How We Got the Books of the New Testament - Bart Erhman Refuted

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
calvinsx76 said:
Currently Modern Scholars Like Bart Erhman calls into question the reliability of the Text of the New Testament Books
Click to expand...

Bart Erhman says the New Testament books are copies ... of copies ... of copies ... and 5 minutes later he is still saying: copies ... of copies ... of copies of the originals. This piece of information can only strengthen my faith because those copies were made in different places, by different scribes, and they all basically say the same thing.

The thing is Bart Ehrman is no longer (or has never been) a Christian and no one can say Jesus is lord except by the Holy Spirit.
 
Marcelo said:
Bart Erhman says the New Testament books are copies ... of copies ... of copies ... and 5 minutes later he is still saying: copies ... of copies ... of copies of the originals. This piece of information can only strengthen my faith because those copies were made in different places, by different scribes, and they all basically say the same thing.

The thing is Bart Ehrman is no longer (or has never been) a Christian and no one can say Jesus is lord except by the Holy Spirit.
Click to expand...

You make an excellent observation. Plus he doesn't support any of his assertions with evidence. He doesn't name the scribe that made these errors, and he assumes they was only one copy.

I have recently made these short videos that counter the arguments of Bart Ehrman and others who support these positions based on the positions of church fathers from the second century that counter his very argument. Let me know what you think of the videos. Thanks.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqjsB-lvDBWXDB-DYVLt-Zg
 
calvinsx76 said:
I have recently put together a couple of short 3-5 minute cool videos on How We Got the books of the New Testament

Currently Modern Scholars Like Bart Erhman calls into question the reliability of the Text of the New Testament Books, and I am building a series to help educate Christians on how the ancient church received the scriptures and how they were preserved the books of the New Testament up to our time.

The debate is set in the 2nd Century - The Gnostics claimed to have received scriptures that were not received by the Apostolic churches, and two Christian witnesses from that period came out to defend the authentic scriptures against the claims of the gnostics.

Please let me know your thoughts and Questions. Videos can be seen blow. Total length of both videos are 9 minutes. The videos totally rock.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqjsB-lvDBWXDB-DYVLt-Zg
Click to expand...

First thought: if you put together the videos, then you need to read and practice Proverbs 27:2.

Second thought: I watched the videos. They are thin on documentation, as are most videos of this type. That is not to say that they are wrong, just thin. Their design and narration is an appeal to emotion, not reason. The style reminds me of secular or anti-Christian videos that seek to promote the very gnostic gospels these videos decry.

Third thought: it is absolutely laughable that the videos lump James White in with Bart Ehrman (I checked the spelling... something you failed to do). White has debated Ehrman on the reliability of Scripture. If it was you who made the videos, you would do well to do your homework. Try reading what White himself has written on the transmission of the New Testament, and on the recognition (not "selection") of canon Scripture, and deal with the arguments directly rather than with general assertions. The first video in particular throws ad-hominem attacks... fallacious and unhelpful.

As you have stated in another thread that you are a KJV-only proponent, I find it difficult to consider this thread, and the videos, as anything but an oblique attempt to promote that viewpoint.
 
Dino246 said:
First thought: if you put together the videos, then you need to read and practice Proverbs 27:2.

Second thought: I watched the videos. They are thin on documentation, as are most videos of this type. That is not to say that they are wrong, just thin. Their design and narration is an appeal to emotion, not reason. The style reminds me of secular or anti-Christian videos that seek to promote the very gnostic gospels these videos decry.

Third thought: it is absolutely laughable that the videos lump James White in with Bart Ehrman (I checked the spelling... something you failed to do). White has debated Ehrman on the reliability of Scripture. If it was you who made the videos, you would do well to do your homework. Try reading what White himself has written on the transmission of the New Testament, and on the recognition (not "selection") of canon Scripture, and deal with the arguments directly rather than with general assertions. The first video in particular throws ad-hominem attacks... fallacious and unhelpful.

As you have stated in another thread that you are a KJV-only proponent, I find it difficult to consider this thread, and the videos, as anything but an oblique attempt to promote that viewpoint.
Click to expand...


Thin on documentation - I quote directly from Irenaeus and Tertuallian, but you would have had too read those ancient fathers to be familiar with the quotes. These videos document the criterion the churches used by the apostolic churches. The ancient churches weren't stupid and they didn't accept documents claiming to be from the apostles.

I have read what white has stated, he rejects the authorship of Paul for Hebrews, he rejects the last twelve verses of Mark as original, he rejects 1 John 5:7, he reject the passage on the women in adultry, but says these scriptures were added later by scribes..He rejects all church texts received through the apostolic churches for documents of unknown origin which he basis he arguments on.

James white and Daniel wallace ignore the testimony of Ireneus and Tertullian...They promote a view that the scriptures were corrupted very early on in the churches...you need to do your homework, obviously you aren't as acquainted with his positions at all, not to mention the writings of the church fathers.

Read their views, they quote scribes going around adding to the known versions all these passage without anyone knowing about it.

I'm quoting from the ancient churches - which are historical records from that period. You have offered no evidence what so ever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back