Steven Carr

WITHERINGTON
I wouldn't pay any attention to that man if I were you. He is now an agnostic who has denied his previous Evangelical faith and is trying to exorcise its influence out of his life.

CARR
Nice to see leading Christian scholars tell people not to listen to scholars who are not evangelicals.

It is always good to have your prejudices about closed-minded Christians confirmed by their words.

I. C. Unicorns

Bart is my hero! I have his New Testament series on CD from the Learning Institute.

Toto

Is this an actual quote? Do you have a cite?

The only place on the web where I can find Witherington discussing Ehrman is a blog entry from last year - Misanalyzing Text Criticism--Bart Ehrman's 'Misquoting Jesus'.

Steven Carr

It was in a comment to
http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/...-proof_19.html

The main blog entry was a poem where Witherington maligns non-believers as blind people, who ignore evidence, and are not open-minded.

I guess showing lack of any respect and writing insults and producing character assassination of non-believers is what Jesus taught his followers.

But many Americans see nothing wrong with disrespecting people who are not Christians.

Happily, not all.

Nazaroo

If you want a detailed assessment of Bart Ehrman's <edit> scholarship and propagandizing, try this link:

http://adultera.awardspace.com/TEXT/Bart.html

spin

While the claim of propagandizing is a value-judgment that may or may not be simply error on your part, Nazaroo, the claim of fraudulent scholarship is apparently libelous. The word "fraudulent" does occur in your source, but not the combination "fraudulent scholarship", which I gather is a judgment that you personally have disseminated here. I understand that his comments are in some way unacceptable to you, but I'd hope that you'd find a non-libelous way of expressing your feelings on the matter.


spin

Steven Carr

'But the most important correction to this vague babble is that from about 200 A.D. until the 15th century, the Bible books made by Christians were copied in organised Scriptoriums by professional scribes, most often Christian monks. '

In 200AD, there were organised Christian Scriptoriums?

And manuscripts were never copied outside those Sciptoriums?

I quote from the page :-
-----------------------------------
8. "The earliest MSS ... don't have this story." ( - Bart Ehrman )

If there were awards for the special art of lying by giving the least amount of truth in the shortest and most misleading manner, this would surely win a grand prize.


The Real Facts about the Manuscripts:

a) Over 1200 MSS, ranging in date from the 5th to the 15th century, have the story.
b) Over a 1000 Lectionaries covering the 7th to the 15th century also have it.
c) Less than 50 MSS, (10th century or later), add critical marks in the margin.
d) Less than 20 MSS, (9th century or later), misplace the story somewhere else.
e) About 25 MSS, (ranging from the 5th to the 15th century), omit the verses.
f) 4 early MSS (2 from the 2nd cent., and 2 from the 4th cent.), omit the verses.
g) 3 out of 4 of these 'earliest MSS' show awareness of the verses with critical marks.

--------------------------------------------------------


In other words, Ehrman was tellng the truth about the early manuscripts.

Steven Avery

Hi Folks,

We actually had a thread here that began with a poster totally
confused about the evidences for the Pericope Adultera after
reading a presentation from Bart Ehrman. He had clearly been
misinformed and started the thread with -

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...ight=Johannine
Do we have the original NT? - Spanish_Inquisitor
"(Ehrman) mentioned in the excerpt that the famous story in John of the woman who was caught in the act of adultery, where Jesus says "let the one without sin cast the first stone", was not in the original, and in fact did not show up in copies of the NT until the Middle of the 12th century, and it was this copy that was used in the translation of the KJV, which is why it is now in the English versions we are familiar with."

Now Spanish_Inquisitor said that this was given from an
"excerpt from one of the lectures".

<edit>

While Spanish_Inquisitor indicated he was working off a written text
it would be good to check the 'primary source'. Perhaps there was
a copyist error.

http://www.teach12.com/ttcx/coursede...nt&pc=Religion
Course Lecture Titles
24. Do We Have the Original New Testament?

<edit>

Shalom,
Steven Avery

Gundulf

Forgive me if I've missed it somehow, I'm not sure what your point is here, your reference is lacking context - This looks terribly like a reference to one particular story, and if it is or is not found in various manuscripts.

Which story is this in reference to?

Steven Avery

Hi Gundulf,

Here is the section of the Bible that is being discussed
in terms of Bart Ehrman's scholarship, or lack thereof.
It is known as the "Pericope Adultera"

John 8:1-11 (KJB)
Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.
And early in the morning he came again into the temple,
and all the people came unto him;
and he sat down, and taught them.
And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery;
and when they had set her in the midst,
They say unto him, Master,
this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned:
but what sayest thou?
This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him.
But Jesus stooped down,
and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself,
and said unto them,
He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience,
went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last:
and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman,
he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers?
hath no man condemned thee?
She said, No man, Lord.
And Jesus said unto her,
Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

Also involved is the last verse from John 7:

John 7:53
And every man went unto his own house.

I understand this is also not in the manuscripts that omit the
Pericope due to the awkward segue if it is included. This omission
(not directly a part of the Pericope) is one of the internal evidences
favoring the Pericope.

Shalom,
Steven Avery