|
|
|
Entrar Centro de Estudios www.IDyHACED.net
...instrucciones. _______________________ Página Inicial ¨Home¨
...sobre la educación-E _______________________
*abierto gratis 24 horas/7 días
Facilitada: TEO110 gratis
Foro: Código Da Vinci 24/7 (gratis)
Clases Facilitadas (pagas una cuota - y esperas la fecha de inicio):
_______________________
Diploma
. Serie Para Maestros Cómo Enseñar Vía Internet:
_______________________ Facultad
_______________________ English Only: (inglès)
_______________________
_______________________
_______________________
|
About Biblical Inerrancy
Links About the Bart Erhman Inerrancy issue: 1. http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/2006/03/misanalyzing-text-criticism-bart.html 2. Review of Bart D. Ehrman, Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 2005) by Daniel B. Wallace, Executive Director, Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts (http://www.csntm.org) 3. http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=3452 Review of Bart D. Ehrman, Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 2005) 4. Triablogue... http://triablogue.blogspot.com/ full of links! to good stuff! 5. http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2006/06/misquoting-metzger.html
Biblical Inerrancy and Ehrman straight quotes from>
in the Denver Journal, An Online Review of Current Biblical and Theological Studies. http://www.denverseminary.edu/dj/articles2006/0200/0206.php
Comments on the work:
"What most distinguishes the work [of Ehrman] are the spins Ehrman puts on some of the data at numerous junctures and his propensity for focusing on the most drastic of all the changes in the history of the text, leaving the uninitiated likely to think there are numerous additional examples of various phenomena he discusses when there are not. Thus his first extended examples of textual problems in the New Testament are the woman caught in adultery and the longer ending of Mark. After demonstrating how neither of these is likely to be part of the originals of either Gospel, Ehrman concedes that “most of the changes are not of this magnitude” (p. 69). But this sounds as if there are at least a few others that are of similar size, when in fact there are no other textual variants anywhere that are even one-fourth as long as these thirteen- and twelve-verse additions."
"Few textual critics of any theological stripe (including Fee) elsewhere accept as probable suggestions that the originals of any New Testament book read differently from all known copies, because of the sheer number and antiquity of the copies that we have, until a passage becomes too awkward for their overall theological systems (and even then most seek some other resolution of the tension than textual emendation).
"...the most disappointing feature of the volume is Ehrman’s apparent unawareness of (or else his unwillingness to discuss) the difference between inductive and deductive approaches to Scripture. The classic evangelical formulations of inspiration and inerrancy have never claimed that these are doctrines that arise from the examination of the data of the existing texts. They are theological corollaries that follow naturally from the conviction that God is the author of the texts (itself suggested by 2 Tim. 3:16, Jesus’ own high view of Scripture and his conviction that the Spirit had yet more truth to inspire his followers to record). But if the texts are “God-breathed,” and if God cannot err, then they must be inspired and inerrant."
"Ehrman offers no supporting arguments for his claims that if God inspired the originals, he both could have and should have inerrantly preserved them in all subsequent copies. It would have been a far greater miracle to supernaturally guide every copyist and translator throughout history than to inspire one set of original authors, and in the process it probably would have violated the delicate balance between the humanity and divinity of the Bible analogous to the humanity and divinity of Christ. All that is necessary is for us to have reason to believe that we can reconstruct something remarkably close to the originals, and we have evidence for that in abundance. No central tenet of Christianity hangs on any textually uncertain passage; this observation alone means that Christian textual critics may examine the variants that do exist dispassionately and without worrying that their faith is somehow threatened in the ways that Ehrman came to believe.
-quotes from Craig L. Blomberg, Distinguished Professor of New Testament, Denver Seminary, February 2006. http://www.denverseminary.edu/dj/articles2006/0200/0206.php
|
Favor de reportar
problemas con esta página a:
info@InstitutoInterGlobal.org
|
