Misquoting Jesus? With Bart Ehrman & Peter J Williams (Show of 3rd Jan 09)

[justinbrierley]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_ULYS62ugM98/SWPPczKubQI/AAAAAAAACus/iPns9Zg7Y4A/s320/ehrman-williams-unbelievable.jpg

SO - do we have the original writings of the New Testament?

This was a big show - two big guests and a big topic.

Have a listen at www.premier.org.uk/unbelievable

What strikes me in the debate is that Bart's thesis that we "Can't know the original words of the New Testament" because of scribal errors and changes over time etc. comes down to a very small number of actual instances where that may be the case, and those instances can be shown quite strongly to be resolvable.

This is where Williams and Ehrman mainly clashed - on Bart's choices for resolving some of the questionable word in Mauscripts. (E.g. Was Jesus Angry or Compassionate in Mark 1:41)

So does Bart's book shake my faith in the reliability of scripture? Well, it shows there are areas of debate, but this is hardly undermining any key doctrine of Christianity. If anything the debate highlighted how modern scholarship has helped us to be sure of the transmission of the vast majority of scripture.

Bart's studies led him to ditch his trust in scripture. The debate opened up an interesting avenue as to whether "inspiration" means flawless transmission of the documents... Would value you the Tweb community responses

[Pumbelo]

I personally hold the view that the originals were inspired, not the copies.

[Echelon]

Peter Williams did very, very well. I was not familiar with him but he came out fine.

[justinbrierley]

I personally hold the view that the originals were inspired, not the copies.

As you'll hear from the programme, Bart doesn;t see that it makes any sense for God to have inspired the originals, but allowed copies to be corrupted, since we don;t have the original any longer.

Is there any point to inspiartion of the originals, if all we ave are copies?

[Echelon]

Justin, I hope you check back here every so often. I think the guy you want on the show is Dan Wallace -NT Critic.

Have a listen to this amazing interview where Dan basically defends the New Testmanet transmission while admitting where the issues are..
http://imagesaes.316networks.com/namb/Apologetics_Wallace_Interview.mp3

Great interview.

[Shadow Phoenix]

I loved how Williams said the problem with Ehrman is he's quick to say the scribes intentionally changed something instead of just a slip of the pen. He always goes with intelligent design instead of chance.

[Pumbelo]

As you'll hear from the programme, Bart doesn;t see that it makes any sense for God to have inspired the originals, but allowed copies to be corrupted, since we don;t have the original any longer.

Is there any point to inspiartion of the originals, if all we ave are copies?

Last time I checked, Jesus said his words would not pass away. The manuscripts represent the Gospel of Christ. Almost all of the text is pure.

[seanD]

Bart's not stupid, he knows textual criticism is not as serious or detrimental as he makes it out to be. From the interviews I've heard from him, he fell away because he couldn't handle the misery and suffering in the world, and couldn't find a reasonable answer in correlation to God. But he just uses the whole interpolation spiel as a crunch and undoubtedly to sell books.