CNN News: At least 19 of the 27 books in the New Testament are forgeries

[Faker]

He says he's not trying to destroy your faith. He's not trying to bash the Bible. And, though his mother no longer talks to him about religion, Ehrman says some of his best friends are Christian.

Ehrman, a best-selling author and a professor of religious studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, is a biblical sleuth whose investigations make some people very angry. Like the fictional Robert Langdon character played by actor Tom Hanks in the movie "Angels & Demons," he delves into the past to challenge some of Christianity's central claims.

In Ehrman's latest book, "Jesus, Interrupted," he concludes:

Doctrines such as the divinity of Jesus and heaven and hell are not based on anything Jesus or his earlier followers said.

At least 19 of the 27 books in the New Testament are forgeries.

Believing the Bible is infallible is not a condition for being a Christian.

"Christianity has never been about the Bible being the inerrant word of God," Ehrman says. "Christianity is about the belief in Christ."




http://edition.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/05/15/bible.critic/

 

[Faker]

Critic: 'There's a touch of arrogance' about him

Ehrman's claims have found an audience, and controversy. He's a fixture on History Channel and Discovery Channel documentaries on Christianity. He's appeared on National Public Radio, CNN and the BBC and talked about scribes misquoting Jesus on "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart."

Yet Ehrman's popularity also may be due to a larger trend. The books of people like Elaine Pagels, author of "The Gnostic Gospels," and Dan Brown, author of "The Da Vinci Code" and "Angels and Demons," resonate with people who believe there are parts of the Bible that the church left on history's editing floor.

Some scholarly critics say Ehrman is saying nothing new.

Bishop William H. Willimon, an author and United Methodist Church bishop based in Alabama, says he doesn't like the "breathless tone" of Ehrman's work.

"He keeps presenting this stuff as if this is wonderful new knowledge that has been kept from you backward lay people and this is the stuff your preachers don't have the guts to tell, and I have," Willimon says. "There's a touch of arrogance in it."

Yet even many of Ehrman's critics say he has a knack for making arcane New Testament scholarship accessible to the public.

"He has a gift for clear thinking and an ability to present some complicated things in simple, direct ways," Willimon says.

Some pastors also say that Ehrman forces them to confront tough questions about the Bible in front of their congregations.

"His take on the scriptures is a gift to the church because of his ability to articulate questions and challenges," says Rev. Guy Williams, a blogger who also happens to be a Methodist minister in Houston, Texas. "It gives us an opportunity to wrestle with the [Bible's] claims and questions." Critic: 'There's a touch of arrogance' about him

Ehrman's claims have found an audience, and controversy. He's a fixture on History Channel and Discovery Channel documentaries on Christianity. He's appeared on National Public Radio, CNN and the BBC and talked about scribes misquoting Jesus on "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart."

Yet Ehrman's popularity also may be due to a larger trend. The books of people like Elaine Pagels, author of "The Gnostic Gospels," and Dan Brown, author of "The Da Vinci Code" and "Angels and Demons," resonate with people who believe there are parts of the Bible that the church left on history's editing floor.

Some scholarly critics say Ehrman is saying nothing new.

Bishop William H. Willimon, an author and United Methodist Church bishop based in Alabama, says he doesn't like the "breathless tone" of Ehrman's work.

"He keeps presenting this stuff as if this is wonderful new knowledge that has been kept from you backward lay people and this is the stuff your preachers don't have the guts to tell, and I have," Willimon says. "There's a touch of arrogance in it."

Yet even many of Ehrman's critics say he has a knack for making arcane New Testament scholarship accessible to the public.

"He has a gift for clear thinking and an ability to present some complicated things in simple, direct ways," Willimon says.

Some pastors also say that Ehrman forces them to confront tough questions about the Bible in front of their congregations.

"His take on the scriptures is a gift to the church because of his ability to articulate questions and challenges," says Rev. Guy Williams, a blogger who also happens to be a Methodist minister in Houston, Texas. "It gives us an opportunity to wrestle with the [Bible's] claims and questions."

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/05/15/bible.critic/

 

[Faker]

Ehrman: There was no resurrection

Ehrman says that no one accepts everything in the Bible. Everyone picks and chooses . He cites some New Testament's references to the role of women in church as an example.

In the first book of Corinthians, Ehrman says, the Apostle Paul insists that women should remain silent in church (1 Corinthians 14:35-36).

In the 16th chapter of the book of Romans, Paul's attitude is that women could and should be church leaders -- and he cites women who were serving as deacons and apostles in the early church, Ehrman says.

Ehrman backs his arguments with a deep knowledge of the culture and history of the New Testament world. He's written 20 books on early Christianity and is an authority on ancient manuscripts used to translate the Bible.

His claims, though, take on some of Christianity's most sacred tenets, like the resurrection of Jesus. Ehrman says he doesn't think the resurrection took place. There's no proof Jesus physically rose from the dead, and the resurrection stories contradict one another, he says.

He says he doesn't believe the followers of Jesus saw their master bodily rise from the dead, but something else.

"My best guess is that what happened is what commonly happens today when someone has a loved one die -- they sometimes think they see them in a vision," Ehrman says. "I think some of the disciples had visions."

Ehrman says he immerses himself in the Bible, though he doesn't believe in its infallibility, because it's the most important book in Western civilization.

"I have friends who teach medieval English," he says. "They don't believe in Chaucer, but they think Chaucer is important," he writes in the conclusion of "Jesus, Interrupted."

Ehrman: There was no resurrection

Ehrman says that no one accepts everything in the Bible. Everyone picks and chooses . He cites some New Testament's references to the role of women in church as an example.

In the first book of Corinthians, Ehrman says, the Apostle Paul insists that women should remain silent in church (1 Corinthians 14:35-36).

In the 16th chapter of the book of Romans, Paul's attitude is that women could and should be church leaders -- and he cites women who were serving as deacons and apostles in the early church, Ehrman says.

Ehrman backs his arguments with a deep knowledge of the culture and history of the New Testament world. He's written 20 books on early Christianity and is an authority on ancient manuscripts used to translate the Bible.

His claims, though, take on some of Christianity's most sacred tenets, like the resurrection of Jesus. Ehrman says he doesn't think the resurrection took place. There's no proof Jesus physically rose from the dead, and the resurrection stories contradict one another, he says.

He says he doesn't believe the followers of Jesus saw their master bodily rise from the dead, but something else.

"My best guess is that what happened is what commonly happens today when someone has a loved one die -- they sometimes think they see them in a vision," Ehrman says. "I think some of the disciples had visions."

Ehrman says he immerses himself in the Bible, though he doesn't believe in its infallibility, because it's the most important book in Western civilization.

"I have friends who teach medieval English," he says. "They don't believe in Chaucer, but they think Chaucer is important," he writes in the conclusion of "Jesus, Interrupted."

 

[Kinanna]

Nothing new to read here just move on. We all know many parts of the bible isn't from God. The only few things that can be said to be from Jesus or Essau as his real name was....is in the ref letter bible.
Where in even then is subject to speculation. Believe what you wIll. In
The end God is One !

Not three or three hundred million

 

[Frodo]

Nothing new to read here just move on. We all know many parts of the bible isn't from God. The only few things that can be said to be from Jesus or Essau as his real name was....is in the ref letter bible.
Where in even then is subject to speculation. Believe what you wIll. In
The end God is One !

Not three or three hundred million

This is hardly news.

http://www.inthedockapologetics.com/linkservid/3FA36A98-08D4-4186-BD5652B96596803D/showMeta/0/

 

[drifteri]

This is hardly news.

http://www.inthedockapologetics.com/linkservid/3FA36A98-08D4-4186-BD5652B96596803D/showMeta/0/

The PDF is talking about another topic. Schizo ang moh cult believer blindly find something to post

 

[Frodo]

The PDF is talking about another topic. Schizo ang moh cult believer blindly find something to post

Obviously the village atheist cannot read.

 

[drifteri]

Nothing new to read here just move on. We all know many parts of the bible isn't from God. The only few things that can be said to be from Jesus or Essau as his real name was....is in the ref letter bible.
Where in even then is subject to speculation. Believe what you wIll.

I already debunked the bible as full of contradictions, errors, violences, immoralities, inhumanities, indecencies and obsenities. Simply, the bible is the Word of the ancient israelite

 

[drifteri]

The end God is One !

Not three or three hundred million

The jews and the muslims are right and trinity is wrong

 

[Frodo]

I already debunked the bible as full of contradictions, errors, violences, immoralities, inhumanities, indecencies and obsenities. Simply, the bible is the Word of the ancient israelite

The abysmally ignorant atheist has debunked the Bible. Is that even possible?

 

[Frodo]

The jews and the muslims are right and trinity is wrong

Either they are right or the Christians are right, that's true, it's the law of noncontradiction at work. But ask the village arheist where the laws of logic come frim and he can only give you a blank dumb stare.

 

[drifteri]

[video=youtube;tRrq3s3P3Pw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRrq3s3P3Pw[/video]

 

[drifteri]

The abysmally ignorant atheist has debunked the Bible. Is that even possible?

You are right! The village atheist can't dunked the whole bible, only a mass of professional historians and scholars can do that

What I have successfully debunked is 0.00...0001% of the myths that the bible is inerrant and inspired

You dare to claim that the bible has:
1. no errors
2. no contradictions
3. no violence
4. no immorality
5. no indecency
6. no obsenity


I don't need you to swear up your bible

 

[Frodo]

[video=youtube;tRrq3s3P3Pw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRrq3s3P3Pw[/video]

Bart's arguments demolished here http://www.alwaysbeready.com/bart-ehrman

 

[drifteri]

Bart's arguments demolished here http://www.alwaysbeready.com/bart-ehrman

Ben Witherington's fraudulent arguments convincingly rebutted here: http://robertcargill.com/2011/02/18/i-stand-with-bart-ehrman/

 

[drifteri]

You are right! The village atheist can't dunked the whole bible, only a mass of professional historians and scholars can do that

What I have successfully debunked is 0.00...0001% of the myths that the bible is inerrant and inspired

You dare to claim that the bible has:
1. no errors
2. no contradictions
3. no violence
4. no immorality
5. no indecency
6. no obsenity


I don't need you to swear up your bible

Frodoluent dumbass dares not make even a mickey mouse wishper

 

[Frodo]

Frodoluent dumbass dares not make even a mickey mouse wishper

Why the taunting? No peace till you get a thrashing and a kick in the rear? You must be really eager to see my response. I know, all your life you never encountered a Christian who can up one you in your attempts at Bible-bashing. So you must be fuming mad and jumping up and down, blood boiling and blood pressure rising. Take it easy, there's more coming.

Have you proven that the Bible is myth? Nope. So that's fallacy of begging the question for you. You are delusional to claim that you have debunked anything. On the other hand, you have been consistenly exposed and debunked by me as an abysmally ignorant village atheist who can only cut and paste, wash and rinse, and recycle the same vomit over and over again.

Here's what I dare to claim. The Bible records truly the following:

1. Yes, there are errors in the Bible. Like David commiting adultery. He erred in taking another man's wife.

2. Yes, there are contradictions in the Bible. Like Solomon's judging the case where one mother said the dead baby was not hers while another mother said it was. You have two persons contradicting each other.

3. Yes, there is violence recorded in the Bible. Cain rose up and killed Abel. That's violence. The Bible does not whitewash the sins of people. It is not sanitised but give the hard truth about human depravity. But don't fret, you are judged sinful just like those violent people in the Bible.

4. Yes, there is indecency in the Bible. Eg Noah uncovered himself while in a drunken stupor. (Maybe you are guilty of that too!) Again the Bible records the failures of fallen humans as it is. No holding back.

5. Yes, there is obscenity in the Bible. The Bible talks about people engaging in filthy talk and language. You should reflect on that since a lot of obscene language comes from you too.

You should be satisfied with my answers above. Don't be too butt hurt OK?

 

[Frodo]

I already debunked the bible as full of contradictions, errors, violences, immoralities, inhumanities, indecencies and obsenities. Simply, the bible is the Word of the ancient israelite

One song for you, it goes like this, "...dream...dream dream dream....dream..."

 

[Frodo]

Ben Witherington's fraudulent arguments convincingly rebutted here: http://robertcargill.com/2011/02/18/i-stand-with-bart-ehrman/

Again the village atheist is proven as being unable to read. There's hardly a line of rebuttal here. Instead what we have is mere gainsaying and committing the no-true scotsman fallacy and also the ad hominem fallacy. Betcha don't know what these terms are!

"The website states it was launched by a campus minister and an undergraduate religion major to provide counter-arguments to the research of Bart Ehrman. But, since most of Ehrman’s textual arguments are essentially the well-established and long-accepted consensus views of just about every worthwhile critical biblical scholar not teaching at a Christian university, seminary, or school with the word “Evangelical” in the title (Ehrman admits as much beginning at the 7:50 mark in the video here), the site is essentially little more than an online video version of Lee Strobel’s The Case for Christ, where conservative scholars attempt to refute the biblical scholarship that is taught in every major university save the aforementioned conservative Christian schools. The video rebuttals offer little more than setting up and knocking down straw men, red herring explanations, the reframing and redefinition of certain critical questions in a strained effort to avoid answering them, and the recitation of facts leading to non sequitur conclusions that only non-critical scholars would accept as satisfactory answers.

 

[drifteri]

Bart's arguments demolished here http://www.alwaysbeready.com/bart-ehrman

There's hardly a line of rebuttal there