In case you thought otherwise, Bart Ehrman’s idea have not gone un-protested in the field of textual criticism. You just never hear that in the popular media.
Bart Ehrman of the University of North Carolina and Peter J Williams of Tyndale House, Cambridge recently appeared on the radio programme “Unbelievable?” hosted by Justin Brierly on Premier Christian radio.
They discussed Bart’s best-selling book “Misquoting Jesus” and whether the textual variation and transmission of the New Testament Documents is as bad as the book makes out. They also discussed what impact this has for a Christan view of the Bible’s authority.
You can listen back to it online in the programme archive. Alternatively you can click the “download the podcast” option to get the MP3 or subscribe in itunes.
What is it with Bart?
How can he even be an “accredited” NT scholar and come with this? He simply ignores the depth of the data of the synoptic gospels and the apparent contradictions in the scriptures and does not look further. Every few years he will continue dropping books like the one he just came up with recently:
Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (And Why We Don’t Know About Them) ::
Here we go again…But in one way, it is good for competent scholars to tediously debunk his material and explore the difficulties and human side of the NT VS the truths and Godly side of the NT.
@blop2008: Bart is an atheist fundamentalist. It’s what they do.
I’ve just recently read that book “Jesus interrupted”. Although it didn’t seem very scholarly I was disturbed by the highlighting of the different accounts of the nativity of Matthew and Luke. I’m not a scholar, could someone please explain how what Ehrman is saying isn’t true? I’d really like to know because it does seem on the surface that they are giving different accounts. Thank you, Nicole
Please search my Naked Bible blog for Bart Ehrman material. He’s been critiqued a number of times by various scholars. You could also Google Bart and Ben Witherington. Dr. Witherington seems to have devoted a lot of space to Ehrman.
I listened to this debate. Peter Williams kept agreeing with everything that Bart Ehrman said but put a different spin on it. It wasn’t very encouraging.
You should listen to Dan Wallace’s debate with Bart. The debate isn’t over manuscript phenomena; it’s about presuppositions and extrapolations from the data. Please search my Naked Bible blog for critiques of Bart Ehrman by various NT scholars.