B. Centre 2008-10-12

2 of 3 people found the following review helpful:

Ehrman takes us on a journey detailing the development of the New Testament, from 2nd century manuscripts through modern day biblical scholarly attempts to piece together what the original "autograph" copy may have really said.

While contradictory and altered versions of the New Testament were known to me, the scope of those variations, and the causes for them was not. Using examples of scripture, and referencing the earliest and later manuscripts, Ehrman details instances of simple scribal errors, mistakes in Greek translations, attempts to counter "heretical" alternative Christian beliefs, reinforcement of the preferred Christian orthodoxy, demonizing Judaism, attempts to fend off pagan criticisms, and suppression of the role of women in the church hierarchy. Much of what was done, in error or with an agenda, clearly altered the intent of the writers of the bible, in some cases so significantly as to alter the original authors' perspectives of the "historical" Jesus and church doctrine.

His ability to explain to the layman the methods of textual critical research, opened up a whole new world of understanding as to how these contradictions and variances came to be and how they can be deconstructed to get a better picture of the original lost version.

That in this day and age there are people who will attempt to gloss over / ignore, or diminish the implications of these errors / alterations / contradictions, instead preferring to cling to the "word of God" dogma, is evidence of blind faith's ability to cloud reason and scholarship in defense of a beloved tradition and belief system. It attests to the strength of the religious meme, not the diminishment of scholarly facts

This is a must read for anyone with an interest in Christian scripture, regardless of where one stands on religion.

Gregory J. Kenney 2008-09-25

2 of 3 people found the following review helpful:

Bart D. Ehrman's "Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why" is simply the most enlightening title I have ever read! Par with his other works, Ehrman condenses centuries of relevant biblical history into this remarkably informative and accessible volume. As one of the world's leading biblical scholars, and chair of the department of religious studies at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Ehrman's qualifications and experience empower him to deliver candid and noteworthy insight into the most provocative topic the world has ever known. In his luminous book, "Misquoting Jesus", Ehrman reveals the academic and historical truth about the New Testament texts and their turbulent rise to become our society's most influential--and controversial--body of spiritual knowledge. This book is sure to prove itself an imperative revelation for any Christian seeker, and a comprehensive examination of fact-versus-fiction for the inquisitive reader. "Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why" is, without doubt, one of the modern world's most significant and important contributions to the effective understanding of the life and teachings of Jesus Christ.

Dave 2008-09-10

4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

Erhman's book provides a clear and concise explanation of new testament history.

This history shows the finger prints of humanity on the authorship of the Bible.

The Bible we have today is the result of one version of early Christianity winning the battle for orthodoxy over competing factions. The victors declared the losers heretics and wrote the "word of God" to support their views.

Todd Stockslager 2008-09-08

3 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

Ehrman follows up on his 2003 study of The Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew by turning his eye for Biblical criticism on those books that did make it into the canon.

Ehrman talks briefly about textual criticism as applied to New Testament source manuscripts, suggesting that the currently accepted canon has been revised inadvertently and intentionally over in over 30,000 places. He provides a handful of examples, and provides a very elementary introduction to the discipline.

Not that compelling. Most interesting is his introductory biographical essay, telling of his boyhood in the Episcopalian (thanks for the correction in a comment to my review) faith where Bible study wasn't encouraged, to a teenage born-again experience, to his scholarly studies which have made him pull back and refer to "born again" in quotes.

The most interesting question he raises is how to square Biblical inerrancy with textual revisions, some of which have surely taken place, although none of his main examples are faith-shattering. His point, well taken, is that if you believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God, then having the actual words of the original writers is vitally important, and needs to be considered seriously as a theological question.

J. Norburn 2008-09-07

3 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

This book is well worth reading if you are interested in the subject matter. Perhaps most refreshing about this book, despite its rather provocative title, is that Ehrman is very objective in his review of early Christian writings. I read a lot of books on the topic of religion that have been written by atheists and, while I enjoy most of these books, I have to admit that many of these authors have a tendency to be sarcastic (some might even say smarmy) when referring to the faithful. Ehrman, a former fundamentalist Christian turned agnostic, appears to respect the religious convictions of others, even if his own research caused him to change his beliefs. His interest in the subject matter seems genuine to me. I didn't get the impression that he had an agenda, other than a genuine scholarly interest to discover, to the degree possible, the truth about early Christianity and the evolution of the New Testament.

It is because of Ehrman's objectivity that I was surprised (although I shouldn't be really) that there is a book called Misquoting Truth that disputes Ehrman's research. I guess this indicates that Ehrman, who has been writing books on early Christianity for years, has achieved a level of success that brings with it a degree of notoriety.

Because I've read a number of books on early Christianity, not everything in this book was new to me, but I found quite a bit of information that I hadn't heard before. It has a logical flow, is accessible to a lay person, and is well researched and objective.

It is unlikely that fundamentalist Christians will read this book with an open mind, but I think a lot of Christians could find it very enlightening to read. I know that as a child, attending Catechism, I was either taught (or just assumed) a lot of things that I suspect many Christians believe. I always assumed that the gospels were written by men who knew Jesus (or at least had first-hand knowledge of his life) shortly after his death. I assumed that the four gospels in the New Testament were the only gospels, that they were consistent with one another, that they never changed, and that we had the originals somewhere. I assumed that all of the followers of Jesus had the same beliefs about his life, death, and resurrection.

I have come to learn that these assumptions are likely false. The gospels were written decades after the death of Jesus and its unlikely that they represent first-hand accounts of his life. There were many very different variations of early Christianity and numerous gospels and writings circulated at this time, reflecting a wide range of interpretations of who Jesus was. These writings reflect the different theological interests and competing agendas of early Christians. The four canonized gospels contradict each other (quite significantly at times) and no originals have been found. Most interesting (and the focus of this book) is how the gospels and other writings of the New Testament were altered by scribes over hundreds of years. Some changes were accidental, but many alterations were likely deliberate. Ehrman objectively analyses the probable motives behind many of these changes.

This is a very well written, well researched, discussion of this topic. I recommend this book to anyone interested in early Christian history.