What does Bart Ehrman conclude about the Bible?

From our series entitled, "Do Ancient Documents Uncover a Radical New Jesus? What does Bart Ehrman conclude about the Bible?

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• Historical Jesus
• John Ankerberg
• Lee Strobel
• Misquoting Jesus
• Textual Variants

[brtherjohn]

Sorry, Mr. Strobbel, you lose. The first minute of your talk here answers it all. So, I guess you can't absolutely rely on the supposed perfection of the scriptures for the very same reasons you gave. So why makes excuses in your books?

The fact that apologists of Strobbel's and WL Craig's caliber can't even honestly respond to these textual problems, presented by Ehrman, means that you all should stop trying to sell belief they way you do until you know very well what you're talking about.

[ostbagen]

Bible guys getting pwnd.

[99minerkc]

@brtherjohn Dr. Erhman has already dealt with Strobel when asked a question by a person who mentioned Strobel as some kind of authority. Erhman basically implied that Strobel should go back to his sunday school class and not try to delve into scholarly level work. In a nut shell Strobel is a JOKE.

[NUAGESA]

Early evidence is not necessarily reliable evidence! you have to make an independent assessment regarding the credibility of sources. The problem is that Christians have a vested interest in propagating their own ideology and all the evidence comes from Christian sources!

Would you entrust Communists with exclusive reportage of 20th century Russian history? They were first hand witnesses and an impeccable primary source after all! At least Ehrman does not appeal to circular faith based logic!

[ianjrivers]

@Strefanasha No one ever got burned at the stake, or tortured for not believing in Julius Ceasar, no one knocks on your door and wants you to join the church of Ceasar, give 10% of your income to it and organise your life around Ceasar, and spread the word!

Julius Ceasar may not have existed, it doesn't matter. But ancient biblical scriptures make demands on your life choices, so we have to be skeptical about it.

[StormTrek]

Nothing Ehrman said in his book was wrong. I wish Christian pastors had taught this to their congregations before an agnostic had to do it. Why don't you thank him rather than hand wave him away?

[Strefanasha]

if what ehrman says about the Bible is true it goes for every other ancient text. as the gap between the writing of Caesar's commentaries and the oldst manuscript we have of it is 'NINE HUNDRD YEARS we cant trust anything that book says. heck, we cannot even be sure there was any such person as julius caesar.

but this is nonsense, so what we are left with is only rejection of any text that makes any kind of supernatural or spiritual claim.

that is all erhman has: HE DONT LIKE THE BIBLE

[shadywolf91]

Of course you can't trust the text (or pictures) of the Bible. Just take one example, the Protestant Bible was taken from the Catholic Bible and a good portion of the books were removed on purpose by.... People! And that's ignoring the hundreds of times it's been translated and re-translated.

[taffiongy]

Ehrman is wright

[ClumsyRoot]

For a smart man, Erhman sure is silly. Of course we can trust the Bible--it says so right in the book!