[CS-FSLUG] OT: Bart Ehrman - Misquoting Jesus

[Chris Brault]

Here's my take,

>>> The larger debate about inspiration of Scripture shows the standard
>>> Higher Critical position. It's been around a very long time, can be
>>> linked to the birth of communism, and a few other nasty trends which
>>> attempted to overturn the Reformation. I won't bother to debate it,
>>> because I'm not called to debate.
>>
>> 	Do you really think Higher Criticism necessitates a rejection of  
>> inspiration (not to say that it often doesn't go together with that...)?
> 
> Short answer: yes. I cannot see separating the concept of "inspired by 
> God" and "infallible." Textual Criticism is hard work enough; the Higher 
> Critical method presumes to judge too much, and cannot avoid in the end 
> placing human judgment over Scripture. Once there, the whole thing 
> depends too much on human perception. I contend we are obliged by God to 
> work with what's given, assuming it comes from Him. No other position 
> offers an anchor external to the human heart. It's one of those 
> *convictions* ;-)

What this nice gentleman said sounded very misleading. As you already
probably know, there were different schools of new testament texts
(Alexandrian, Babylonian, etc.). The different schools of text are
consistent within themselves. They do, however differ from each other.
That said, all the differences combined do not change a single doctrine.
In fact, most "changes" are spelling errors or a missing word which does
nothing to the reading of the text (with the exception of the ending of
Mark's Gospel). In other words, there is no great variety of differences
unless you want to see it that way, otherwise, all you see are minor
errors in the same inspired text (the understanding of which has
survived unscathed until this day).

Gabe