Bart D. Ehrman's Blog, page 351

June 21, 2014

Why Textual Variants Matter for the Rest of Us

In this thread I am discussing why it matters that there are so many variants in our surviving manuscripts of the New Testament. It does not matter because there are any “fundamental Christian doctrines” at stake, per se, but for other reasons. As I sketched in my previous post, it should matter for anyone who believes that God gave the very words of the Bible, since the facts that we don’t *have* the original words in some cases and that in many other cases the words themselves are in doubt,...
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on June 21, 2014 00:05

June 20, 2014

Fundamentalists and the Variants in our Manuscripts

In my previous post I began a discussion of why textual variants (that is, different wordings of the verses of the NT) found in the manuscripts might matter to someone other than a specialist who spends his or her life studying such things. Most of the hundreds of thousands of variations are of very little importance for anything, as most people – even specialists – would admit. Only a minority really matter. And none of these seriously threatens any significant, traditional, Christian doctri...
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on June 20, 2014 03:02

June 19, 2014

Who Cares??? Do the Variants in the Manuscripts Matter for Anything?

Ever since I wrote Misquoting Jesus readers have asked – these are usually conservative Christians with a high view of Scripture, but not always – whether any of the differences in the manuscripts of the New Testament actually *matter* for anything.

I have often pointed out that there are hundreds of thousands of differences among our surviving manuscripts. We don’t know exactly how many because no one has been able to count them all. Are there 200,000? 300,000? 400,000? We don’t know. But wha...

 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on June 19, 2014 08:46

June 17, 2014

Hypothetical Problems with Copies of Philippians

In trying to figure out what it even means to talk about the “original” text of Philippians (was it what Paul meant to dictate? Was it what he did dictate, if it was different from what he intended? Was it what the scribe wrote even if it was different from what Paul dictated? Was it what Paul corrected after he saw what the scribe incorrectly wrote? Was it the fresh copy that the scribe made even if it was different from the corrected version Paul gave him? What happens if in fact Philippian...
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on June 17, 2014 03:15

June 16, 2014

Dictation of Letters: More Complications for Knowing an “Original” Text

I have been talking about the problems in knowing what the “original” text of Philippians is. Even with the following brief review, the comments I will be making in this post will, frankly, probably not make much sense if you do not refresh your memory from my previous two posts. Here I will be picking up where I left off there.

We have seen that knowing what the original of Philippians is complicated by the facts that: 1) The letter appears originally to have been two letters, so that it’s ha...

 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on June 16, 2014 09:11

June 13, 2014

Complications with Finding an “Original” Text

I have been asked to comment on whether we can get back to the “original” text of Paul’s letter to the Philippians, and I have begun to discuss the problems not just of getting *back* to the original, but also of knowing even what the original *was*. In my previous post I pointed out the problems posed by the fact that Philippians appears to be two letters later spliced together into one. And so the first problem is this: is the “original” copy the spliced together copy that Paul himself did...
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on June 13, 2014 23:15

June 12, 2014

What Would Be the “Original” Text of Philippians?

I have begun to answer a series of questions asked by a reader about the textual history of Paul’s letter to the Philippians. In my previous post I explained why some critical scholars maintain that the letter was originally two separate letters that have been spliced together. That obviously makes the next question the reader asked a bit more complicated than one might otherwise imagine. And it’s not the only complication. Here is the reader’s next question:

QUESTION: Do you agree that the fi...

 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on June 12, 2014 23:20

June 11, 2014

Are There Two Letters to the Philippians?

In my previous post I answered, in short order, a series of questions that a reader had about the “original” text of Paul’s letter to the Philippians. I will now take several posts in order to address some of the questions at greater length. Here was the first one:


QUESTION: Would you agree that the letter written to the Philippians was an original writing of Paul?


The short answer is Yes – it is one of the undisputed Pauline letters. The longer answer is, well, complicated. Scholars have long...

 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on June 11, 2014 07:30

June 10, 2014

Do We Have the Original Text of Philippians?

QUESTIONS:

Would you agree that the letter written to the Philippians was an original writing of Paul? Do you agree that the first copy of the letter written by Paul to the Philippians was also an original? Assuming there were errors made by the person(s) who copied the original letter of Paul to the Philippians, would you agree that the first copy even with some errors still had the original context of the first letter. If you do agree, then is it totally accurate to say that we don’t have th...

 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on June 10, 2014 08:14

June 8, 2014

My Debate on Suffering with Philosopher Richard Swinburne

This is a radio debate that I had on January 10th, 2009 with Richard G. Swinburne, a philosopher who teaches at Oxford; Swinburne is a Christian and is well-known in philosophical circles. The debate involved an area we are both interested in, The Problem of Suffering and whether it makes sense to be a theist in light of the pain and misery in the world.

I have to say, this is probably the only radio debate that I’ve ever done where I got genuinely angry at an opponent. Swinburne’s answers to...

 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on June 08, 2014 09:05

Bart D. Ehrman's Blog

Bart D. Ehrman
Bart D. Ehrman isn't a Goodreads Author (yet), but they do have a blog, so here are some recent posts imported from their feed.
Follow Bart D. Ehrman's blog with rss.