Vorkosigan

What exactly are you referring to?

Vorkosigan

Vivisector

I'm assuming you've read Ehrman's Orthodox Corruption of Scripture - do you regard his examples as significant to Christianity?

V.

Gamera

Been a while, but as I recollect Ehrman identifies a number of mss variances and attributes them to the ongoing (later) ideological battles with "heresies" or preceived heresies, usually christological in nature, and that later scribes "shored up" the mss by various means, often by lifting passages from other texts and inserting them where deemed appropriate. Thus, the drops of blood that Jesus sweats in Luke were added in an attempt to assert Jesus' human nature against Docetism (or whatever particular heterodoxy was the threat, I forget). Similarly, to shore up Jesus' salvational role, various verbiage was added to the Last Supper in Luke, about how it's done "for you,". Etc.

So to answer your question, no, Ehrman's example don't seem to address my point. While these additions and restructurings were tendentious to be sure, they really don't alter the meaning of the text (unless you assume, for instance, that no salvational claim was ever made by or about Jesus, but that's not what the variance themselves show)

Now if there were a variance that showed one mss claiming Jesus taught that circumcision was needed for salvation, or that he rotted in his tomb, then that would perk my ears up. But variances that just emphasize an idea or position posited elsewhere in a canonical text (and as I recall Erhman argues that passages were in fact lifted wholesale from one text or text portion and inserted into another to strengthen a point), don't argue against that position's original existence. But I admit some are a close call.

I guess here's the test: take all the variances identified by Ehrman and return the texts to their "original" text. Would have a text at odds with historical Christianty

Richbee

Most so called "Internet Infidels" are refuted by some of the most basic facts in History!

Vorkosigan

What? More meaningless posting from a religious conservative who thinks 1 and 2 Tim are from Paul?

One thing I like about you Rich, is that you never fail to disappoint.

Vorkosigan

Richbee

Do fair minded people doubt that Paul wrote Timothy 1 and 2?

Who?

Why should I care about empty conjesture and wild off the Vork of Bork mindless speculatiuon?

2 Timothy 2:14-26

A Workman Approved by God

Keep reminding them of these things. Warn them before God against quarreling about words; it is of no value, and only ruins those who listen.

Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth. 16 Avoid godless chatter, because those who indulge in it will become more and more ungodly. 17 Their teaching will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have wandered away from the truth. They say that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some. 19 Nevertheless, God's solid foundation stands firm, sealed with this inscription: “The Lord knows those who are his,” and, “Everyone who confesses the name of the Lord must turn away from wickedness.”

In a large house there are articles not only of gold and silver, but also of wood and clay; some are for noble purposes and some for ignoble. 21 If a man cleanses himself from the latter, he will be an instrument for noble purposes, made holy, useful to the Master and prepared to do any good work.

Flee the evil desires of youth, and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, along with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart.

Don't have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels.

And the Lord's servant must not quarrel; instead, he must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful. Those who oppose him he must gently instruct, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth, and that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will.

dongiovanni1976x

Ehrman, B. New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings 3rd Etd. 2004, p385

Dr. Ehrman is the James Gray Professor and Chair of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Doug Shaver

That depends. Do you consider it within the realm of possibility for someone to disagree with you and still be fair-minded?