...since the originals actually invested any time to investigate whether or not that claim is true? I'm certainly not a scholar on the subject, and wouldn't expect anyone here to be either, but there is an excellent book, written by one of the world's premier Biblical historians, Bart Ehrman's "Misquoting Jesus" is all about this problem.
Mills found over 30,000 nontrivial differences in different copies he had access to. Modern scholars have identified mored differences in extant ancient copies than there are words in the New testament.
2007-09-13 03:57:06 · 18 answers · asked by wondermus 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
You're wrong CJ. Most Biblical scholars are not only Christian, they also hold advanced theology degrees from Christian universities.
2007-09-13 06:23:15 · update #1
HA HA HA....all of these comments that the Bible HASN'T Changed!!!!
It's true what the bible does say.....There will be those that will be so blinded that they can not see the truth. There will be those that will be so deaf, as not to hear the truth!!
They are simply afraid to admit that they are wrong. That all they have built their lives on is a lie. Sad Sad when people feel more comfortable ''killing the messenger'' than accepting the truth!!!
you keep telling it like it is, brother!!!!
2007-09-13 04:47:02 · answer #1 · answered by Oberon 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
"one of the world's premier Biblical historians, Bart Ehrman"?
In March of 2006, Ehrman and evangelical theologian William Lane Craig engaged in a debate entitled "Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus?" on the campus of the College of the Holy Cross, with Ehrman arguing the opposing position. Following the event, Ehrman's publisher, along with Craig, expressed interest in publishing the transcript in book form. However, Ehrman declined. In June of 2006, a transcript of the debate was made available on the college's website.
2007-09-13 11:05:08 · answer #2 · answered by Aspurtaime Dog Sneeze 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I'll be honest, I haven't read the book. However, I have read books by someone he debated (William Lane Craig), and I wonder who won the debate. I'm reading it now. Once I'm done, we'll see.
However, from what I've read, Ehrman is wrong and apologetics are right. I'm still looking into this, though.
Just one last thing, before I go to read the file (will edit this after I'm done). The Dead Sea Scrolls showed that the Bible had been copied correctly in over a thousand years of copying. I'd say that lends a certainty to the Bible not being mistranslated, or having too many errors.
Oh, here's the link to the pdf file I'm reading, in case you're interested. It might interest you as well:
http://www.holycross.edu/departments/crec/website/resurrection-debate-transcript.pdf
Edit: I didn't get a chance to read the pdf file in its entirety yet; yesterday was my husband's and my anniversary so I was a little busy. I might get a chance to read it today, in between cleaning and running errands, it's payday.
2007-09-13 11:11:49 · answer #3 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋
The Bible, which was written by Rabbis and other teachers, has been re-written many times. Jesus wasn't actually quoted much in the Bible, so we only have the writings of the teachers to tell us what Jesus said, felt, etc. It's a very confusing book and that's where the modern teachers of the Bible try to convince us what THEY believe. You must read, read, read, and come to your own conclusions. Remember, many believe these are just stories to make a point about how we should live. The rest you take on faith.
2007-09-13 11:05:24 · answer #4 · answered by red 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
You know, I'm exhausted by the "expertise" of the "experts". I've read similar books which claim this and claim that about the so-called "trivial" differences they've found in different versions of the Bible. But, I've read the Hebrew version of Genesis ( translated almost word for word from the Mosaic text) and the Christian "version" is all but word-for-word. All this debate about minor changes in the wording is important from the context of preserving textual integrity, yes. But the theme of the message remains the same no matter how hard man may try to alter it. So, in effect, the trivialness merely renders man stupid and ignorant-- NOT God or His Word.
2007-09-13 11:09:40 · answer #5 · answered by RIFF 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
The Bible is a collection of random books that were written a century after Jesus's death, and selected by a handful of priests among a much larger selection (and, over the course of years, edited to better support church doctrine, cutting out phrases or suggestions they deemed "blashphemous"). I don't know how the Biz-nible could be considered the word of God, given that it was written by several different people all claiming that they were messengers of God, but, even if they were, had the messages altered over time through translations. I mean, really, it is the most unreliable book on the face of the planet, in my opinion.
2007-09-13 11:05:17 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
People are funny.
"Did you know that they count misspellings?"
If a misspelling is nontrivial and changes the meaning of the text, then they should.
"Most scholars aren't believers... and will say anything to avoid the truth of the Bible."
Or maybe they actually found a bunch of changes. The changes are available to check for anybody with enough time. Why would they lie if they knew that they would be discovered whenever somebody tried to follow their research?
2007-09-13 11:19:47 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Before you side with Ehrman, I suggest you read "Misquoting Truth: A Guide to the Fallacies of Bart Ehrman's "Misquoting Jesus" " by Timothy Paul Jones. You can only make a decision when you see BOTH sides, not just one.
2007-09-13 11:10:58 · answer #8 · answered by Suzanne: YPA 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
For me, if the bible was full of errors it would not nullify the spoken word God uses in these texts. It is not the words themselves that have the draw or power.
2007-09-13 11:17:33 · answer #9 · answered by . 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The bible has been changed many times throughout history. Kings would have it changed to suit what they were doing politically. I think it is foolish to think that a book that has been translated in as many different languages as the bible has never been altered or mistranslated.
2007-09-13 11:01:29 · answer #10 · answered by MyMichelle 4 · 5⤊ 1⤋