Bart Erhman
New Testament Contradictions
I have watched many debates and talks that discuss the New Testament alleged contradictions. This has been a topic that grabbed my special interest ever since I was living in India. The reliability of the text of the New Testament is something that is particularly attacked in the Muslim world.
I hope Dr. Licona’s lecture on Bible Contradictions will help people realize that the contradictions are not really so. Also, you might want to watch some of Dr. Licona’s debates with Barth Erhman regarding the Resurrection of Jesus. You can easily find those on YouTube.
If you ever decide to give Dr. Erhman a chance to mess with your mind, I can assure you he will. I have come to appreciate him – only by watching his debates – and he seems like a nice, funny guy. Bart Erhman has made a living by writing books that create doubt in the minds of Christians. But that is all there is. He is good at casting doubt, but he kinda has a double standard.
In one of his famous books Misquoting Jesus, Erhman concludes that you cannot really trust the manuscripts, and therefore, you cannot really know what the original manuscripts of the New Testament said. However, in the same year when he wrote Misquoting Jesus (2005), he also cowrote an academic book called The Text of the New Testament with Bruce Metzger – the greatest manuscript scholar of the last century.
In The Text of the New Testament, Metzger and Erhman conclude that the manuscripts of the New Testament have been accurately copied, and that we know what the original ones said. So when Erhman writes for a lay audience, he says you cannot trust the manuscripts. But when he writes for an academic audience, Erhman says you can actually trust them.
Why would a respected scholar do this? Same year, same texts, but two different conclusions. I think Erhman knows he cannot get away with these conclusions within an audience that knows what he is talking about. But he can get away with it with the popular audience. And these books that cast doubt into the Bible text – unfortunately – are very popular and sell a lot of copies.
Actually, many Muslims adore Erhman because he is a former Christian who is now a critic of the New Testament. Muslims often exploit Ehrman’s work and parade his anti-Christian rhetoric in videos and articles. It is important to note, tough, that Erhman, along with the majority of serious scholarship, holds the view that Paul was a true disciple of Jesus Christ who met with the leaders of the early church shortly after Jesus’ crucifixion – not a usurper.
Also, Dr. Ehrman remarks that we can say with confidence that Jesus actually did die, he probably was buried, and that some of his disciples (all of them or some of them?) claimed to have seen Him alive afterward. Erhman also says that NO scribe EVER changed the cardinal doctrines of Christianity i.e. Council of Nicea (on the divinity of Christ).
Now that you have the background on who Dr. Bart Erhman is, you can enjoy the lecture 🙂
If you have doubts about the Christian faith, have you put those doubts *themselves* to the test as much as you have Christianity?
Andy Bannister
Dissecting Jesus 
I read this article recently. I am so happy Bart Ehrman finally said this.
The study of the Historical Jesus has in the past decades generated lots of interest among Scholars. Among the world religion interested in this subject are the adherents of the Islamic faith. Muslims are willing to hear what the Scholars have to say and adapt which ever part seems to agree or confirm the Islamic belief, and in the end will go like “There you have it, the Qur’an have been echoing this for years!”
Among the Scholars Muslims would like to listen to and quote for the defense of Islam and as an attack on the Christian faith is the man, Bart D. Ehrman – the man Muslims love quoting when discussing the critical issues on the Gospels and the Bible as a whole.
The reason why the Muslims love to quote Ehrman among other liberal Scholars is obvious: Erhman is always about attacking the Bible. Even though Dr. Ehrman does not hold the same view with the Muslims – and will not come to the same conclusion with them – they love him anyway.
Recently, Bart posted on his blog, responding to certain questions he was asked, and one of those happened to be a trend that has grown for some years among the Muslims: the use of his material as an attack for the Bible. Before responding to the questions, Bart noted how a Muslim had earlier made this comment about how they use his work:
This pretty much gives an insight into the reason why the majority of Muslims are interested in Ehrman’s work, they see this as a tool for defending Islam and attacking the Gospels. Why do they do this? Because it “supports” Islam in a way. In other words, anything that advances the course of Islam should be used – no mater where or who said it. Even though there are some views Ehrman holds – which not only go contrary to some core Islamic teachings – but make Islam look like a made up religion, Muslims DO NOT want to know about this. All they want is what Ehrman has that can be used to destroy the Bible.
Bart continues in his response,
How on earth will Muslims continue to use Ehrman’s arguments when he sees one of the fundamental Islamic beliefs as ahistorical and false? How clearer can this be to any honest person looking to use an argument from which the source you disagree with?
That is the highest level of inconsistency I have ever seen. I once told a Muslim who quotes Ehrman in attacking the Bible how he debunks Islam on the crucifixion. His response was that Ehrman was wrong in that regard. Yet he believes and uses his argument on others areas. When will our Muslim friends wake up to the reality of this dangerous position and worldview?
Coming as a big surprise, while the Muslims attack the Gospels as being unreliable accounts of the life of the historical Jesus (on the basis of the fact that the Qur’an has a different opinion and views of Jesus), Bart and other Scholars still agree that the NT is what the Scholars draw from when executing their research on the historical Jesus.
Ehrman remarked that the Qur’an could not be trusted on this and cannot be taken seriously by Scholars on the historical Jesus. This alone should get the Muslims thinking since they love quoting Bart materials and using them as well.
We are not asking the Muslims to agree with Bart Ehrman on everything, but at least, we hope to see a consistent argument from Muslims in the future and not just anything they could get hold of to support Islam.