He only mentions this in the introduction and conclusion, which are the main times when he ever gives his personal opinions on the implications for the truth of Christianity. And if he didn’t perform that miracle, there seemed to be no reason to think that he had performed the earlier miracle of inspiring those words. The fact that we don’t have the words surely must show, I reasoned, that he did not preserve them for us. If he wanted his people to have his words, surely he would have given them to them. …it would have been no more difficult for God to preserve the words of scripture than it would have been for him to inspire them in the first place. The closest he gets to implying that he has dismissed God altogether is the point that Ehrman is now agnostic, but he doesn’t say so in this book. The book begins with the story of Ehrman’s deconversion from the fundamentalist Christianity of his high school years and how textual criticism of the New Testament started him on a path away from that and instead to wherever the evidence led him. Theologically Motivated Alterations of the Text The Copyists of the Early Christian WritingsĦ. Even if it is a bit slow in the first half, it really starts to pick up speed later on. Misquoting Jesus contained a lot of surprises that I had never heard about the New Testament. I said then that it seemed likely that his other books (like this one) would be more exciting, and I was right.
This wasn’t my first time reading Bart Ehrman in December I read Did Jesus Exist? and I remember saying that Ehrman seemed to have a great reluctance in writing that book, and that it had a negative effect on the overall tone.
Now that I’ve finally read it, I wish I had done so earlier. I had been meaning to read Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why by New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman for several months, but I kept putting it off.
0 kommentar(er)
