Aren't there 400,000 variants or errors in the New Testament? (Part 2)
Loading...
Loading...
1,736
Loading...
There is no Interactive Transcript.
4:53
Aren't there 400,000 variants or errors in the New Testament? (Part 1)by ehrmanproject2,048 views- 4:11
How do we explain the Bible's 400,000 errors?by ehrmanproject2,315 views
- 3:12
Are the New Testament manuscripts reliable? (Part 1)by ehrmanproject6,562 views
- 2:56
How did the New Testament canon develop?by ehrmanproject1,864 views
- 2:08
How do you explain the 'long ending of Mark'?by ehrmanproject1,474 views
- 5:33
The issue of oral tradition.by ehrmanproject1,758 views
- 4:48
Who wrote the Gospels?by ehrmanproject3,789 views
- 4:07
Richard Dawkins: Embarrassingly Bad Thinker, Incredibly Ignorantby drcraigvideoz40,471 views
- 5:03
What are some passages you interpret differently than Dr. Ehrman? (Part 2; 1 John 5:7-8)by ehrmanproject2,490 views
- 5:24
Why are the birth narratives so different? (Part 2)by ehrmanproject1,247 views
- 1:37
Is the Bible historically reliable?by ehrmanproject1,640 views
- 3:06
What answers does the Bible give for the "problem of evil"?by ehrmanproject2,545 views
- 3:02
Which day was Jesus crucified?by ehrmanproject1,500 views
- 2:31
Why does a 'loving God' permit evil in our world?by ehrmanproject7,748 views
- 5:19
What are some passages you interpret differently than Dr. Ehrman? (Part 3; Mark 16:9-20)by ehrmanproject2,398 views
- 1:34
Will there be freewill in Heaven?by ehrmanproject1,564 views
- 4:54
What is the Bible's answer for the 'problem of suffering'?by ehrmanproject886 views
- 4:27
Why are the birth narratives so different? (Part 1)by ehrmanproject1,632 views
- 2:49
Do the Gospels disagree with one another?by ehrmanproject1,489 views
The issue, here, is that there's an argument about semantics. The only reason the students can't seem to see the "variants", is because the different syntax, or the different grammar, are still saying the same thing. The example of Romans 5:1 is a good example, because both "Let us have peace with God" and "We have peace with God" express the idea that peace with God is desirable. Arguing over semantics is not only a waste of time; it's poor scholasticism.
dameon692002 1 month ago
@yaminatodaydotcom If you don't mind, I'd like to give my thoughts...
Primarily, the "lost" books were out for many reasons: two being falsity, and age. The collectors of the NT accepted only books whose content and authors could be verified back then, written during the first century, for authenticity. If the author lived too long after Christ, they were unreliable; esp. if the authors claimed to be someone from the first century, like Peter, Paul, James, John, Jude, Matthew, Mark, or Luke..
dameon692002 1 month ago
@yaminatodaydotcom "gnostic literature....as well as such books as the gospel of Mary and Thomas". Could you point me to a reference that does not consider either one gnostic?
On the other hand, it was inaccurate of me to say the "only writings that survived". However, the limited number of copies and very limited spread of gnostic beliefs are good indicators that these were not the "winners".
jimmo42 1 month ago
@jimmo42 But, the writings by early Christians aren't the only books that survived. Plenty of gnostic literature is still around to day; as well as such books as the gospel of Mary and Thomas. Manuscripts and fragmented manuscripts from the second century on still survive today - and those were written by people who at the time were not "winners in history."
yaminatodaydotcom 1 month ago
Only two traditions survived. The Byzantine, and the Alexandrian.
pandirasbox 3 months ago
Yes replacing the name Jesus with God or any nomina sacra with another is a HUGE deal because it changes the Christology.
pandirasbox 3 months ago
@dekelt
"It's just that history shows apostolicity and orthodoxy go hand in hand."
Only if you believe that all of the apostles were in 100% agreement about doctrine and ignore the fact that early Christians destroyed books they considered heretical. To any intelligent person, it should not be any surprise that the only writings that survived are the ones supporting the group that was able to control the other groups. The winners always write the history.
jimmo42 4 months ago
@dekelt "I'm of course not saying that ancientness was the only criterion."
You could have fooled me. You said, "They were not chosen because of their theology, but because they were the only ones that went back to the time of the apostles."
Having problems with your memory?
jimmo42 4 months ago
@dekelt "It's more likely that it was recognized as historically inaccurate and not apostolic." Pure speculation! In any case, it still refutes your claim that the books in the canon were the *only* ones.
"Furthermore, the epistle explicitly quotes the Gospel of Matthew as scripture." A handful of quotes without a specific references does not mean he is talking about what we know as "Matthew". He could have been using the M-source or something else.
jimmo42 4 months ago
@dekelt cont.
While I appreciate the the list of scholars, what's the point? Only books from the 1st century were chosen. Yes, and? Being from the 1st century is basically a requirement for apostolicty as the apostles were dead by the 2nd century.
"It's more likely that it was recognized as historically inaccurate and not apostolic." Pure speculation! In any case, it still refutes your claim that the books in the canon were the *only* ones.
jimmo42 4 months ago