Archaic Christianity

A Site Devoted to the Study of Early Christianity and Christian Origins

Patrick Gardella

9/6/2008 8:24:32 AM

You wrote, Though the discussion on changes to the tradition was interesting and is certainly true to an extent, the reader is left with the impression that this had major effects on the textual tradition. But as far as I can see, that is not the case.

In fact, that is exactly what he believes. In two other books, he has spelled out that belief. In Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why (HarperCollins, 2005), he makes the case, in popular writing style, that the NT is unreliable because of the changes that took place as a result of the struggles of proto-orthodoxy. In his The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture: The Effect of Early Christological Controversies on the Text of the New Testament (OUP, 1996) he presents a picture less controversial, where the struggles of the early church did leave a mark on the NT, but did not essentially change the doctrines. He doesn't come out and say that quite that clearly.

If you are interested in this topic, you can buy the podcast of the Greer Heard Forum, New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, April 2008. There Ehrman, Dan Wallace, David Parker, Michael Holmes, and others debated the reliability of the NT that was brought into question as a result of these books by Ehrman.

As for me, I agree with you. There are minor effects on the text of some manuscripts, but in general, we can recover the text of the earliest manuscripts.

Patrick

Eric

9/6/2008 9:53:31 AM
Website: http://www.archaicchristianity.com/

Thanks for dropping by Patrick. I have heard this about Ehrman a few times, and it is a shame. I own both his Orthodox Corruption and his Misquoting Jesus, but have not gotten around to them. I know his Orthodox Corruption is worth reading. In your opinion, is the other?

I have thought about buying that podcast. I have heard all about the debate from Dan but still want to listen to the thing myself.