to follow. But with God, as in Jer 29:11 says, He has a future and a hope for you. Nothing you can plan on your own could be better then help from the one who created you for a specific purpose. Everything I have need of is provided by God, miracles happen all the time for me. I saw a lady who was blind in one eye receive her sight back in front of me! I'm telling you, there is nothing better then serving a God who loves us. Other religions die for their God and cause, but our God dies for us!!
Matthew; Science is not an absolute anything. Science is a method for discovering and eventually proving what is true. Using the scientific method over and over again in repeated experiments will eventually lead us to what is real. Along the way, hypothesis and theories will come and go. If properly applied (used), the scientific method will ALWAYS reveal reality. If it doesn't, then the experiment was incorrectly done. This is true of any field of inquiry. There is no reason to believe that God did not give man the scientific method, therefore science is a gift of God for man to use to discover and come to embrace the world around him. If God did not want man to discover the truth he would not have made the scientific method available. Eventually we may come to learn more about God. It may or may not have much to do with the Bible.
Cato (PhD in Microbiology)
It's interesting. Most say," Alright, this is wrong." and go on to, at least try to prove a point. This side of the fence, or that side. And some of you (thankfully) try to point out that there's plenty of land away from this silly fence you've built. Okay, enough pasture talk.
If we really want to get down to it, when has the bible never contradicted itself? If you were to follow the teachings, it's a book written by (imperfect) man (and woman, unless Ruth, Ester and the like were too busy/lazy to pen their journeys) who have heard from a (perfect) God. The few convenient sidenotes are thrown in there, in case we start to question things ( This is the Holy (.. as in, with many holes?) word Of GOD, and all that rot ). Who's to say it is or it isn't? I'd venture that it's got many great ideas, but we've tended to follow them .. well. Not so well, as our good friend 'londonderry' pointed out. But to quote ksmith, I'd hate to be just another 'igonrant'. (okay, okay, potshots at people's spelling. I'll stop. My grammar and the like is awful.)
You don't need to be brainwashed by someone. We as humans are perfectly capable of doing that to ourselves. Which brings me to another points ( on one of those crazy shoots and ladders rabbit trails ). .. If its' a perfect system, yet' we've messed it up so many times, who's to say that we didn't mess it up when we wrote it down?
I'd venture that things sort of heated up when the son of an idol maker in a little desert town noticed things were a bit off. " Wait a minute," he must've said," How does this piece of wood, and this rock, become a god? " And Abram (the 'ha' was added later. A bit of comic relief, perhaps.) decided," Oh, what the hell. I'll start my own religion!.. Wait. Hell. That might come in useful later." And thus began the saga. Yes, I've read it many times. I have my mum and dad to thank for that, but no hard feelings seriously.
Here's my advice. Set aside your beliefs, at least for one day. And go explore another! I really mean that too. Someone made a very good point when they spoke of the human sacrifice. It matches all too well with the pagan religions of the time ( as do Christmas, and Easter.. Wait. The communion. Blood- Vampirism? Flesh-Cannibalism? Even as a symbolic gesture its' a bit disturbing. ).
Anyway, back on track. Keep up this charade you play as a harbinger of doom. It's going to happen sure. Just like the dinosaurs ( although we seem to have a few of them about still ) and what not. Who's to say that humans will last forever? By any timeline you go by, we're just the newcomers. (Except for the Adam and Eve thing. Which is a bit creative… To say the least. "There was nothing. And voi-la! The world! .. And now for my next trick!" .. Seriously, we went " I .. I dunno." and made it up. In my humble opinion, which doesn't mean fuck-all to anyone but me at the moment. But tha'ts what matters, so I'm writing it down. )
Get a bit crazy with it. Play, dance, feel, hurt, laugh, love, cry. And that's life.
Ciao
– Tialas
Is there a translation of only the oldest known versions which have been compared so that a consensus version can be printed? It would seem that the errors could be statistically, textually, stylistically and otherwise analysed to come up with a more accutrate version. The obvious errors could be weeded out. As a Christian who does not believe in the Trinity, as it was obviously added later, I want to know what the original Christians believed.
THANK GOODNESS WE HAVE MODERN DAY PROPHETS AS SHOWN IN THE BOOK OF MORMON
time has a way of bringing things to light! i have preached what has been stated here for the last 14 to 15 yrs. research will so that man changed the bible a number of times for many reasons! king james changed the bible because the churh was mad that he was ruling as a tyrant and it was against the bible. he had a group of scholars come together and write the king james version so he would not have to change the way he ruled.
jesus was once quoted as saying "prove all things lest ye know better then me! " thats sttaight from the bible! did he really say that? good question ! but a better quetsion is why dont you do the research yourself and see what the truth really is! thats one way to know for sure! prove it yourself! there is another passage in the bible that says you should not celebrate chrismas the way you do and another that says all gays should be put to death! is it the word of god or man! that is the question! do the research and you will know the answer! i studiy all religions so i can know who stands for what and why! thats the only way you will come to terms on what you truly believe!
I think you have all missed the key point here; which is what happens when one threatens deeply held, dogmatic belief. The point is that the original biblical texts were written in GREEK. The prophet and his disciples spoke ARAMAIC. What does this mean? The original texts of the bible NEVER WERE WRITTEN by the disciples in the first place. Two plus two, folks.
These arguments are as old as the Church itself, and all come down to the same thing: social engineering by misdirection thereby preventing REAL thought and discourse to arise.
Oh, and one more point. I only picked this post, because it was the closest.
""ksmith Says:
October 23rd, 2006 at 7:28 am
What a shame in all of this. All this disagreement is also foretold, do your own look up.
Either you believe or you don’t, your choice, man’s free will, also spoken about in scripture. To tear the Bible apart is discusting to me, and I can’t beleive you people call yourselves intelligent. Why is it so important to validate anything when if comes to God? So a few words were misspelled or left out, whoop dee do. The truth is still there and guess what I’m not a scholar I’m a human being who does feel Christ in my soul, have seen miracles happen AND AM NOT BRAINWASHED,. I feel the truth in my heart, don’t care to pick it apart in hopes to find fault in all of it just so I can feel better about my lifestyle and choices I make in this life that are are pleasing to me ( selfish self) all about me syndrome that this world has embraced, techincally serving one’s self and no other supreme God. now to me that is really igonrant. ""
First of all, to pick at anything is human nature. Next time you get a bill, or car payment, or some sort of document to sign.. Just sign it. Don't read it. Can you? Most people can't. Not for any length of time. Yet, you're asking us to do the very same thing with the Bible!
"" Why is it so important to validate anything when if comes to God? ""
Well, because if it actually was from God, that'd be something now wouldn't it! Unfortunately, there are plenty of people out there who would love us to believe that their's really is GOD!, and the one TRUE GOD(c)'' at that. Who do you believe? Surely you can't accept all of them, because I'm afraid they just don't match up that well. It'd be nice, but doesn't happen. So solly, cholly. Therein is the importance of when we 'validate anything when if comes to God'. If I could say," Yes, it is absolutely and 100 percent the complete way. " Then by all means, I'd be on the front row with you now. But, I just can't do that. To many unexplained things. To many errors. It's like reading 2 guide to scuba diving. If one said," Please turn the knob right. It is the correct way." And the other," Please turn the knob left. It is the correct way." I'd be somewhat perturbed about scuba diving, until I knew the right way. It's not quite that simple though. We're talking about hundreds, and thousands of 'scuba diving manuals'. So, bottoms up, and cheerio. Keep a smile in your heart ( or wherever it is we keep that particular ideal) and one foot in front of the other. It comes down to survival. And when you can bring your mind out past that, to look at the world and go " Hey! There's really more than 'me' out here. Wow." That's when you've done something.
Tialas
"When you can't run, walk. And when you can't walk, crawl. And when you can't even do that.. You find someone to carry you."
The message of Christ, regardless how we think of salvation, is that to love one's neighbor, to help those who are in need, to turn to spiritual quests over material. Before a person who considers themselves a Christian to speak or write or in any way direct a comment to a person or group, they would have to apply the teachings of Christ for the 'individual' in order to be live a life of a Christian. Faith is demonstrated by our actions. Though those who do not believe in a Creator do not have a standard as such, civilization is moving to recognizing that those same behaviors that govern Christians, Moslems, Buddhists, and all others are what are the cause of well being of all. All the posts have been interesting and undoubtedly dogged by our human and imperfect perceptions, I think we can do better at coming to an understanding of what is best for us. I challenge all of us to remember if we are members of a Faith community, that judgement belongs to the Creator alone and not to us. And those who do not believe in a Creator that Justice is handled, though imperfectly, by those appointed or elected to do so and vigilantism is considered criminal. So I am just suggesting that we all look at ourselves first and in saying this I know that I might be violating my own request. I wish I knew how to say this how I feel it. It makes my heart heavy to see all of you who care about truth to treat each other unkindly.
Beesucker has hit the issue right on the head. The Author is pointing out discoveries that are the result of a great deal of research. It is better to question thoughtfully anything produced by man or God as we are men and women who ourselves are imperfect. How can we go wrong if we search for truth?
It seems to me the natural inclination of finding fault with something be it the bible or someone elses missive may be a calculation to discredit the target writing and therefore marginalize it. How manipulative we try to be to find a spelling error and then boom – you made an error so you are not God!
Who the hell cares? Listen to what someone is trying to say instead of trying to shut that someone down. Get over it already!
How come Dinosaurs was not talked about in the Bible? Did God just stop with this Earth and not make anymore (if God wanted a perfect world, why did God stop with us? People who sin and kill). Did God have parents? How did God come to be? What did Jesus do as a Teen? Is Jesus really coming back or does he come back when we Die to get us? Jesus did not start Christianity nor did he talk about it. Yes we do call him Jesus Christ, but Christianity was made up, however CHRIST IS REAL. If the Orginal Jews was the #1 people of God and I'm not talking about Some Euor Jew today or anybody else then what is our real place since we where not the Chosen people??? If in the begining everything was with out sin and evil then how did evil come about? In the Garden the serpent was evil, but God was first? Since he is First and powerful how come he will not get rid of Evil/ The Devil??? The CHRISTIAN theology states that evil came into the world through the sin of the first man's eating of the tree of forbidden fruit. All men sinned in Adam; because of Adam's sin, every other being is and has been a sinner WHY??? Strangely enough this first man was made by a Superior Being in His own image, or, in other words, perfect; yet, he was not able to restrain himself from doing those things which he had been forbidden to do. In the very first being created in the image of the "Supreme," there was a tendency to do wrong WHY?????? Some people say if God Loves you the why does he send some People to Hell??? If your in Hell and you start have faith in God (God knows where you heart really is) why is it too late and can you go to Heaven from Hell??? How could Satan do Evil when God had nothing Evil or Evil in this world??? In God everything is GOOD (Take of the extra O in GOOD then its GOD or Turn GOD around then its Dog.) Why do we hate the # 666? It just a # if it was bad then why can't it be 664, 665, 667,668??? Was it reall 666 or 999??? Just some Questions
so… All of a sudden, after 2,000 years, Bart has it all figured out… We're not to take the Bible "as gospel," but we ARE to take Bart's opinion "as gospel." Whew! I'm glad that's finally cleared up… Good grief…
I have heard a lot about the Bible being in error and authors refuting Scripture, consider, "Josh McDowell, Evidence that demands a verdict". Many books have been written both about the Bible as well as the Quran". Stories about the, a, Christ figure is prominent in ancient literature as well as stories about the flood.
Yet wisdom no matter where it comes from would say let every one be persuaded in their own mind.
As for me I believe in the Christ and him Crucified. I believe in God and the basic tenets of the Christian faith that Christ was born of a virgin crucified rose again and is coming back to the earth for those that believe, repent and accept him as personal Lord and savior.
The real issue, is Bert Ehrman still a believer? I am and I hope that those of you that believe will not be shaken and those that do not will come to know the Love of God through Jesus Christ.
This is a good discussion compared to others I have seen on the Internet. A good but respectful (for the most part) interplay of skeptics and believers who are trying to put forth intelligent arguments, rather than just bashing someone else's point of view.
Congrats to all. Especially to londonderry for his wonderful History of the World (Part 2, if we are to take Mel Brooks' version as Part 1).
Basically even if the original version of the new testament was found – this wouldn't solve the real problem – which is that texts are not self evident but are always interpreted. Context is basically everything. To really understand the new testament you would have to be a religious Jew living in the time of Jesus. Without this you run the very serious risk of completely misunderstanding what the text means (not what it says). Remember that Jesus spoke to a Jewish audience and that it is within this context that he was acting as a rabbi (following a tradition of rabbis who spoke against hypocrisy and authority). Those who tend to quote the bible tend to ignore the fact that they need a very serious understanding of the Torah to actually be able to follow Jesus. This is especially ironic for those who use the new testament as a justification for racism
i have a problem beleiving that everything in the bible is true. i believe in god, but why cant people realize that ther can be mistakes in the bible. we do not know what is or what is not the truth. i think people should keep their mind open to anything.
I feel sorry for those who chose to ignore the thousands of people that have witnessed the power of faith in Christ. the lives changed, the ones delivered from the power of drugs and etc.
I could argue with Ehrmans so called writings but I only have to look at the places he chose to get an education to know that he knows nothing. As a man who has a far deeper education has stated, "this man is educated far beyond his intellegence".
As my dear old departed Daddy said, "Only a fool argues with a fool" so I will leave it at that until I'see you on the day of judgement.
Yes, it will come.
kaluto
It seems to me that all of the religious tomes written throughout history, have been written by men, for the benefit of men – to wit the acquisition and/or maintenance of power and wealth. The god of the old testament in particular is one needy supreme being with most of the frailties of men and women (though women get the short-shrift in pretty much all religions) The greatest arrogance of humankind may very well be that we (well some of us) think we would have a clue about what a supreme deity would want or think or believe – this of course requires that there is a supreme being
and that supreme being would pay any attention to a small planet on the edge of a small galaxy . . . of course that is why we call them beliefs.
There are many Christians now that believe, on this point, similarly to Ehrman. They love, read, use, & believe the Bible…as far as it is translated correctly.
Thank you Ksmith for your words! I feel the same as you do. I don't need to pick apart every little dot or tittle to find fault in the Bible. I know Christ lives and I know He is in me. I am not any better than anyone else, I am just trying to get through this life like everyone else. I have problems and make mistakes (sin) but I have a promise for a future when this life is over that many others do not. I only hope that while I am able, I will continue to share with others and help them discover that same promise.
1 Corin 1:18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
It doesn't look like many other people responding have actually read the book, so (going from memory)…My qualifications for responding are that (a) I have read it and (b) I know Koine Greek moderately well (I used to do my daily devotions in nit).
The resurrection passage from Mark. Erich Vieth fails to mention that Bart Ehrman quite happily tells you where the passage comes from — it's copied out of Matthew. The original ending from Mark was lost (or perhaps was never finished), and later copyists wanted to make a "proper" ending and appended the equivalent passage from Matthew. Or possibly, had access to some other document which Matthew had access to and copied it from there. Likewise, there's the account in Luke (which differs in the odd detail, showing that it isn't a copy from the same source).
It’s not common knowledge, as its not taught in the West, but in the Near East it’s common knowledge that the bible was NOT written in Greek but in Aramaic. I'm not sure exactly what the poster is saying. The New Testament letters were most certainly written in Greek. There are passages in the gospels which might have been originally written in Aramaic and then translated into Greek, but claiming that (say) Luke was entirely an Aramaic translation is a… ahem… bold claim.
E.W. Bullinger I think a more modern apologist would be Wesley Perschbacher. Personally, I read his Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (in which he defends the bible-as-the-dictated-word-of-God) and came away even more convinced of the bible-as-the-inspired-word-of-God (i.e. the lengths he went to convinced me that he was wrong). The difference between the two view points is whether or not the Bible authors had any free will choice in what they wrote and whether they were controlled absolutely by the spirit as they wrote.
Actually, I'm really keen on the Wesleyan view of the role of the bible: it is a collection of writings by human hands which give enough information to become a Christian and to understand how God wants Christians to live their lives — and nothing more than that. It's kind of hard to argue with that.
The idea that the bible is inerrant and unable to be faulted is I think a late 19th century phenomenon, originating perhaps earlier than that in the baptist movement. (I'm a baptist.) It's correct Islamic theology vis-a-vis the Quran — you can't be a Muslim and not believe that the Quran is the actual nature of God — but I don't think it's original Christian theology. "Salvation is by grace" is all that really matters — what you believe on the accuracy of the bible (as long as it's a bit above 0%) is irrelevant to salvation.
This is why we members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, in the Articles of Faith state:
"We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God."
Further, the Book of Mormon states:
1 Ne. 13: 26 (20-40).
26 And after they go forth by the hand of the twelve apostles of the Lamb, from the Jews unto the Gentiles, thou seest the formation of that great and abominable church, ( There are save two churches only, the Church of the Lamb of God & the Church of the Devil.) which is most abominable above all other churches; for behold, they have taken away from the gospel of the Lamb many parts which are plain and most precious; and also many covenants of the Lord have they taken away.
Dear Folks
alot of arguing equals alot of waste in resources and the power of our minds to make life here on earth better. I can not beat any one over the head with the Bible and expect results. nitpicking the Bible, or the Quran, or a work on history or phisics does not improve our lives but the true core of the message in the Bible or Quran et al. can. I was an atheist for @ 14 years , but thakfully I now have God in my heart and I know He is there for me if you open your hearts He can come in. You won't need proof you will feel His pressence. How much better would our world be if we all regardless of what we believe worked with each other instead of against each other.I appologize in advance for any gramatical, textual or spelling mistakes. Gee is that last sentance a message within a message.