Ehrman used to be evangelical, can read latin, greek, aramaic, hebrew, studied under the most hardcore bible schools and there he learned of the thousands of errors in the bible. He is honest enough to reveal them to the public unlike the other priests, pastors, religious who knew it all along but kept quiet to protect the faith.
...who was keeping it quiet??...my very first "study" Bible...included hundreds of variant readings in the margins...most Bibles do...I bet your Bible does...and except for a couple of notable instances...in general they don't amount to very much...in fact the vast majority amount to absolutely nothing...Ehrman makes much ado about very very little...
@Kevin’s Class ...What I said was my very first study Bible contains all the textual variants, Herman harps on and on about...I was 15yo...and I've learned a lot since...and I've met Bart on several occasions....I'm aware of the weak and inconsistent points of his postions.. Erhman's exaggerated popular book titles ("forged" etc) only shock ignorant fundamentalists and excite even more ignorant skeptics, like yourself..to buy his books... in Erhman's most candid moments and during debates with scholarly peers...he is forced to admit 99% of the variants have no meaning (variant or bad spelling, missed words etc.)...the others everyone knows about...only a couple variants are more than a few words ...his scholarly works are different... much different...and frankly excellent, I highly reccomend his translation of the Apocryphal Gospels...I also enjoyed "Lost Christianities"...so I'm a fan...but I also know when Bart's "playing cute".... Perhaps, since you seem to think my knowledge is "study bible"...you be willing to engage with me regarding Ehman's ideas...you pick the variant or agnostic Ehrman idea you find most compelling for unbelief...and you and I will "go to Town"...how's that sound?...Fun?.. (Warning I don't suffer fools lightly)..
The word of God should be straight forward and simple without having hundreds of variants, God is not human he cannot make mistakes like us, the only reason that the Bible has so many mistakes is because its not the words of God end of story, ask any Muslim and he will tell you the Quran has been the same since the time of Muhammed and no changes or variants exists
spelling mistakes are not errors or contradictions...the problem is that some people get it and others don't...and of course just like at school these days, when you don't get something it's the teacher's fault not the fact that you need to learn something and may be your brain needs stretching...
seems to me 30k denominations all claiming different things based on the conflicting nature of scripture has caused a ton of confusion in the world for centuries. Even in your goalpost shifted definition, God is still the author of confusion with His word. He is not logically possible according to his own word. So God is either an immoral idiotic barbarian who doesn't mind lying or stretching the truth to us mere mortals, or he simply doesn't exist. Another possibility is that we don't have original copies of the word which would show it is perfect, but if we can trust that statements in the bible about gods word not passing away are true, then this is another contradiction. So therefore we cannot trust that word. So until you have originals, you can't even begin to tell me any of this is god's word.
Chad S Excerpt from nag hammadi manuscript peters apocalypse. The Savior said to me, "He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living Jesus. But this one into whose hands and feet they drive the nails is his fleshly part, which is the substitute being put to shame, the one who came into being in his likeness. But look at him and me." But I, when I had looked, said "Lord, no one is looking at you. Let us flee this place." But he said to me, "I have told you, 'Leave the blind alone!'. And you, see how they do not know what they are saying. For the son of their glory instead of my servant, they have put to shame."
“We can see when a scribe has made a mistake” *only* as far back as the earliest source text available for reference. And in most cases, the earliest source text available to scholars is from the 10th century. That’s the problem Bart Ehrman identifies.
Exactly. At best, one could get back to the earliest pair of copies of a single manuscript but not to the original. The pre-canonization manuscripts show greater changes than after, so we should expect a rate of change at the early rate in the earliest copies.
Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly adestroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass Samuel 15 3.
Actually, I have heard Erhman's lectures. He has stated that many of them are minor already. But shouldn't the written word of the divine, supreme creator of the universe be taken down and/or preserved without error at all? That is pretty much the point.
Even with divine inspiration, errors will happen especially when the scriptures are transcribed throughout the centuries. Humans make mistakes, but at the same time it's pretty clear that such a book like the Bible is divinely inspired because of the prophecies, scientific details like the earth being in space supported by nothing etc.
@@greatminds1017 What about the prophecies that don't come true such as the Egyptians speaking the language of Canaan despite it being an extinct language? Or that that Egypt will be conquered by Nebuchadnezzar? Or scientific details like the moon being a source of light when it merely reflects the light of the sun? You have a very low bar for divinely inspired.
@@cloudstone123 please provide the Bible scriptures were the prophecies were made and I'll read it and respond. Also do we not get light at night from the moon? Yes it only reflects the light from the sun but it still provides light.
@@greatminds1017 That will take a long time because there are a lot from Egypt and Assyrian converting to Judaism to the Nile river drying up completely. How about we just start with Ezekiel 29:1-21 and everything incorrect in that one and Isaiah 19:18? Both Ezekiel and Isaiah were terrible prophets. Maybe I am a prophet. Watch. I predict you will say the prophecies don't say what they actually say. The problem with prophecies is that you already know they will happen because they were predicting an event that already happened. And even if they didn't you can just say they haven't happened yet. And that is not the worst part. Because even if we assume they were prophecies of the future, how can you possibly know they come from the christian god as opposed to literally anything else that can be thought of? And no, we do not get light from the moon. Genesis clearly states that there are two sources of light and one rules the day and one rules the night. The moon reflects the sunlight. If the moon is a ruler because of its light, then that would mean the sun is actually the ruler then. I mean, there is so much wrong in here no matter which way you choose to interpret it.
@@greatminds1017 Actually, there are times when you can see both the moon and the sun at the same time and the moon will be seen in it's various phases. There is nothing in between the two bodies so there is nothing causing the shadow seen on the moon. The only possible explanation for that is that the moon is its own light source (which is what the bible says).
The 400,000 variants are spread out over thousands of pages of MSS, so instead of there being "more variants than words in the NT", the formula is more like 400,000 variants and tens of millions of words in total.
Actually, Ehrman openly talks about all four of those points. The main problem is that there are no original manuscripts in existence...not to mention the amount of changes that happened to the oral versions of the stories before they were even written. Most people treat the Bible like it fell out of the sky exactly as it is....in English.
Sir, assertions such as "amount of changes..." and "most people..." are typical baseless argumentation. These changes you aledge, enumerate them...you cannot. Who are these "people"...they exist only in your hate-filled imagination. As for there being no "original" manuscripts, this also is meaningless argumentation that deminstrates a profound ignorace of the vast array of extent manuscripts of such disparate origins yet evidencing complete agreement in ALL things doctrinal. I cannot know whether or not you hate Christ and, by association, all Christians, but know this, your and Mr. Ehrman's efforts cannot harm God's true Church nor His eternal and theopneustos word. May the eternal Father cause your heart of stone to be replaced by a heart of flesh, in Christ Jesus' name.
you've argued that "The main problem is that there are no original manuscripts in existence" ...Is not having any original manuscripts a "problem" for any other ancient text or holy book? ...because we don't have originals manuscripts for any ancient work....just copies...we just have thousands more and older copies of the New Testament, than say the Iliad ...
Oh, you mean it didn't? LOL! Erhman is yet to address the unexplainable textual changes occurring as attributed to the so called Mandela effect.. another can of worms to be opened!
@@japexican007 So the God couldn't protect its words or it was never meant to be protected like Quran is protected? Quran claims it won't change , and its protected even after 1400 years... 😊😊😊
So believers are forced to shift from, "There are no mistakes in the bible," to "There are mistakes, but they don't matter." We are asked to believe that God gave his word to mankind in languages that have become extinct and been reconstructed, on original manuscripts that have long since been lost, so that all we have today are reconstructions of translations of copies of copies. And we must build our eternal salvation upon this quicksand.
Edward Wood Excerpt from nag hammadi manuscript peters apocalypse. The Savior said to me, "He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living Jesus. But this one into whose hands and feet they drive the nails is his fleshly part, which is the substitute being put to shame, the one who came into being in his likeness. But look at him and me." But I, when I had looked, said "Lord, no one is looking at you. Let us flee this place." But he said to me, "I have told you, 'Leave the blind alone!'. And you, see how they do not know what they are saying. For the son of their glory instead of my servant, they have put to shame."
Edward Wood Do they not consider the Qur'an (with care)? Had it been from other Than Allah, they would surely have found therein Much discrepancy. -Sura An-Nisa', Ayah 82 Say: "I tell you not that with me are the treasures of Allah, nor do I know what is hidden, nor do I tell you I am an angel. I but follow what is revealed to me." Say: "can the blind be held equal to the seeing?" Will ye then consider not? -Sura Al-An'am, Ayah 50 O humanity! If you are in doubt about the Resurrection, then ˹know that˺ We did create you from dust, then from a sperm-drop, then ˹developed you into˺ a clinging clot ˹of blood˺, then a lump of flesh-fully formed or unformed-in order to demonstrate ˹Our power˺ to you. ˹Then˺ We settle whatever ˹embryo˺ We will in the womb for an appointed term, then bring you forth as infants, so that you may reach your prime. Some of you ˹may˺ die ˹young˺, while others are left to reach the most feeble stage of life so that they may know nothing after having known much. And you see the earth lifeless, but as soon as We send down rain upon it, it begins to stir ˹to life˺ and swell, producing every type of pleasant plant. -Sura Al-Hajj, Ayah 5
Binyamin A I respect where your coming from, but the Quran has also been changed, all throughout its history. Not only that, but there are many things about it that are so scientifically inaccurate it leads me to laugh at it, same with the Bible. I'm not exactly sure where I'm going, but all religious texts have errors. I don't know where I'm going for sure, but I saw a video about Howard Storm. And many other NDE's where people saw Jesus as their lord. I think I'm gonna go with all those people, as I found there testimony convincing from an objective standpoint. Just check it out
@@binyamina8850 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly adestroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass Samuel 15 3
Michael Kruger doesn't say that the vast majority of the NT manuscripts come from th 9th century or later. That's NOT good for determining the origina text.
Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly adestroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass Samuel 15 3.
Variants do NOT equal "errors", so the terms aren't interchangeable. Dan Wallace does a fine job of trouncing Ehrman's ignorance in this area, so the evidence mounts that Ehrman, rather than showing any integrity, panders to Bible critics who are too lazy to actually study the Bible. He might be getting very wealthy with his tripe, but he's exchanging his eternal soul for the praise of men. He's a fool.
+Betsy Ross Yeah. Although I don't totally agree with all of what Wallace says, he most certainly nalls Ehrman on the supposed mistakes. You're right, critics are lazy. Worse than that, they'll have to answer to God in the end, and then they will be put to shame for ignoring the truth.
Don't think you can criticize Ehrman's depth of bible study. It is formidable. He just has the honesty of stating the obvious contradictions and giving justified reasoning why they are like that. Any careful study of the bible will make those contradictions obvious. How you choose to deal with them is up to you. You can be an apologist and explain them away using contradictory parts of the bible; or you can try to present rational reasons for them.
@@johnelliott5859 Who's criticizing Ehrman's scholarship? I criticize his wanton dishonesty, but a bunch of blockheads have made him wealthy. Dr. Daniel Wallace has exposed him in two or three debates, and Ehrman was defenseless. He didn't address most of the accusations.
Here's the irony...he accuses Ehrman of making an argument based on sheer numbers. But later he goes on to make this same type of argument to prop up the bible. There are 'so many manuscripts' (about 25K in all). But that number is by itself meaningless, in the same sense that you could say Ehrman's numbers are meaningless...what's more important is how early they are, how complete they are, etc. (See "Is the New Testament Reliable Holding vs Carrier" starting at 52:45)
We have the originals preserved in our earliest copies, which are corroborated by the quotes of the NT by the earliest apostolic and church leaders (who quoted from either the originals themselves or copies made in the time of and shortly after the originals). But what kind of illogical, unreasonable, and radical criteria is that? We do not have any complete originals of anything from the ancient world, everything exists in copies. Remember that manuscripts get deteriorated over time. If you are a Muslim, then by your own criteria we can disregard the Quran, since we do not have any complete original Uthmanic manuscript of the Quran. The earliest complete *copy* of the Quran is not even Uthmanic, and it dates to around 742 BC, 110 years after Muhammed's death, and around 90 years after Uthman. If you look at it from the 21st-century perspective, yeah the originals have deteriorated a long time ago, since papyrus only last around 120 years, depending on how well preserved they were. But if you go back 1000 years, the originals would probably exist in fragments, and if you go back 1500 years the originals would be intact in bigger parts, and if you go back to around 200 AD, the originals would plausibly be intact in a complete form. Based on your absurd criteria, we can't know anything about anyone from the ancient world.
@@iamfunnyipromise9605 - One last thing that bothers me is i just saw a clip of bart saying that 78% of jesus's words aren't actually jesus's words is there any proof that the gospels are historically accurate and what about the so called discrepancies can they be reconciled i say that with concern and respect for the previous books respect from a muslim
@@theguyver4934 One of the biggest reasons why Barth Ehrman says what he says about 78% non-Jesus sayings, is because he dates the gospels so late to the 80-100 AD and rejects that they were written by eyewitnesses of Jesus. He claims they were passed on by oral tradition for over 50 years, and then written down by some unknown people who never heard or saw Jesus themselves. He comes to the conclusion that we cant possibly know what Jesus said because they were written way to late and not by eyewitnesses. To destroy his argument about the 78% non-saying of Jesus, we have to see if there are strong reasons to conclude that they were written way earlier than what Bart says and by eyewitnesses. I have already given my own reasons for dating the gospels earlier then 70 AD, I will find my reply and paste it here in my next reply. And yes, we have strong reasons to conclude that they are early, eyewitness accounts and historical accurate.
@@theguyver4934 I have never heard about him before now, but we have very strong reasons to conclude a early date of the gospels. And one of the biggest reasons for why Bart ehrman dates the gospels to the 90s, is because Jesus prophesied about the destruction of the Temple in most of the gospels. Since prophecies are miraculous in nature, and he does not believe in miracles, therefore he and others conclude that the gospls must have been written after the fact when the temple were destroyed. This implies that the author's were writing lies about what Jesus said, according to Bart's reasoning, Jesus did not prophecy about the destruction of the temple, therefore the gospel writers lied about something Jesus did not say. And Bart has already also rejected all miracles Jesus did because he does not believe miracles are possible, not because of any great evidence. Now, before I give reasons for the historical accuracy of the Gospels, I want to briefly show some of the reasons why I date them earlier than 70 AD, and also if they were written early, in the lifetime of eyewitness of Jesus, that increases their reliability. All who hold to naturalism as their worldview, as Bart do, presuppose that miracles are impossible, therefore they are forced to date the gospels after the destruction of the temple, because Jesus predicts the destruction in the gospels. They are dated in the 90s, not because they have any good reasons to do it, but because of their worldview. But in reality, Mark, Matthew, and Luke were written down approximately 45 to 52 AD. Matthew most probably around 45 AD, Mark in 50 AD, and Luke in 52 AD. Luke wrote a later book, called Acts, probably in 61 AD. In Acts, none of the deaths of James the brother of Jesus, Paul, or Peter was recorded. Neither was the siege of Jerusalem or the destruction of the temple recorded. The book of Acts records the history of the early Jewish and gentiles believers and especially centers around the ministry of Peter and Paul in Jerusalem and Asia. All of these would have been important for Luke to record, especially the deaths of Peter and Paul, but none of them are recorded, he left them out *most probably* because they hadn't occurred yet when Luke was finished with the book of Acts. Since we know from Josephus that James died in 61 AD, we can reasonably infer that Acts were finished in either 60 AD or early in 61 AD. But the gospel of Luke was written prior to that, and it's plausible to conclude that Paul quotes the gospel of luke twice in the mid 50 AD. Thus, it's also here reasonably to place the date of Luke's gospel at around 52 AD. We know Luke based a lot of his account from both Mark and Matthew. Therefore we can place both Mark and Matthew from around 45-50 AD. Jesus died in 33 AD, that means the gospels, including Paul's letters, would have been written between 12-19 years after Jesus, which are extremely early historical accounts, compared to other ancient historical accounts. And also to take an example, when something was fulfilled, let's say for example about Judas Iscariot they wrote it like this ''and Judas Iscariot, *who later betrayed* Him.'' That sentence shows that it was recorded after the fact had happened. But we find nothing like this with the destruction prophecy because It hadn't occurred yet. As I reasonably demonstrated, they wrote the gospels long before the destruction, while it was still peaceful in Jerusalem. And this means that Bart is wrong about the datings of the gospels, and if he is wrong about this, then he is most plausible wrong about his claim that 78% are non-Jesus sayings. Because his biggest reason to claim this is because of his late datings of the gospels.
..... but then how can you spot changes if you don't have the originals? How can you tell which copy is a copy of your earliest manuscripts. Meanwhile you call a manuscript what is actually a credit card sized parchment with a few words on it. Your earliest full manuscripts of these texts are hundreds of years after the fact. you have NO idea how many of these are in error or not. the fact God's Word can be so easily mistranslated and miscopied already calls your earliest copies into question not to mention subsequent copies. He said they can trace back to the original. YOU DONT HAVE ORIGINALS!
@@leonardodavincithegenius4615 there is no original quran as the writings are very disjointed. They later were compiled together and structured. So it really depends on what you mean by quran as a text. As for errors, we dont have original documents. The oldest quran in existence is dated to a few hundred years after the prophet is claimed to have been taken from this mortal plane. Plenty of time for errors to creep in as we see with other texts including jewish and christian ines
book from god would be without any mistakes or contradictions .but book like the bible which is full of mistakes errors contradictions and human adding is not reliable sorr its the truth
candyman878 david Excerpt from nag hammadi manuscript peters apocalypse. The Savior said to me, "He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living Jesus. But this one into whose hands and feet they drive the nails is his fleshly part, which is the substitute being put to shame, the one who came into being in his likeness. But look at him and me." But I, when I had looked, said "Lord, no one is looking at you. Let us flee this place." But he said to me, "I have told you, 'Leave the blind alone!'. And you, see how they do not know what they are saying. For the son of their glory instead of my servant, they have put to shame."
@@japexican007 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly adestroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass Samuel 15 3
If there were 1,000 manuscripts with identical text and not one variation, Dr. Ehrman would then claim the New Testament writers and copyists to have colluded and deceived because it's not humanly possible to have so many documents without any possible errors. Point is, no matter the state of the documents, scoffers and skeptics will find ways to discredit Christ.
God didn't ask for people to prove he exists but to have faith in what he did lol so true, i have debated so many skeptics and it's never about "proof" it's always biased opinion
Do you know bart Erhman was an evangelist Christian who became an agnostic after founding these errors .How can you say that he would have said such thing when he himself was a devoted Christian?
Ehrman definitely states that of the errors, most are meaningless. Be honest. Have you even read him or watched his videos. Maybe you can address the significant contradictions.
When the Bible says it’s the word of God and or Christian’s claim there is no error. What they are saying is that God’s word does not contradict. His laws, his purpose, his plans etc in context. They do not mean literally every word has be to spelled correctly or copied perfectly. What a poor and unrealistic standard atheist or some secular scholars demand. The church was persecuted for over 300 years. Given the history context it is impossible to have a perfect copy let alone preserve an original.
Let me just add. If three were any real evidence of gods, why would there be so many differnt versions of that imaginery friend that so many claim to have a personal relationship with?
The Bible is contradictory at the ground-level, common sense level. There’s no need to split hairs over minor variations here and there, for people advocating it or opposing it.
Ha Ha ha ha. Has this person even read Ehrman's books? Ehrman talks extensively about 'minor' changes to the NT text. He doesn't rely on numbers as his sole argument, but explains how they happen, and argues convincingly about why each is significant. Kruger is dismissing scribal errors as irrelevant, but without a true original source, even a single minor change is extremely relevant to understanding a supposedly inerrant holy book. Apology fail.
Since such textual variants do not affect the meaning of the text and the orthodoxy of Christian doctrine, it's not a big problem. Less than 5% of such textual variants do affect the meaning of the text and 1% actually affects Christian doctrine.
Why didn't Yeshua ever write Himself or command the disciples to write down what He taught nor did he establish scribes (which he was well aware of) to maintain the accuracy of any writings? The "reason" there are so many errors in the "scriptures" is because their writing and "canonization" were just ideas of mortal men to improve (in their mind at least) God's obvious plan (i.e. to have the Gospel PREACHED around the world).
The evangelical position is that the Bible is the infallible, perfect word of God. You cannot claim God directed infallibility if even one error or contradiction is present let alone thousands of errors of any kind. It should be expected that God's word would be perfected and preserved by the Creator. You either believe it as the infallible perfect word of God or the fallible imperfect work of man. To admit an error of any size is to admit that either it is man's work or that God was unable to preserve his original perfect word. Either conclusion creates a real theological problem for Christianity.
What “book” are you referring to where ehrman doesn’t talk about the quality of the discrepancies???? He’s written dozens of books and the ones I’ve read he has indeed discussed them.
Fact to verify : there is only one hebrew orthodox Tanakh ever used in history. Todays Tanakh matches the dead sea scrolls perfectly. All Tanakhs world wide match word for word.( Excluding the JPS reform version). There are hundreds of variant versions of Christian bibles none match each other or the sources of koine greek or hebrew. Why wouldnt Christians today insist on using original scriltures of the pre Nicene koine greek and hebrew? There as those who spuriously claim rabbi s went back 330 years in time and erased JC from dead sea scrolls...kind of silly to even suggest this. Shalom
motorhead Excerpt from nag hammadi manuscript peters apocalypse. The Savior said to me, "He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living Jesus. But this one into whose hands and feet they drive the nails is his fleshly part, which is the substitute being put to shame, the one who came into being in his likeness. But look at him and me." But I, when I had looked, said "Lord, no one is looking at you. Let us flee this place." But he said to me, "I have told you, 'Leave the blind alone!'. And you, see how they do not know what they are saying. For the son of their glory instead of my servant, they have put to shame."
I guess saying the earth doesn't move at all, the sun moves around the earth and a miracle is stopping the sun from moving, as the bible does, is right?
Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly adestroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass Samuel 15 3.
@OppressedAnarchist You obviously have not read Ehrman's books, so I am wondering, who is the deceiver here. I will not be so bold as you to throw around the word "liar." But you obviously have not read Misquoting Jesus. You obviously have not watched him speak in front of scholars, as opposed to a TV interviewer that would not know.
I have an idea. Why don’t we stop making excuses for a very poorly written book that couldn’t be farther from divinely inspired. Nobody really knows who wrote it and it’s not supported by historical or scientific facts.
This is an important document. With the help of a prominent biblical apologist, we have moved one step ahead. By Kruger's emphasizing that at least 80% of the errors in the bible a) exist and b) can be ascribed to human errors, the notion that the bible is the unerring word of god goes down the drain.
Ashoerchen Excerpt from nag hammadi manuscript peters apocalypse. The Savior said to me, "He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living Jesus. But this one into whose hands and feet they drive the nails is his fleshly part, which is the substitute being put to shame, the one who came into being in his likeness. But look at him and me." But I, when I had looked, said "Lord, no one is looking at you. Let us flee this place." But he said to me, "I have told you, 'Leave the blind alone!'. And you, see how they do not know what they are saying. For the son of their glory instead of my servant, they have put to shame."
@VibrantNTingling What you are misunderstanding is that you lack the whole picture. Ehrman is forthcoming when he is talking in front of people who have all the facts. But when addressing seminary students and others, who do not know, he paints another picture. In his Misquoting Jesus, he paints a very negative picture, and does not offer both sides of the picture. He is very good at misrepresenting, misleading, withholding info, and even deception.
I don't get it. Bart Ehrman's arguments are by no means new, nor are they wrong. And he does indeed explain that most errors are insignificant. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure this out. Anyone who has had to copy a text by hand, i.e. every school child, knows this. The Bible is a collection of ancient stories. So are Grimm's Fairy Tales. So is Star Trek. What's your problem? It seems highly plausible that you are merely trying to hitch a ride on Bart Ehrman's success.
One at a time. Jesus never said that Abiathar was high priest at the TIME David ate the sacred bread. Neither did bible in 1 Sam. 21 KJV call Achimelech high priest either, only priest. He mentions Abiathar by his latest known title. If I say governor So beat someone up when in grade school I'm correct in calling him by his last known title. To add, Jesus said in the DAYS OF ABIATHAR because he was of higher fame n stature than Achimelech who gave the bread to David. Abiathar was there n supported it.
This is exactly why I started to hate being a associated with Christians at the last days of my faith before becoming an atheist. All the lying and misrepresentation of what people actually say is disgusting. If I was a Christian I would feel ashamed of people like Dr. Michael Kruger.
Even if changes happen then it will not effect the original message... If it does then its divinity is gone... Anyways what about Quran? Its error-free...
You explains it with intellectual dishonesty. However if it is full of erroneous information or demonstrably false doctrines then it is not the "word of God". Period.
What errors? Things they say are errors are not . Sometimes both can be true n it's intact by God. Things they thought error are now proven legit in KJV. Alexandrians opposed St. Stephen in Acts n their texts are to be rejected. All we need is in KJV. 2nd These. 2 :11 with John 1:1 KJV actually hints that the WORD itself will send delusion for the serpents seed people to fall away who love not the truth but love sinful ways instead. They chose to believe not
Bart Ehrman is not really the most reliable resource. His personality can be very disarming, but really doesn’t come across as very believable on doctrinal theological beliefs.Really not a good source for new Christian’s.
Liars like Ehrman always withhold the details. Fools don't care about the details, for in them truth comes; fools are more interested in their agenda than truth.
+Betsy Ross So true. Reminds me a lot about evolutionists. They have their proof but it does not stand up to the details. Anything going contrary to what God says, falls apart.
Did you hear the theory of Jesus being called Hero of Alexandria? So many of Jesus' parables match up with Hero's inventions like the wineskin (turns water into wine), windmill power (stopping the wind), and more. The tales of the son returning to his father may refer to the early mechanical "plays" which were hi technology of the time period. The theory states the writers of the Bible left out any references to physical inventions to keep the Bible solely focused on Jesus' spiritual teachings
Edwin. Bullinger gives better explanation than this video about manuscript in his KJV STUDY BIBLE APPENDIX.. KINDLY READ IT N B ENLIGHTENED RATHER THAN SUCH HALF KNOWLEDGE TALKS 4 POPULARITY... Isa. 40: 6-8 TEACHES ALL FLESH IS GRASS N HIS WORD ALONE IS ETERNAL.. JOHN. 8: 32. ZRBM
No wonder he's so accurate: Reformed Theological Seminary. Did not see that at first. Says it all right there. This guy is always going to be accurate.
@@lets_Enjoy_Learning_English Or you can study to show yourself approved as the scriptures command instead of being lazy. Then you'll know for yourself he's accurate too.
@berrywoke Stupid is making comments when you are not educated in the area that you speaking about. If only people would realize how little snide remarks are really nothing more than a mirror, reflecting the person speaking, and a window into the person speaking.
Logical Plateau Excerpt from nag hammadi manuscript peters apocalypse. The Savior said to me, "He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living Jesus. But this one into whose hands and feet they drive the nails is his fleshly part, which is the substitute being put to shame, the one who came into being in his likeness. But look at him and me." But I, when I had looked, said "Lord, no one is looking at you. Let us flee this place." But he said to me, "I have told you, 'Leave the blind alone!'. And you, see how they do not know what they are saying. For the son of their glory instead of my servant, they have put to shame."
pete walsh Excerpt from nag hammadi manuscript peters apocalypse. The Savior said to me, "He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living Jesus. But this one into whose hands and feet they drive the nails is his fleshly part, which is the substitute being put to shame, the one who came into being in his likeness. But look at him and me." But I, when I had looked, said "Lord, no one is looking at you. Let us flee this place." But he said to me, "I have told you, 'Leave the blind alone!'. And you, see how they do not know what they are saying. For the son of their glory instead of my servant, they have put to shame."
you're correct, the Gospels are speaking to different peoples also, one to the jews before the new covenant was made and one after to the gentiles, we are currently in the age of grace, faith alone by believing in Jesus and what he did on the cross to save us, but once the rapture occurs then a new covenant will begin
If Erhman were a Christian, he would have been crucified by atheists for his persistence in the lies and deception he spews out...but because he is an atheist, he gets away with murder....I guess that is why Jesus was murdered but Barabbas released...funny how God is in fact very patient with people even those who don't seem to want it...
This is so funny and sad at the same time. Everyone seems to be so intelligent and far more intellectual than the next with their newfound truths. No matter if you believe it or not one fact remains that we can all rest on. Death is the common denominator for us all. FACT. Let’s say I lived my life as such the way the scriptures are written. Without malice or ill will in order to gain something over the next person, and I'm wrong. What have I done with my life? 1. If I’m a follower of Jesus and trust in him, and I’m wrong when I die. I’ve given people hope when there was no hope, connected with a multitude of individuals on a much deeper level, and left a positive impact that will last generations. Attending a lot of funerals can sometimes give you a sense of what I’m talking about. I mean these arguments are centuries old, and here we are still arguing about the same very thing. Aside from Christmas when was the last time anyone of us reached out on a regular basis to a stranger because you have compassion and love for them? No matter what they’ve done. My God teaches me that. If I’m wrong and all atheists are right. Have I really wasted my life? 2. Now what if I’m right and the ancient text is real? What if those who doubt and make others stumble. What do you have to lose? It seems to me that my wrong is far worse than your wrong, but if scripture is right. You have far more at risk than looking intelligent and sounding intellectual. This discussion isn’t based on someone else’s facts are more proven than these facts over here. No matter what you say. They’re based on where your heart is right now, and what are your motives. We’re all so quick to jump on social media to prove one another wrong - Christian and non-Christian alike. I pray for anyone who gets to the end of this message. That the God of the scripture will touch your heart, Christian and non-Christian alike, and allow you to see, feel his love, grace, compassion, and mercy for you and all of humanity. Peace and Love to you all brothers and sisters. Christianity, if false, is of no importance, and if true, of infinite importance. The only thing it cannot be is moderately important. C. S. Lewis
3 роки тому
Seek for allah try to read the quran,learn about other religions and the one that really convince you no matter what people say about it if it's the truth and it convince you then you should follow it
3 роки тому
@@MichaelTheophilus906 ok and what does that have to do with me
3 роки тому
@@BO0O0M650 in the old bible not the corrupted one
Umer Amjad There is proof from old manuscripts showing Jesus didn't die. Excerpt from nag hammadi manuscript peters apocalypse. The Savior said to me, "He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living Jesus. But this one into whose hands and feet they drive the nails is his fleshly part, which is the substitute being put to shame, the one who came into being in his likeness. But look at him and me." But I, when I had looked, said "Lord, no one is looking at you. Let us flee this place." But he said to me, "I have told you, 'Leave the blind alone!'. And you, see how they do not know what they are saying. For the son of their glory instead of my servant, they have put to shame."
... then why do you even worry youself with this discussion? Nevertheless, you are indeed a servant... if not God, then the adversary. This is why you are drawn to discussions such at this...not to learn or to engage in reasoned discourse but to spread discontent and sow controversy. However, it is not too late. Consider this, we are all sinners falling horribly short of His holy standard...but God entered His creation and lived a perfect, sinless life so that He could be our perfect sacrifice in our place receiving the fullest extent of the righteous wrath of the Father against our sin. Jesus' perfect life and perfect sacrifice removes our guilt before God and grants us a holy righteousness so that we may stand in the presence of the most holy Father and be counted as one of his children in holy communion with Him and all other believers for all eternity.
Ehrman used to be evangelical, can read latin, greek, aramaic, hebrew, studied under the most hardcore bible schools and there he learned of the thousands of errors in the bible. He is honest enough to reveal them to the public unlike the other priests, pastors, religious who knew it all along but kept quiet to protect the faith.
...who was keeping it quiet??...my very first "study" Bible...included hundreds of variant readings in the margins...most Bibles do...I bet your Bible does...and except for a couple of notable instances...in general they don't amount to very much...in fact the vast majority amount to absolutely nothing...Ehrman makes much ado about very very little...
yeah i dont think you know what you're talking about
Not to mention when the Dead Sea scrolls were discovered the church said hold up let me keep that while we “verify” it first lmao
@Kevin’s Class ...What I said was my very first study Bible contains all the textual variants, Herman harps on and on about...I was 15yo...and I've learned a lot since...and I've met Bart on several occasions....I'm aware of the weak and inconsistent points of his postions..
Erhman's exaggerated popular book titles ("forged" etc) only shock ignorant fundamentalists and excite even more ignorant skeptics, like yourself..to buy his books...
in Erhman's most candid moments and during debates with scholarly peers...he is forced to admit 99% of the variants have no meaning (variant or bad spelling, missed words etc.)...the others everyone knows about...only a couple variants are more than a few words ...his scholarly works are different... much different...and frankly excellent, I highly reccomend his translation of the Apocryphal Gospels...I also enjoyed "Lost Christianities"...so I'm a fan...but I also know when Bart's "playing cute"....
Perhaps, since you seem to think my knowledge is "study bible"...you be willing to engage with me regarding Ehman's ideas...you pick the variant or agnostic Ehrman idea you find most compelling for unbelief...and you and I will "go to Town"...how's that sound?...Fun?..
(Warning I don't suffer fools lightly)..
The word of God should be straight forward and simple without having hundreds of variants, God is not human he cannot make mistakes like us, the only reason that the Bible has so many mistakes is because its not the words of God end of story, ask any Muslim and he will tell you the Quran has been the same since the time of Muhammed and no changes or variants exists
Dr. Bart Erhman is my favorite Bible scholar. Wonderful person!
@hassanpendek tried Islam for a year wasn't for me, I had an experience with Jesus when my grandmother died.
Thats more errors than my math test
can a book that has so many errors and contradictions in it be from God?
LXX Researcher 1corinthians says "god is not the author of confusion
spelling mistakes are not errors or contradictions...the problem is that some people get it and others don't...and of course just like at school these days, when you don't get something it's the teacher's fault not the fact that you need to learn something and may be your brain needs stretching...
seems to me 30k denominations all claiming different things based on the conflicting nature of scripture has caused a ton of confusion in the world for centuries. Even in your goalpost shifted definition, God is still the author of confusion with His word. He is not logically possible according to his own word. So God is either an immoral idiotic barbarian who doesn't mind lying or stretching the truth to us mere mortals, or he simply doesn't exist. Another possibility is that we don't have original copies of the word which would show it is perfect, but if we can trust that statements in the bible about gods word not passing away are true, then this is another contradiction. So therefore we cannot trust that word. So until you have originals, you can't even begin to tell me any of this is god's word.
Yes, if the god is an idiot...you would think that a message from 'God' would be crystal clear
Chad S
Excerpt from nag hammadi manuscript peters apocalypse.
The Savior said to me, "He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living Jesus. But this one into whose hands and feet they drive the nails is his fleshly part, which is the substitute being put to shame, the one who came into being in his likeness. But look at him and me."
But I, when I had looked, said "Lord, no one is looking at you. Let us flee this place."
But he said to me, "I have told you, 'Leave the blind alone!'. And you, see how they do not know what they are saying. For the son of their glory instead of my servant, they have put to shame."
The argument about the infallible bible is shattered to pieces by a scholar, who does not defend that argument at all.
Why would God let His word be translated erroneously?
probably for the reasons the guy in the video mentions, common sense please
“We can see when a scribe has made a mistake” *only* as far back as the earliest source text available for reference. And in most cases, the earliest source text available to scholars is from the 10th century. That’s the problem Bart Ehrman identifies.
But we can't "trace our way back to the original." There are no original manuscripts.
Exactly. At best, one could get back to the earliest pair of copies of a single manuscript but not to the original. The pre-canonization manuscripts show greater changes than after, so we should expect a rate of change at the early rate in the earliest copies.
@@8WholeThing because if there was an original man could change and alter it
It's a paradox. Like for example, I got cloned. And my clone murdered somebody. Who committed the murder? Who will be judged at the court?
Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly adestroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass Samuel 15 3.
Actually, I have heard Erhman's lectures. He has stated that many of them are minor already. But shouldn't the written word of the divine, supreme creator of the universe be taken down and/or preserved without error at all? That is pretty much the point.
Even with divine inspiration, errors will happen especially when the scriptures are transcribed throughout the centuries. Humans make mistakes, but at the same time it's pretty clear that such a book like the Bible is divinely inspired because of the prophecies, scientific details like the earth being in space supported by nothing etc.
@@greatminds1017 What about the prophecies that don't come true such as the Egyptians speaking the language of Canaan despite it being an extinct language? Or that that Egypt will be conquered by Nebuchadnezzar?
Or scientific details like the moon being a source of light when it merely reflects the light of the sun?
You have a very low bar for divinely inspired.
@@cloudstone123 please provide the Bible scriptures were the prophecies were made and I'll read it and respond. Also do we not get light at night from the moon? Yes it only reflects the light from the sun but it still provides light.
@@greatminds1017 That will take a long time because there are a lot from Egypt and Assyrian converting to Judaism to the Nile river drying up completely. How about we just start with Ezekiel 29:1-21 and everything incorrect in that one and Isaiah 19:18? Both Ezekiel and Isaiah were terrible prophets.
Maybe I am a prophet. Watch. I predict you will say the prophecies don't say what they actually say.
The problem with prophecies is that you already know they will happen because they were predicting an event that already happened. And even if they didn't you can just say they haven't happened yet.
And that is not the worst part. Because even if we assume they were prophecies of the future, how can you possibly know they come from the christian god as opposed to literally anything else that can be thought of?
And no, we do not get light from the moon. Genesis clearly states that there are two sources of light and one rules the day and one rules the night. The moon reflects the sunlight. If the moon is a ruler because of its light, then that would mean the sun is actually the ruler then. I mean, there is so much wrong in here no matter which way you choose to interpret it.
@@greatminds1017 Actually, there are times when you can see both the moon and the sun at the same time and the moon will be seen in it's various phases. There is nothing in between the two bodies so there is nothing causing the shadow seen on the moon. The only possible explanation for that is that the moon is its own light source (which is what the bible says).
The 400,000 variants are spread out over thousands of pages of MSS, so instead of there being "more variants than words in the NT", the formula is more like 400,000 variants and tens of millions of words in total.
...and those 400, 000 variants don't amount to a hill of beans...
Actually, Ehrman openly talks about all four of those points. The main problem is that there are no original manuscripts in existence...not to mention the amount of changes that happened to the oral versions of the stories before they were even written. Most people treat the Bible like it fell out of the sky exactly as it is....in English.
Sir, assertions such as "amount of changes..." and "most people..." are typical baseless argumentation. These changes you aledge, enumerate them...you cannot. Who are these "people"...they exist only in your hate-filled imagination. As for there being no "original" manuscripts, this also is meaningless argumentation that deminstrates a profound ignorace of the vast array of extent manuscripts of such disparate origins yet evidencing complete agreement in ALL things doctrinal.
I cannot know whether or not you hate Christ and, by association, all Christians, but know this, your and Mr. Ehrman's efforts cannot harm God's true Church nor His eternal and theopneustos word.
May the eternal Father cause your heart of stone to be replaced by a heart of flesh, in Christ Jesus' name.
you've argued that "The main problem is that there are no original manuscripts in existence"
...Is not having any original manuscripts a "problem" for any other ancient text or holy book?
...because we don't have originals manuscripts for any ancient work....just copies...we just have thousands more and older copies of the New Testament, than say the Iliad ...
Oh, you mean it didn't? LOL! Erhman is yet to address the unexplainable textual changes occurring as attributed to the so called Mandela effect.. another can of worms to be opened!
funny how an ‘errorless’ book has 400k errors
the bible doesn't claim to be "inerrant" it claims to be the true word of God.
The videographer just explained that there are not 400,000 errors. Didn't you listen?
@@japexican007 So the God couldn't protect its words or it was never meant to be protected like Quran is protected? Quran claims it won't change , and its protected even after 1400 years... 😊😊😊
@@japexican007 how do we know what the text means if we don’t know what the text says?
Muslim troll? 😂
So believers are forced to shift from, "There are no mistakes in the bible," to "There are mistakes, but they don't matter." We are asked to believe that God gave his word to mankind in languages that have become extinct and been reconstructed, on original manuscripts that have long since been lost, so that all we have today are reconstructions of translations of copies of copies. And we must build our eternal salvation upon this quicksand.
Edward Wood
Excerpt from nag hammadi manuscript peters apocalypse.
The Savior said to me, "He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living Jesus. But this one into whose hands and feet they drive the nails is his fleshly part, which is the substitute being put to shame, the one who came into being in his likeness. But look at him and me."
But I, when I had looked, said "Lord, no one is looking at you. Let us flee this place."
But he said to me, "I have told you, 'Leave the blind alone!'. And you, see how they do not know what they are saying. For the son of their glory instead of my servant, they have put to shame."
Edward Wood
Do they not consider the Qur'an (with care)? Had it been from other Than Allah, they would surely have found therein Much discrepancy.
-Sura An-Nisa', Ayah 82
Say: "I tell you not that with me are the treasures of Allah, nor do I know what is hidden, nor do I tell you I am an angel. I but follow what is revealed to me." Say: "can the blind be held equal to the seeing?" Will ye then consider not?
-Sura Al-An'am, Ayah 50
O humanity! If you are in doubt about the Resurrection, then ˹know that˺ We did create you from dust, then from a sperm-drop, then ˹developed you into˺ a clinging clot ˹of blood˺, then a lump of flesh-fully formed or unformed-in order to demonstrate ˹Our power˺ to you. ˹Then˺ We settle whatever ˹embryo˺ We will in the womb for an appointed term, then bring you forth as infants, so that you may reach your prime. Some of you ˹may˺ die ˹young˺, while others are left to reach the most feeble stage of life so that they may know nothing after having known much. And you see the earth lifeless, but as soon as We send down rain upon it, it begins to stir ˹to life˺ and swell, producing every type of pleasant plant.
-Sura Al-Hajj, Ayah 5
Binyamin A
I respect where your coming from, but the Quran has also been changed, all throughout its history.
Not only that, but there are many things about it that are so scientifically inaccurate it leads me to laugh at it, same with the Bible.
I'm not exactly sure where I'm going, but all religious texts have errors. I don't know where I'm going for sure, but I saw a video about Howard Storm. And many other NDE's where people saw Jesus as their lord.
I think I'm gonna go with all those people, as I found there testimony convincing from an objective standpoint. Just check it out
@@binyamina8850 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly adestroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass Samuel 15 3
Michael Kruger doesn't say that the vast majority of the NT manuscripts come from th 9th century or later. That's NOT good for determining the origina text.
Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly adestroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass Samuel 15 3.
Variants do NOT equal "errors", so the terms aren't interchangeable. Dan Wallace does a fine job of trouncing Ehrman's ignorance in this area, so the evidence mounts that Ehrman, rather than showing any integrity, panders to Bible critics who are too lazy to actually study the Bible. He might be getting very wealthy with his tripe, but he's exchanging his eternal soul for the praise of men. He's a fool.
+Betsy Ross Yeah. Although I don't totally agree with all of what Wallace says, he most certainly nalls Ehrman on the supposed mistakes. You're right, critics are lazy. Worse than that, they'll have to answer to God in the end, and then they will be put to shame for ignoring the truth.
Don't think you can criticize Ehrman's depth of bible study. It is formidable. He just has the honesty of stating the obvious contradictions and giving justified reasoning why they are like that. Any careful study of the bible will make those contradictions obvious. How you choose to deal with them is up to you. You can be an apologist and explain them away using contradictory parts of the bible; or you can try to present rational reasons for them.
@@johnelliott5859 Who's criticizing Ehrman's scholarship? I criticize his wanton dishonesty, but a bunch of blockheads have made him wealthy. Dr. Daniel Wallace has exposed him in two or three debates, and Ehrman was defenseless. He didn't address most of the accusations.
Always enjoy solid teaching from Dr. White, the late Dr. Norman Geisler, Craig Evans, Professor Blomberg, and yourself. ✝️👍
Here's the irony...he accuses Ehrman of making an argument based on sheer numbers. But later he goes on to make this same type of argument to prop up the bible. There are 'so many manuscripts' (about 25K in all). But that number is by itself meaningless, in the same sense that you could say Ehrman's numbers are meaningless...what's more important is how early they are, how complete they are, etc. (See "Is the New Testament Reliable Holding vs Carrier" starting at 52:45)
As long as you do not have the original you have nothing give it up
We have the originals preserved in our earliest copies, which are corroborated by the quotes of the NT by the earliest apostolic and church leaders (who quoted from either the originals themselves or copies made in the time of and shortly after the originals).
But what kind of illogical, unreasonable, and radical criteria is that? We do not have any complete originals of anything from the ancient world, everything exists in copies. Remember that manuscripts get deteriorated over time.
If you are a Muslim, then by your own criteria we can disregard the Quran, since we do not have any complete original Uthmanic manuscript of the Quran. The earliest complete *copy* of the Quran is not even Uthmanic, and it dates to around 742 BC, 110 years after Muhammed's death, and around 90 years after Uthman.
If you look at it from the 21st-century perspective, yeah the originals have deteriorated a long time ago, since papyrus only last around 120 years, depending on how well preserved they were. But if you go back 1000 years, the originals would probably exist in fragments, and if you go back 1500 years the originals would be intact in bigger parts, and if you go back to around 200 AD, the originals would plausibly be intact in a complete form.
Based on your absurd criteria, we can't know anything about anyone from the ancient world.
@@iamfunnyipromise9605 - One last thing that bothers me is i just saw a clip of bart saying that 78% of jesus's words aren't actually jesus's words is there any proof that the gospels are historically accurate and what about the so called discrepancies can they be reconciled i say that with concern and respect for the previous books respect from a muslim
@@theguyver4934 One of the biggest reasons why Barth Ehrman says what he says about 78% non-Jesus sayings, is because he dates the gospels so late to the 80-100 AD and rejects that they were written by eyewitnesses of Jesus. He claims they were passed on by oral tradition for over 50 years, and then written down by some unknown people who never heard or saw Jesus themselves. He comes to the conclusion that we cant possibly know what Jesus said because they were written way to late and not by eyewitnesses.
To destroy his argument about the 78% non-saying of Jesus, we have to see if there are strong reasons to conclude that they were written way earlier than what Bart says and by eyewitnesses.
I have already given my own reasons for dating the gospels earlier then 70 AD, I will find my reply and paste it here in my next reply.
And yes, we have strong reasons to conclude that they are early, eyewitness accounts and historical accurate.
@@iamfunnyipromise9605 - Well related to the authors of the gospels i watched jonathan sheffield and i think he made excellent points
@@theguyver4934 I have never heard about him before now, but we have very strong reasons to conclude a early date of the gospels.
And one of the biggest reasons for why Bart ehrman dates the gospels to the 90s, is because Jesus prophesied about the destruction of the Temple in most of the gospels. Since prophecies are miraculous in nature, and he does not believe in miracles, therefore he and others conclude that the gospls must have been written after the fact when the temple were destroyed. This implies that the author's were writing lies about what Jesus said, according to Bart's reasoning, Jesus did not prophecy about the destruction of the temple, therefore the gospel writers lied about something Jesus did not say. And Bart has already also rejected all miracles Jesus did because he does not believe miracles are possible, not because of any great evidence.
Now, before I give reasons for the historical accuracy of the Gospels, I want to briefly show some of the reasons why I date them earlier than 70 AD, and also if they were written early, in the lifetime of eyewitness of Jesus, that increases their reliability.
All who hold to naturalism as their worldview, as Bart do, presuppose that miracles are impossible, therefore they are forced to date the gospels after the destruction of the temple, because Jesus predicts the destruction in the gospels. They are dated in the 90s, not because they have any good reasons to do it, but because of their worldview.
But in reality, Mark, Matthew, and Luke were written down approximately 45 to 52 AD. Matthew most probably around 45 AD, Mark in 50 AD, and Luke in 52 AD. Luke wrote a later book, called Acts, probably in 61 AD.
In Acts, none of the deaths of James the brother of Jesus, Paul, or Peter was recorded. Neither was the siege of Jerusalem or the destruction of the temple recorded. The book of Acts records the history of the early Jewish and gentiles believers and especially centers around the ministry of Peter and Paul in Jerusalem and Asia. All of these would have been important for Luke to record, especially the deaths of Peter and Paul, but none of them are recorded, he left them out *most probably* because they hadn't occurred yet when Luke was finished with the book of Acts. Since we know from Josephus that James died in 61 AD, we can reasonably infer that Acts were finished in either 60 AD or early in 61 AD. But the gospel of Luke was written prior to that, and it's plausible to conclude that Paul quotes the gospel of luke twice in the mid 50 AD. Thus, it's also here reasonably to place the date of Luke's gospel at around 52 AD. We know Luke based a lot of his account from both Mark and Matthew. Therefore we can place both Mark and Matthew from around 45-50 AD. Jesus died in 33 AD, that means the gospels, including Paul's letters, would have been written between 12-19 years after Jesus, which are extremely early historical accounts, compared to other ancient historical accounts.
And also to take an example, when something was fulfilled, let's say for example about Judas Iscariot they wrote it like this ''and Judas Iscariot, *who later betrayed* Him.'' That sentence shows that it was recorded after the fact had happened. But we find nothing like this with the destruction prophecy because It hadn't occurred yet. As I reasonably demonstrated, they wrote the gospels long before the destruction, while it was still peaceful in Jerusalem.
And this means that Bart is wrong about the datings of the gospels, and if he is wrong about this, then he is most plausible wrong about his claim that 78% are non-Jesus sayings. Because his biggest reason to claim this is because of his late datings of the gospels.
..... but then how can you spot changes if you don't have the originals? How can you tell which copy is a copy of your earliest manuscripts. Meanwhile you call a manuscript what is actually a credit card sized parchment with a few words on it. Your earliest full manuscripts of these texts are hundreds of years after the fact. you have NO idea how many of these are in error or not. the fact God's Word can be so easily mistranslated and miscopied already calls your earliest copies into question not to mention subsequent copies.
He said they can trace back to the original. YOU DONT HAVE ORIGINALS!
why does it matter, he said it doesn't affect the integrity of the scripture, the error doesn't change the message of the gospel
What about Quran? Its error-free and claims to be Divine Book... With 5 books of hadees Hadees
@@japexican007 many of the errors we know are in the manuscripts do infact change the message and meaning of the text.
@@leonardodavincithegenius4615 there is no original quran as the writings are very disjointed. They later were compiled together and structured. So it really depends on what you mean by quran as a text.
As for errors, we dont have original documents. The oldest quran in existence is dated to a few hundred years after the prophet is claimed to have been taken from this mortal plane.
Plenty of time for errors to creep in as we see with other texts including jewish and christian ines
book from god would be without any mistakes or contradictions .but book like the bible which is full of mistakes errors contradictions and human adding is not reliable sorr its the truth
candyman878 david
Excerpt from nag hammadi manuscript peters apocalypse.
The Savior said to me, "He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living Jesus. But this one into whose hands and feet they drive the nails is his fleshly part, which is the substitute being put to shame, the one who came into being in his likeness. But look at him and me."
But I, when I had looked, said "Lord, no one is looking at you. Let us flee this place."
But he said to me, "I have told you, 'Leave the blind alone!'. And you, see how they do not know what they are saying. For the son of their glory instead of my servant, they have put to shame."
Quran is error-free and scientific sound... So why people don't convert to Islam?
Significant changes and errors such as 1 John 5:7-8 and Mark 16:9-20 were made. Also errors such as Hebron and JCs geneology etc.
what? how are these even errors?
@@japexican007 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly adestroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass Samuel 15 3
If there were 1,000 manuscripts with identical text and not one variation, Dr. Ehrman would then claim the New Testament writers and copyists to have colluded and deceived because it's not humanly possible to have so many documents without any possible errors. Point is, no matter the state of the documents, scoffers and skeptics will find ways to discredit Christ.
God didn't ask for people to prove he exists but to have faith in what he did lol so true, i have debated so many skeptics and it's never about "proof" it's always biased opinion
Do you know bart Erhman was an evangelist Christian who became an agnostic after founding these errors .How can you say that he would have said such thing when he himself was a devoted Christian?
What about Quran?
Ehrman definitely states that of the errors, most are meaningless. Be honest. Have you even read him or watched his videos. Maybe you can address the significant contradictions.
We can spot those changes because we compare them to one another and just know which is the correct one? Sure that makes sense.
Comparing the originally written version to the translation
When the Bible says it’s the word of God and or Christian’s claim there is no error. What they are saying is that God’s word does not contradict. His laws, his purpose, his plans etc in context. They do not mean literally every word has be to spelled correctly or copied perfectly. What a poor and unrealistic standard atheist or some secular scholars demand. The church was persecuted for over 300 years. Given the history context it is impossible to have a perfect copy let alone preserve an original.
Let me just add. If three were any real evidence of gods, why would there be so many differnt versions of that imaginery friend that so many claim to have a personal relationship with?
if the bible was really truely insired there wouldnt be one discrepancy ...
How do you know this?
Simple. Only one could be God's word. But which one?
The Bible is contradictory at the ground-level, common sense level. There’s no need to split hairs over minor variations here and there, for people advocating it or opposing it.
Ha Ha ha ha. Has this person even read Ehrman's books? Ehrman talks extensively about 'minor' changes to the NT text. He doesn't rely on numbers as his sole argument, but explains how they happen, and argues convincingly about why each is significant. Kruger is dismissing scribal errors as irrelevant, but without a true original source, even a single minor change is extremely relevant to understanding a supposedly inerrant holy book. Apology fail.
Slip of the pen. Didn't God guide the writers' hands infallably?
Since such textual variants do not affect the meaning of the text and the orthodoxy of Christian doctrine, it's not a big problem. Less than 5% of such textual variants do affect the meaning of the text and 1% actually affects Christian doctrine.
@@oscarin13 So he most likely only allowed up to, but not including, 5% of textual variants to be effectual of those changes. Perfect being and all...
I haven't read his book, but Erhman mentions exactly the kinds of mistakes mentioned here in lectures/debates on youtube
Why didn't Yeshua ever write Himself or command the disciples to write down what He taught nor did he establish scribes (which he was well aware of) to maintain the accuracy of any writings? The "reason" there are so many errors in the "scriptures" is because their writing and "canonization" were just ideas of mortal men to improve (in their mind at least) God's obvious plan (i.e. to have the Gospel PREACHED around the world).
There no error in the kjv.
The evangelical position is that the Bible is the infallible, perfect word of God. You cannot claim God directed infallibility if even one error or contradiction is present let alone thousands of errors of any kind. It should be expected that God's word would be perfected and preserved by the Creator. You either believe it as the infallible perfect word of God or the fallible imperfect work of man. To admit an error of any size is to admit that either it is man's work or that God was unable to preserve his original perfect word. Either conclusion creates a real theological problem for Christianity.
Error is Error regardless of kind of changes, quality and quantity etc...
Yea, man a religious book from the book of God should stay in it's original form and not be untouched by man-kind. What a bs
The Qu'ran :))
What about Quran?
Leonardo Da Vinci The Genius The Quran has been it is original form since 1400 years back
@@leun6768 Yes... So why people don't convert to Islam?
Leonardo Da Vinci The Genius Because they are either arrogant or ignorant
What is the evidence we have to proof that the New testament we have today is the same new testament that Mark wrote or John wrote . ?????
They have scribal variants in NT apocryphal too.
What “book” are you referring to where ehrman doesn’t talk about the quality of the discrepancies???? He’s written dozens of books and the ones I’ve read he has indeed discussed them.
You said he doesn’t mention that but in his podcast he addressed that most these errors where minor except for the major errors you failed to mention
Some are nor errors and others can be explained but not all can be. But at the same time lt's hard to believe there are that many errors.
He said alot without saying anything at all .lol
I found a mis-print in "Finnegans Wake" but nobody wanted to know
Let’s just say it’s corrupted
Gives an idiotic explaination there are errors.
But doesn't show any errors.
Fact to verify : there is only one hebrew orthodox Tanakh ever used in history. Todays Tanakh matches the dead sea scrolls perfectly. All Tanakhs world wide match word for word.( Excluding the JPS reform version).
There are hundreds of variant versions of Christian bibles none match each other or the sources of koine greek or hebrew.
Why wouldnt Christians today insist on using original scriltures of the pre Nicene koine greek and hebrew? There as those who spuriously claim rabbi s went back 330 years in time and erased JC from dead sea scrolls...kind of silly to even suggest this. Shalom
motorhead
Excerpt from nag hammadi manuscript peters apocalypse.
The Savior said to me, "He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living Jesus. But this one into whose hands and feet they drive the nails is his fleshly part, which is the substitute being put to shame, the one who came into being in his likeness. But look at him and me."
But I, when I had looked, said "Lord, no one is looking at you. Let us flee this place."
But he said to me, "I have told you, 'Leave the blind alone!'. And you, see how they do not know what they are saying. For the son of their glory instead of my servant, they have put to shame."
The Bible has incredible scientific facts ( round Earth and jet streams and man from soil and way more). Divine composition is the only answer.
will somebody plz autotune this so i can get my swag on to it
Not one error in the entire bible - just people who don't do research.
I guess saying the earth doesn't move at all, the sun moves around the earth and a miracle is stopping the sun from moving, as the bible does, is right?
SinnerSavedByGraceThruFaith InJesus
Many, actually.
clayton henrickson can you Quote the Verses?
I don't even think the Bible has 400,000 words
Bryan the bible has more than 700 thousand words!
well said Dr Kruger
Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly adestroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass Samuel 15 3.
@OppressedAnarchist You obviously have not read Ehrman's books, so I am wondering, who is the deceiver here. I will not be so bold as you to throw around the word "liar." But you obviously have not read Misquoting Jesus. You obviously have not watched him speak in front of scholars, as opposed to a TV interviewer that would not know.
I have an idea. Why don’t we stop making excuses for a very poorly written book that couldn’t be farther from divinely inspired. Nobody really knows who wrote it and it’s not supported by historical or scientific facts.
This is an important document. With the help of a prominent biblical apologist, we have moved one step ahead. By Kruger's emphasizing that at least 80% of the errors in the bible a) exist and b) can be ascribed to human errors, the notion that the bible is the unerring word of god goes down the drain.
Ashoerchen
Excerpt from nag hammadi manuscript peters apocalypse.
The Savior said to me, "He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living Jesus. But this one into whose hands and feet they drive the nails is his fleshly part, which is the substitute being put to shame, the one who came into being in his likeness. But look at him and me."
But I, when I had looked, said "Lord, no one is looking at you. Let us flee this place."
But he said to me, "I have told you, 'Leave the blind alone!'. And you, see how they do not know what they are saying. For the son of their glory instead of my servant, they have put to shame."
Consider Quran... And become a Muslim...
Well it was written by people, everything about God is 99% false but that's a given
@VibrantNTingling What you are misunderstanding is that you lack the whole picture. Ehrman is forthcoming when he is talking in front of people who have all the facts. But when addressing seminary students and others, who do not know, he paints another picture. In his Misquoting Jesus, he paints a very negative picture, and does not offer both sides of the picture. He is very good at misrepresenting, misleading, withholding info, and even deception.
I don't get it. Bart Ehrman's arguments are by no means new, nor are they wrong. And he does indeed explain that most errors are insignificant. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure this out. Anyone who has had to copy a text by hand, i.e. every school child, knows this.
The Bible is a collection of ancient stories. So are Grimm's Fairy Tales. So is Star Trek. What's your problem?
It seems highly plausible that you are merely trying to hitch a ride on Bart Ehrman's success.
One at a time. Jesus never said that Abiathar was high priest at the TIME David ate the sacred bread. Neither did bible in 1 Sam. 21 KJV call Achimelech high priest either, only priest. He mentions Abiathar by his latest known title. If I say governor So beat someone up when in grade school I'm correct in calling him by his last known title. To add, Jesus said in the DAYS OF ABIATHAR because he was of higher fame n stature than Achimelech who gave the bread to David. Abiathar was there n supported it.
This is exactly why I started to hate being a associated with Christians at the last days of my faith before becoming an atheist.
All the lying and misrepresentation of what people actually say is disgusting. If I was a Christian I would feel ashamed of people like Dr. Michael Kruger.
Changes? Dont you mean errors? So is the NT perfect or not?
The Bible has been corrupted over its long lifespan and has had around 39 authors, ofcourse its not perfect
There are scribal changes, who changed it?? Thanks to God, I have original Script which is 100% pure.
If its not written in hebrew text then its deffo not the original script
@OppressedAnarchist Let me ask you to begin with why did you believe in Christianity in the first place?
To much faults, it is not the treu word of God. Is it made by men, and Gods word can't be changed by men.
Even if changes happen then it will not effect the original message... If it does then its divinity is gone...
Anyways what about Quran? Its error-free...
So many atheists here, wow. Most just seem to come and comment something completely unrelated to the point in this video... Very strange...
Your butthurt is so strong
What about Quran? Its error_free... And solid proof is also there...
You explains it with intellectual dishonesty. However if it is full of erroneous information or demonstrably false doctrines then it is not the "word of God". Period.
What errors? Things they say are errors are not . Sometimes both can be true n it's intact by God. Things they thought error are now proven legit in KJV. Alexandrians opposed St. Stephen in Acts n their texts are to be rejected. All we need is in KJV. 2nd These. 2 :11 with John 1:1 KJV actually hints that the WORD itself will send delusion for the serpents seed people to fall away who love not the truth but love sinful ways instead. They chose to believe not
Bart Ehrman is not really the most reliable resource. His personality can be very disarming, but really doesn’t come across as very believable on doctrinal theological beliefs.Really not a good source for new Christian’s.
Liars like Ehrman always withhold the details. Fools don't care about the details, for in them truth comes; fools are more interested in their agenda than truth.
+2fast2block Proverbs 18:2 A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion.
That pretty well sums up Ehrman's teachings.
+Betsy Ross So true. Reminds me a lot about evolutionists. They have their proof but it does not stand up to the details. Anything going contrary to what God says, falls apart.
Praise be to Elohim the creator of heaven and earth. The 10 commendments were written with Elohims finger on stone tablets, they are perfect. 👍
Did you hear the theory of Jesus being called Hero of Alexandria? So many of Jesus' parables match up with Hero's inventions like the wineskin (turns water into wine), windmill power (stopping the wind), and more.
The tales of the son returning to his father may refer to the early mechanical "plays" which were hi technology of the time period. The theory states the writers of the Bible left out any references to physical inventions to keep the Bible solely focused on Jesus' spiritual teachings
The point is it's not a "perfect word" of God it's an affectation by man.
Does God exist?
Use KJV n it wins . If I say a woman bit her own neck n blamed her boyfriend, did I make an error? No. Ask me why n how
I stopped watching at 2:53. "we can trace these changes all the way back to the original."
I call bullcrap on you.
The supposed word of God has errors? Yahh….. no. God is flawless therefore the bible is the word of man
Edwin. Bullinger gives better explanation than this video about manuscript in his KJV STUDY BIBLE APPENDIX.. KINDLY READ IT N B ENLIGHTENED RATHER THAN SUCH HALF KNOWLEDGE TALKS 4 POPULARITY...
Isa. 40: 6-8 TEACHES ALL FLESH IS GRASS N HIS WORD ALONE IS ETERNAL..
JOHN. 8: 32.
ZRBM
Never heard of this guy before but he is indeed accurate. Were he not accurate I would say so. He's well taught does his homework.
No wonder he's so accurate: Reformed Theological Seminary. Did not see that at first. Says it all right there. This guy is always going to be accurate.
Error free Quran and its unchanged from 1400 years... So why people don't convert to Islam?
Can't tell if sarcastic or not... Holy moly, I hope so.
@@lets_Enjoy_Learning_English Or you can study to show yourself approved as the scriptures command instead of being lazy. Then you'll know for yourself he's accurate too.
Oh, my dude... You are a chicken hawk trying to argue with Foghorn Leghorn. Don't do it to yourself.
@berrywoke Stupid is making comments when you are not educated in the area that you speaking about. If only people would realize how little snide remarks are really nothing more than a mirror, reflecting the person speaking, and a window into the person speaking.
Crystal clear bibles is not a words of god. Gameover.
Is this a pro or anti Ehrman channel? He must be a pretty big thorn in the side to name a whole channel after him.
Logical Plateau
Excerpt from nag hammadi manuscript peters apocalypse.
The Savior said to me, "He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living Jesus. But this one into whose hands and feet they drive the nails is his fleshly part, which is the substitute being put to shame, the one who came into being in his likeness. But look at him and me."
But I, when I had looked, said "Lord, no one is looking at you. Let us flee this place."
But he said to me, "I have told you, 'Leave the blind alone!'. And you, see how they do not know what they are saying. For the son of their glory instead of my servant, they have put to shame."
The gospels do not all say the same. That's pretty damn important if it's the word of God.
pete walsh
Excerpt from nag hammadi manuscript peters apocalypse.
The Savior said to me, "He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living Jesus. But this one into whose hands and feet they drive the nails is his fleshly part, which is the substitute being put to shame, the one who came into being in his likeness. But look at him and me."
But I, when I had looked, said "Lord, no one is looking at you. Let us flee this place."
But he said to me, "I have told you, 'Leave the blind alone!'. And you, see how they do not know what they are saying. For the son of their glory instead of my servant, they have put to shame."
you're correct, the Gospels are speaking to different peoples also, one to the jews before the new covenant was made and one after to the gentiles, we are currently in the age of grace, faith alone by believing in Jesus and what he did on the cross to save us, but once the rapture occurs then a new covenant will begin
If Erhman were a Christian, he would have been crucified by atheists for his persistence in the lies and deception he spews out...but because he is an atheist, he gets away with murder....I guess that is why Jesus was murdered but Barabbas released...funny how God is in fact very patient with people even those who don't seem to want it...
@mjt532 Kruger grounds his numbers in context, explaining them. That's what he's accusing Ehrman of not doing. No irony here.
This is so funny and sad at the same time. Everyone seems to be so intelligent and far more intellectual than the next with their newfound truths. No matter if you believe it or not one fact remains that we can all rest on. Death is the common denominator for us all. FACT.
Let’s say I lived my life as such the way the scriptures are written. Without malice or ill will in order to gain something over the next person, and I'm wrong. What have I done with my life?
1. If I’m a follower of Jesus and trust in him, and I’m wrong when I die. I’ve given people hope when there was no hope, connected with a multitude of individuals on a much deeper level, and left a positive impact that will last generations. Attending a lot of funerals can sometimes give you a sense of what I’m talking about. I mean these arguments are centuries old, and here we are still arguing about the same very thing. Aside from Christmas when was the last time anyone of us reached out on a regular basis to a stranger because you have compassion and love for them? No matter what they’ve done. My God teaches me that. If I’m wrong and all atheists are right. Have I really wasted my life?
2. Now what if I’m right and the ancient text is real? What if those who doubt and make others stumble. What do you have to lose?
It seems to me that my wrong is far worse than your wrong, but if scripture is right. You have far more at risk than looking intelligent and sounding intellectual. This discussion isn’t based on someone else’s facts are more proven than these facts over here. No matter what you say. They’re based on where your heart is right now, and what are your motives. We’re all so quick to jump on social media to prove one another wrong - Christian and non-Christian alike. I pray for anyone who gets to the end of this message. That the God of the scripture will touch your heart, Christian and non-Christian alike, and allow you to see, feel his love, grace, compassion, and mercy for you and all of humanity. Peace and Love to you all brothers and sisters.
Christianity, if false, is of no importance, and if true, of infinite importance. The only thing it cannot be is moderately important.
C. S. Lewis
Seek for allah try to read the quran,learn about other religions and the one that really convince you no matter what people say about it if it's the truth and it convince you then you should follow it
@@MichaelTheophilus906 ok and what does that have to do with me
@@BO0O0M650 in the old bible not the corrupted one
I love god and jesus they are the most high and mighty
Your number of manuscripts argument doesn't prove inerrancy.
Yes there could be many changes in the old books. But only 1 book "Quran" is free of such changes since 1400 years.
Umer Amjad
There is proof from old manuscripts showing Jesus didn't die.
Excerpt from nag hammadi manuscript peters apocalypse.
The Savior said to me, "He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living Jesus. But this one into whose hands and feet they drive the nails is his fleshly part, which is the substitute being put to shame, the one who came into being in his likeness. But look at him and me."
But I, when I had looked, said "Lord, no one is looking at you. Let us flee this place."
But he said to me, "I have told you, 'Leave the blind alone!'. And you, see how they do not know what they are saying. For the son of their glory instead of my servant, they have put to shame."
there r lot of errors in bible thats true . No matter. we know that.
My humble opinion. It's very simple. Why can't you just you go and check the Quran.
I'm not a "servant of God," so I guess that's a win for me. I don't really think that God can do anything at all.
... then why do you even worry youself with this discussion? Nevertheless, you are indeed a servant... if not God, then the adversary. This is why you are drawn to discussions such at this...not to learn or to engage in reasoned discourse but to spread discontent and sow controversy. However, it is not too late. Consider this, we are all sinners falling horribly short of His holy standard...but God entered His creation and lived a perfect, sinless life so that He could be our perfect sacrifice in our place receiving the fullest extent of the righteous wrath of the Father against our sin. Jesus' perfect life and perfect sacrifice removes our guilt before God and grants us a holy righteousness so that we may stand in the presence of the most holy Father and be counted as one of his children in holy communion with Him and all other believers for all eternity.
Kruger treats Ehrman as dishonest but Kruger is even more dishonest in the other direction.
You have made an assertion for which you have no substantiation. Enumerate where Dr. Kruger was dishonest or repent of your slander.
@th0r5 I was brainwashed as a child by my family !!!
Read Quran...the only truth
You better find where to belong otherwise you are excused. Iam proud of Qur'an
The Quran isn’t worth the paper it’s written on or the ink it took to print it.