Misquoting Jesus

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

netrox

New Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2003
Messages
4,769
Reaction score
0
This book, "Misquoting Jesus" is one of the best books on the authencity of the Bible. Bart Ehrman, the author, was a fundamentalist Christian turned into agnostic, and he explains how the NT was often edited to suit their cultural beliefs. Also, remember, he was also a Biblical scholar and knows more about the Bible than you all do.

For example, the part when a woman was stoned for adultry and Jesus said, "Go sin no more" was NEVER found in any of the original manuscripts. It was added much later.

It is an important book for those who think the Bible is PURE and UNALTERED. His book proves beyond reasonable doubt that there were some edits through translations.
 
Just because Ehrman is a Biblical scholar does not mean he knows everything of the Bible. He may study and be well versed one part of the Bible but be totally clueless of other parts. But, I will have to reserve my thoughts on Ehrman considering he seems to be very knowledgeable of the New Testament.

But here's a good debate on Jesus' resurrection involving Ehrman Vs. Craig.

I knew that Jesus was being either misquoted or assumed to have said some of these things. I have pointed out some of the problems with original sin and baptism in another thread. I asked Christians there to provide a single verse of Jesus himself speaking about original sin but no one has yet to show me such a verse. So was Jesus being misrepresented?

Attempting to not get the topic astray, here's a critique of Ehrman's book. The critique claims that Ehrman is ignorant on some level.
 
Jesus was just a loveable hippy that wanted free love and ate psychedelic mushrooms -- although I may be thinking more of Mario with the last part but hey!
 
Attempting to not get the topic astray, here's a critique of Ehrman's book. The critique claims that Ehrman is ignorant on some level.
Click to expand...

Yeah, a Christian apologist. Bleh.. he said he's so troubled by his conversion to agnosticism. That's why he's so upset.
 
It's not an opinion, it's a fact that some text has been altered.

It's not an opinion that there were several books regarding Jesus in the second century and they were destroyed. It happened.

The Dead Sea Scroll and the Gospel of Judas shows that they clearly had a lot of stories about Jesus.

The Church was going through turmoil with different Christian groups and they had different ideas of who Jesus was. The Church decided to destroy some of the books because it just didn't like them.
 
One more thing, we don't have original copies of the NT. None. The recent findings of lost manuscripts reveal that there's a lot more to it than previously thought.
 
netrox said:
It's not an opinion, it's a fact that some text has been altered.

It's not an opinion that there were several books regarding Jesus in the second century and they were destroyed. It happened.

The Dead Sea Scroll and the Gospel of Judas shows that they clearly had a lot of stories about Jesus.

The Church was going through turmoil with different Christian groups and they had different ideas of who Jesus was. The Church decided to destroy some of the books because it just didn't like them.
Click to expand...
It is not a fact. One thing its true of missing. But we have been discussing why some does not fit in, just like Davinci doesn't fit in. Why Judas wrote, bec he misrepresent Jesus Christ. What did Judas thought of Jesus? And there are others. Many have studied very carefully how to use them. And it's still going on. As claiming like you mention that person, also Davinci, and etc. It's nothing new. Trying very hard to tarnish who Christ is. Who Christ is, is perfect description from the OT who prophesied. There always will be a person to seek to tarnish to prevent people from knowing who Christ is. You chose to believe him than you believe the other person who wrote Case of Christ, bec he was very similar where you are now, and he's been down hard studied to find see the error of christians and discover, it wasn't. There are both side. And always will be. The reason I stick my beliefs, bec what I read in the OT, its fully describe the match the description of Christ.
 
I'm with netrox on this one. He knows what he's talking about. It's not an opinion, it's a pure fact right to the core.
 
I agree. I believe that the people who wrote the Bible are biased and/or misquoted.

First of all, the Bible is a collection of books written by different people. Each book is written in a style based on the person who wrote it. For instance, Psalms is in poetry format. Also, things are translated differently by different people.

Remember what I said elsewhere about technology and magic? Magic is unknown technology or science. Well, if you went back in time and showed some people your lighter... they would be amazed by your ability to create fire from your fingertips. They would call it magic. That's their point of view. If someone was scientifically intelligent, they would observe the device in your hand and eventually figure out how it works.

Now, back to the writers of the books in the Bible. They may see something and can't put it into words. So, they use something they can put in words. We see a condor. They see a monster. We see a snake. They see a creature of the devil. We see water mixed with red clay. They see water turned to blood.

I'm sure that if we were to send scientists back in time to observe everything that was written in the Bible, they would be able to put it in more sensible terms that would be more believable.

Now, the other part... the biased part.

A lot of the Biblical stuff that archaeologists find are reviewed by the Vatican and the Pope. If it's allowed into our Christian teachings, we'll hear about it. If it's not allowed or goes against their beliefs, we won't hear it. Rumor has it that there was a set of writings (supposedly another book to be added to the Bible) that mentions the married life of Jesus. Since the Vatican refused to believe that Jesus was ever married, they wouldn't allow it to be included in their Christian teachings. So, to us... Mary Magdalene is a female disciple or a prostitute. Why? The Christian religion (like many other religions) are male dominant and biased against females.

What if there was an educated woman who wrote a book? Oh wait, we'll never see it since the church doesn't believe that a woman ever wrote a book. Sad. :(
 
Did you know that Islam teaches that Jesus was married and had a child?

:o
 
Important and key is this about the Bible, Jesus as The Messiah and The Final Prophet. The problem is focusing other than focusing what God says about New Covenant, which covers everything. There are about the principles which Paul wrote about deacons, women and etc. But Paul emphasize over these is about who we are in Christ Jesus. Paul and Peter has different views of what should be done in church. But both agree who Jesus is. Important part is who Jesus is, and the key in the Bible about the Messiah. All thru the OT matched Jesus, nothing else and that is where there is infallible word about who He is.
 
So you're admitting the Bible does have some flaws. I see.
 
Like I said, disagreements they have is about position, what to eat. But both believe Jesus is the Messiah, Immanuel, fully God and fully Man. All point who Jesus is. As a principle in church example, is secondary. Spiritual admonishment is prior and who Jesus is, is prior.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top