Sit back and enjoy Bart Ehrman’s research regarding what we know about the origin of the Bible. Ehrman is a professor [1] at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill . I’ve previously posted [2] about Ehrman’s 2007 book, Misquoting Jesus [3].
Ehrman starts by telling the audience about a question that he asked his students recently: If the Bible is really the inerrant word of God, why aren’t all believers actually reading it? Many of Ehrman’s own students truly believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God, but large numbers of them haven’t yet read the entire Bible. Ehrman asks: “If God wrote a book, wouldn’t you want to see what He said?”
Most of this lecture concerns the origin of the modern version of the Bible. Ehrman presents a fascinating history of a book based upon thousands of incomplete and conflicting earlier versions. These versions are riddled with mistakes. The oldest copy that we have of any book of the new testament is a tiny scrap from the Gospel by “John” called “P52). It is about the size of a credit card and it only contains a couple sentences. It is dated at “the first half of the second century” (minute 15 of the video). Our earliest surviving complete copy of the Gospel of “John” was created about the year 200 A.D.
Most of our manuscripts of the Bible are not anywhere near this old. Most of our manuscripts were created around the beginning of the third century (around the year 200). The earliest manuscripts of most of the books of the Bible date from the 7th or 8th century. By the time that a man named John Mill actually tracked the conflicts among the 100 manuscripts he reviewed (about 300 years ago), he noted about 30,000 differences. We now have about 7,000 manuscripts, and nobody has been able to add up all the differences among these copies (21:30). “There are more differences in our existing Greek manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament.” So, then how can we really know what any of the writers really said? Ehrman characterizes this as “a problem.” Most of these differences are “completely insignificant . . . mistakes.”
I especially enjoyed Ehrman’s description of one scribe’s mistaken version of the alleged genealogy of Jesus all the way back to Adam and Eve (27:00). Many other more significant translation problems have been detected by modern scholars (32:00).
Unfortunately, this video has a glitch and it ended at the 34-minute mark. This is as far as I got tonight. I now see that there are other versions of Ehrman’s lectures available in ten-minute chunks, starting here. [4] I’m planning on viewing the remainder of Ehrman’s lecture, and I’ll report on it in the comments.
I would add a few questions to the one Ehrman asked at the top of his lecture: If the Bible really is the inspired word of God, why aren’t more believers taking the time to understand the genesis of the Bible itself? Why aren’t they more interested in learning about the things that Ehrman has researched throughout his career. Why don’t they care more about the inaccuracies and contradictions? As Ehrman asked, don’t you need to be confident that you know the accurate version of the Bible before telling others how “important” it is? I raise these questions because, in my experience of having discussed the Bible with hundreds of Christian believers, almost none of them know about these critically important issues raised by Ehrman, and it’s a rare American Christian believer who exhibits any curiosity regarding these issues. How strange, unless, as Daniel Dennett suggested, that most believers believe in belief, [5] rather than in the religious stories that they claim to be true.
Ehrman has also published, Jesus, Interrupted [6], in which he argues that “the Bible is riddled with inconsistencies and outright forgeries, but that many fundamental stories and doctrines don’t actually exist within its pages–they were later inventions by people trying to make sense of a disconnected collection of texts.” At his website [1], Ehrman further states:
Only 8 of the 27 books of the New Testament were actually written by the authors to whom they’re attributed. Others are likely forgeries.
The gospels provide remarkably divergent portrayals of Jesus.
The message of the Apostle Paul and the message of gospel writer Matthew are completely at odds over the question of whether a follower of Jesus also had to observe the Jewish law.
The Nicene Creed and the Trinity were constructs of the later church and are not found in the pages of the Bible.
Traditional doctrines such as the suffering Messiah, the divinity of Christ, and the notion of heaven and hell are not based on the teachings of the historical Jesus.
The commonly told story of Jesus — his birth, death, and resurrection is actually a composite of four vastly different gospel narratives.
Print this post [7]
[8]