Bart D. Ehrman's Misquoting Jesus

One fact that must remain in consideration by any student of textual criticism is that there were many other religious and philosophical writings produced simultaneously with the Scriptures of the New Testament era. Robert J. Sargent states, “As the Bible was being written down, numerous other religious

Even early church writers contested the validity of what Luther referred to as an “epistle of straw”, even denigrating it as a leftover from Judaic writers. Even recent commentary writer Sophie Laws referred to “the epistle of James is an oddity. It lacks almost all of what might be thought to be the distinctive marks of Christian faith and practice.” The Luther casts further doubt on the authenticity of this epistle.

Throughout time biblical scriptures have been interpreted differently by different religions, scholar’s, and languages. Many theologians have provided different interpretations based off their mentors and time they lived. Using works from the Sacra Pagina Series, Norton Bible scriptures, and excerpts from Matthew, Mark, Luke, and teaching of John Calvin this essay will show the vast differences of interpretations in just one biblical scripture let alone throughout the entire bible and its many interpretations.

The third section dissects the formation of the New Testament with more historical context and views of other writings defined as Gnostic writing. Bruce explains the spoken words of the apostles carried as much authority as their written words and gives an in depth explanation how the Gospels and Pauline writings were viewed by the Church Fathers. The rest of the section demonstrates the Church Fathers and their views of what was to be considered scripture and the councils that affirmed the inspired scripture.

Q is short for “quelle” and means “source.” The concept behind Q is to reconstruct the original sayings of Jesus. Many quotes of Jesus found in the Bible may very well have been embellished or forged. So it is of interest to some to endeavor to find the original or lost sayings of Jesus. This can be achieved by searching through the Gospels, comparing and contrasting their contents until a common thread is found, which might better reveal Jesus' true words. Thus, the quelle, or source, of Jesus' sayings is found. “The Lost Gospel Q: The Original Sayings of Jesus”, written by Marcus Borg, is an effort by the author to deliver the purest messages and statements from Jesus to the readers. To achieve this objective, Borg presents the literature in a completely unadulterated fashion. These sayings have been removed from any context or purpose and are presented to the reader in a manner that provokes thought and reflection. Each of the Q sayings of Jesus are presented alone on a page, with an occasional footnote providing some explanations or interesting background information relating to the saying. A cross reference is also provided at the back of the book, making it easy to cross reference the Q with the parallel scriptures in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. This

Bruce Waltke begins his argument by establishing the opponent’s view. Waltke writes that forms of criticism hold “that most of the literature of the Old Testament had a long oral prehistory before being written down” (17). Waltke seeks to refute this claim by establishing that “biblical literature had a short oral prehistory

Award-winning journalist, Lee Strobel wrote The Case for Christ to retrace and expand his journey toward becoming a Christian. Strobel once declared atheist, and now Christian, shares how he began to look upon the Bible and God. As an atheist, Strobel lived the life of selfishness and only worried to please himself. When his wife began to go to church he wasn’t very pleased until after he saw the positive and attractive change in her. This is the start of his curiosity and investigation about Christianity. To relate with his wife he decided to study about this and attend church services with her. Strobel interviewed thirteen leading scholars who defended their views concerning the historical reliability of the New Testament.

In his recent article for the October 7th issue of Commonweal magazine, David Bentley Hart highlighted how different the Christians of the New Testament are from modern day Christians. Hart’s article, titled “Christ’s Rabble; The first Christians were not like us”, argues that the first Christians were so different than present day Christians that we would have a very hard time getting along with one another if we meet today. Hart, a fellow at the Notre Dame Institute for Advanced Studies, came to this conclusion after in-depth study of the text of the New Testament in its original koine Greek. His work translating the New Testament for Yale University painted a clear picture of the character of the first Christians and underscored how far from the original meanings of the text we have come.

Throughout the course of the semester, we have constantly talked about and expressed the idea of reading the Bible in a historical context. Picking out the pieces that coincide with evidence that has been found with archeological findings, the accuracy of dates, and important people. The critical study of the Bible is to look at the book as a piece of historical text. The use of our “historical lens” allows us to pick out to various pieces that appear to be factual. Using this analysis of looking at the Bible through our “historical glasses”, we can understand the true meaning of the Bible in its original historical setting.

Machen stated that the New Testament books “are regarded by all serious historians as genuine products of the first Christian generation.” (PAGE 18) The statement merely could be false without Machen’s willingness to terminate as un-serious all historians who ignore the validity and authority of the New Testament. The argument of the New Testament authenticity is still conflicted between in liberalism and typical denominations. A weakness in Machen’s argument on Doctrine was while Machen indicates that the New testament could be understood through the perspective of the “primitive Jerusalem church” (PAGE 22), no supportive agreement was found what the primitive church looked

As we move further into the research of this paper, defining some terms under the viewpoints of the selected authors is necessary. Millard Erickson defines inspiration as “that supernatural influence of the Holy Spirit upon the Scripture writers which rendered their writings an accurate record of the revelation or which resulted in what they wrote actually being the Word of God.” While inspiration primarily concerns the quality of the finished product rather than the process of that period of time in which the entirety of the Scriptures came into being, the divine-human authorship raises the tension as to how those Scriptures came into being. The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy states: “We affirm that inspiration, strictly speaking applies only to the autographic text of Scripture.” The leads to the question “What constitutes an autograph or the autographs?” In general, scholars use the term autographs to refer to the first or original copies of the biblical documents which is the material the author actually wrote himself. One customary definition of the term “autographa” in a theological discussion refers to the unchanging form of text whereby the original document is identical to the final canonical form of a given OT biblical book. Since canon involves the list of all books that belong in a bible or those reckoned as Holy Scriptures which

N.T. Wright releases “How God Became King: The Forgotten Story of the Gospels” with the affirmation that the church has come to emphasis almost exclusively on Jesus’ birth, death and resurrection. Although, the gospels devote the majority of their time on Jesus’ life. Jesus’s life, death, resurrection and rise did not hint the end of the old Israel story, but redirected it further to a worldwide effort of adaptation. Wright addresses several New Testament documented interpreters who present the gospels as simply “the prognosis of early Christian faith, reflecting the disputes and predicaments of the early church,” something Wright calls a “half-truth”. Wright argues that notwithstanding the gospels countless differences, none of

Bart Ehrman is a scholar of the New Testament, and also serves as co-editor of the New Testament Tools. Since he is a scholar, he places more emphasis on the historical and literary interests of the bible scriptures. When he originally began evaluating the gospels, he alleged the information to be reliable and valid. He held an open mind should be kept while interpreting the gospels. Although, as he began reading Greek, analyzing, and comparing the scriptures in their original format, he found the gospels to be inconclusive. Therefore, he deemed the historical sources of the gospel to be plausible. He was knowledgeable of the discrepancies in the gospels though he had not realized just how many there actually were. He went on to say he found

In biblical study, Narrative Criticism has been developed against the evolutionary models of historical criticism, which has been mainly focused to reenact the position and thought of the original writer and audience through certain ‘scientific and analysis of biblical material’. This discipline is the study of a narrative text most likely similar to any narrative literature. It is sub discipline of interpretation method under literary criticism, which emphases on ‘the literary form or shape of the text in its final form’ as pointer of what the texts meant. There is general agreement among the various disciplines of literary approach, that they all consider Scripture as a ‘literary document’, rather than a ‘historical’. These various disciplines,

The process by which the English Bible, as it is known to the English culture today, was compiled is an extraordinary thing to see. The Bible consists of two parts: the Old Testament and the New Testament. The process by which both Testaments were written and then canonized into one book transpired over a period of many years. Once the canonization of the Bible officially came to an end, it was translated into English. Since then, many versions of the modern Bible have been made. Since the individual books of the Bible became scattered as they were written, people set forth to preserve God’s Word by compiling them into one