book- "Misquoting Jesus"

[hrsmom]

This is a discussion for the book Misquoting Jesus by Bart Ehrman.

If anyone is interested, the idea to discuss this book came from the thread Theologically Liberal Christians in the spirituality forum. We are planning to read a chapter a week, starting this week, give or take!





So far I've read chapter one and part of chapter two. I like Bart Ehrman's qualifications as he describes them in his intro. (I've read the intro, too!) I like that he's a scholar and has spent lots of time looking into this subject. His passion for the subject is obvious to me. Someone suggested a book one time about the making of the King James Bible, but it was put together by a journalist, I think, as kind of a hobby. With all due respect to the profession of journalism, I find a book on the subject of this history of the documents that give us our Bible better covered by a scholar. But maybe that's just my bias.


I thought it was interesting how important written documents were to the religions of Judaism and Christianity, in contrast with other religions of the time. I wonder why that was? Especially given the extremely low literacy rate.

What else did you all find in the beginning of the book? I'm looking forward to getting further into the book.

[SquishyBuggles]

I just started reading it last night and got halfway through chapter 2.

I liked reading about Ehrman's religious history and background, how he got to where he is now, his education, etc. He has obviously done a lot of research and he knows what he's talking about.

One thing that really resonated with me so far was from the introduction. Ehrman has a problem with the view of 'divine inspiration' because (for one thing)...God is, well, God! God could have preserved the words of scripture as easily as he did everything else.

"if he wanted his people to have his words surely he would have given them to them (...possibly in a language they could understand)....the fact that we don't have the words surely must show....that he did not preserve them for us.....there seemed to be no reason to think that he performed the earlier miracle of inspiring those words." (pg. 11)

[athansor]

I'm here, but I'm still waiting for my copy in the mail...should be here any day!

[Suzukimom]

Thank you Kimberly for starting this thread. I was thinking I might do it this afternoon to get things going but I'm glad you went ahead. I think Book Clubs is the perfect place.

I enjoyed reading Ehrman's introduction as well since he shares his journey. I think so many people, like he did, are innocently accepting what the "older, wiser, more experienced" Christians teach without ever questioning. I'm guility.
Ehrman was different because he started to look for answers to his question- "is the Bible the verbally inspired Word of God?" "To ask questions is to be willing to open onseslef up to the possibility that on'e views need to be revised in light of further knowledge and life experience." p.6

I jotted down some things that struck me:

"What good does it do to say the words are inspired by God if you don't understand the original language - Greek."

How does the Bible answer abortion, women's rights, gay rights, religious supremacy and other issues of our age?

Marcion thought the Law (OT) and Gospel are distinct and not from the same God. He was considered a heretic.
I see where Marcion is coming from. I think Jesus showed us an entirely different God - one of grace, love and compassion.
So what do you think? Are the OT God and the NT God, one and the same?

I'm about half way through chapter 2. I find it interesting that the copyists aren't necessarily trained scribes. Ehrman does a good job of showing that copyists made mistakes. I'm not sure the mistakes impact the Bible as a whole of literature/history/poetry but when verses are "cherry picked," people can't assume their total meaning as truth.

[hrsmom]

As for are the OT and NT God the same, I tend to think they are. I think Jesus was showing people a side of God that they hadn't seen before or hadn't seen in a long time (historically)- but I haven't given this much thought before! What do you think?

I thought it was very interesting (this might be in chapter two, it's hard to remember exactly) that the message after the end of Revelation (not to add to this, etc.) was a message for the scribes. It makes sense, I just didn't know that! I also thought it was interesting that the books we find in the NT are just a sampling really of the kinds of documents that were being written at the time. Again, makes sense, I just didn't know.

[Suzukimom]

Originally Posted by hrsmom

As for are the OT and NT God the same, I tend to think they are. I think Jesus was showing people a side of God that they hadn't seen before or hadn't seen in a long time (historically)- but I haven't given this much thought before! What do you think?

I thought it was very interesting (this might be in chapter two, it's hard to remember exactly) that the message after the end of Revelation (not to add to this, etc.) was a message for the scribes. It makes sense, I just didn't know that! I also thought it was interesting that the books we find in the NT are just a sampling really of the kinds of documents that were being written at the time. Again, makes sense, I just didn't know.

Well, the NT God is much more appealing than the OT God of wrath and zapping. I realize God is also a God truth and justice but there are parts of the OT that seem a bit over the top. For example, killing all the inhabitants of Jericho - including women and children. Or the guy (his name escapes me) who touched the ark as it was being transported. It seems like it could have been an instinctual reaction to try to catch the ark as it started to fall.
Jesus certainly does show a gentler side to God. I think Ehrman discusses some of Marcion's beliefs in Lost Christianities.

It interesting to get the historical aspect. It seems like I heard a sermon on that verse in Revelation saying we need to very carefully handle the Bible and not distort it's words. But there are so many interpretations and apparently some scribes added their own interpretation as they wrote the Bible. I agree, Ehrman's explanation makes more sense to me.

[hrsmom]

Hi, Carol! I agree, some of that OT stuff is hard to understand and explain. I have a problem with the "God gave us this land and told us to kill everyone here" scenario as well! I think what I mean is that God is God, and a lot of us are trying to figure just exactly who/what God is. I don't think there are different Gods, but different understandings of god? That may be my monotheistic bent, however!!! So like Jesus was saying, "wait you guys, that's NOT GOD!!!!!!!"

Squishybuggles, the things you pointed out really spoke to me, too. Otherwise, it's like God is saying, "Hi, I'm God. I want you to know all about me. So, to that end, I have this book for you, that was written over 2,000 years ago in a different time period, different type of culture, oh yeah, and in a different language. Get to know me!!!"

This speaks to my irritation with the great end times discussions, too. So Jesus wasn't actually talking TO the people of the time, he was talking to US? Sure. I read somewhere that most of his "warnings" were things that happened shortly after his lifetime. He was astute enough to predict the destruction of the temple, etc. just like many would have predicted our current financial crisis.

Happy Saturday!

[hkowell1]

First, thanks for the redirection...I was still looking in Spirituality forum.

I do believe that the OT/NT GOD are both the same. Its how you read the torah (ot) to understand that the "Law" was to set up a civilization, and for its time...gave women power to own property and the right to inherent even if their spouse was dead. It's hard to understand the bible because most do not have a historical/cultural back ground. If read to understand these issues, the OT was VERY a head of its time. That is why the Israelites were to be a "light to the nations" so they could also establish law and justice. Remember that the Hebrews had been slaves for a 1oo years or so and were in "Mental slavery" when they left Egypt...I personally read many of these "stories" as allegory for us to live by today. Even some of the nations to be destroyed, were horrible, sacrificing their infants to their gods and bestiality. I find it interesting that even some of the "laws" of killing your neighbor for this or that sin...you had to first make the accusation, and then you were to be the person to do it. Jesus did not give a "New Message" it was the same message, just a bit more intense. He was closing the "loopholes". However, the NT is what I have the most problems with, I just don't take it to be infallible, inspired maybe, as in I am inspired by the words and teachings of Yeshua of Nazarith, and his message should be carried on...the letters are well....questionable. It has been great for me to get more back ground on what I had already suspected.

[hrsmom]

I'm glad you found us!!!

I'm just realizing with the thousand and thousands of copies made over the years, it's kind of something to assume a mistake was never made! Never thought about it before.

I read the part about the part of John that has the story of the woman caught in adultery. (John 8 something, I think.) I remember reading in a footnote in my Bible that scholars pretty much feel that isn't part of the original John, and when I read that I cried and cried! I was so full of despair, I didn't know WHAT to believe! This was a couple of years ago. I love that story, too! I appreciate Ehrman's discussion of that story and how it came to be included in John's gospel. The story still has meaning to me, regardless of how it got into the Bible.

hkowell1, interesting perspective on the OT. I have to say, too, that setting aside the things I just don't understand about the OT, it does talk about an awesome God! Again, setting some things aside I don't understand, I LOVE the God of the OT!!

[SquishyBuggles]

Originally Posted by hrsmom

I'm glad you found us!!!

I'm just realizing with the thousand and thousands of copies made over the years, it's kind of something to assume a mistake was never made! Never thought about it before.

I read the part about the part of John that has the story of the woman caught in adultery. (John 8 something, I think.) I remember reading in a footnote in my Bible that scholars pretty much feel that isn't part of the original John, and when I read that I cried and cried! I was so full of despair, I didn't know WHAT to believe! This was a couple of years ago. I love that story, too! I appreciate Ehrman's discussion of that story and how it came to be included in John's gospel. The story still has meaning to me, regardless of how it got into the Bible.

hkowell1, interesting perspective on the OT. I have to say, too, that setting aside the things I just don't understand about the OT, it does talk about an awesome God! Again, setting some things aside I don't understand, I LOVE the God of the OT!!

My H is pretty rigid on his view of the Bible being the inerrant word of God. I was telling him about the woman taken into adultery, and about the last 12 verses of Mark. He wasn't believing me until he got out his Bible and saw it in the footnotes! He went through the house and got a few versions of the Bible and they all said the same thing in the footnotes. I think I may have him thinking about things, too!

[Suzukimom]

I'm getting a bit bogged down in Chapter 4 - where the author discusses all the bible scholars and their research and viewpoints. Is anyone at this point yet?


One man found 30,000 textual variations! Today there are even more. I don't have my book in front of me.

On a side note, I started reading A.J Jacob's Book The Year of Living Biblically. I've only read the first month but I'm enjoying it. SquishyBuggales - your husband might find it interesting - you too. The author wrote down all the commandments/rules of the Bible and is trying to keep them. He grew quite a beard during his Biblical year.

If those who really believe the Bible is inerrant, they sure aren't doing a good job of following the Book. People really do pick the verses that suit them.

[hrsmom]

I haven't gotten to ch. 4 yet. I just read the part about the Erasmus Greek Bible and how he did a pretty sloppy and hasty job of putting it together, but it's the foundation for the KJV. Oh, my!!!!

[SquishyBuggles]

I'm also a bit bogged down with ch 4 so I'm taking a break...catch up, people! Hee. I started reading another of Ehrman's books, 'God's Problem' and I am really enjoying it.

[hkowell1]

I've finished the book! It was an enlightening read. If anything, it did confirm a few issues that I did have with the NT. For a while I had struggled with 1 Timothy 2:11- It contradicts the whole store of Deborah. Women have always held a role a significant role in worship and leadership. No where in the OT (law,torah) does it say that women can not teach or lead.

[hrsmom]

I'm trying, Squishy! It is interesting and enlightening!

Heather, I have a Bible that says in the note under Deborah that that was just evidence of how badly things had gotten in that society, that a woman was appointed as a judge. Yeah, right!

I just discoverd that my LO is happy to have me reading near her while she's on the floor playing. I didn't know that, she's quite demanding when she's awake! So that means more reading time for this mama, yippee!!!!

I just read that there are more variations of the NT than there are words of the NT. Interesting.

That book "God's problem" sounds really good! Do you like it?

[athansor]

I've got it!
I'm just in the first chapter, but I'll catch up!

[hrsmom]

yippee!!

Chapter four definitely has some interesting historical information. Some of these people really had a passion for the scriptures! Interesting idea that the Catholic church holds that the scriptures can't be a basis for faith, since they are so unreliable, so the church tradition is really the basis for faith. I guess that's why Catholics don't believe the Bible is the "inerrant word of God"?

Have a great weekend everyone!

[Suzukimom]

Originally Posted by hrsmom

yippee!!

Chapter four definitely has some interesting historical information. Some of these people really had a passion for the scriptures! Interesting idea that the Catholic church holds that the scriptures can't be a basis for faith, since they are so unreliable, so the church tradition is really the basis for faith. I guess that's why Catholic's don't believe the Bible is the "inerrant word of God"?

Have a great weekend everyone!

My goal is to finish Chapter 4 tomorrow. I hope some of the biblical scholars were compensated for the years they spent in studying the scriptures and texts. 30 years is a long time!

Yes, very interesting about the Catholic Church. I guess that's why traditionally they left scripture study to the "professionals." What do you think about the church traditions? After reading Pagan Christianity last spring, I questioned the foundations of those traditions.

If you all think of it, pray for the families who lost loved ones on the flight that went down near Buffalo. I live close to the scene of the crash and although I don't know anyone personally who perished, many of my friends do. Our community is struck by this tragedy.

[hrsmom]

Hi Carol- That is a tragedy, wow. I'll pray for comfort and healing for the people affected.

I was just going to say that I need you to come watch Hannah so I can keep reading that book! J/K. I did get in about 40 minutes today during her nap, and it was nice! I am enjoying it! He revisits the concept of two (or more) Gods in chapter 5. He talks about how there were lots of different beliefs among Christians, lots of things people truly believed were the teachings of Jesus, but were different from one group to the next. I'd love to read his book "Lost Christianities" (or something like that.) That stuff is very interesting to me!

It's interesing how many variations there are in the GREEK, not to mention the various translations! This book was a good choice!

[hrsmom]

Carol, you ask such good questions! I don't have much opinion on the church traditions at the moment, though! I grew up in a Lutheran church, that has some of the traditions "carried over" from the Catholic church. I did like the structure, I kind of miss that in my current church. I haven't read Pagan Christianity yet!

I guess I'm just questioning everything right now!