Curated by Justin Bailey
In one sentence: Bart Ehrman argues that the New Testament text is unreliable due to its transmission history, which includes numerous textual variants, scribal errors, and deliberate alterations over centuries.
Why it matters:
The reliability of the New Testament text underpins its theological authority and historical credibility. If it is unreliable, the foundations of Christian doctrine and apologetics could be undermined.
State of play:
Ehrman highlights several key points in his case:
- Textual Variants: The New Testament manuscripts contain hundreds of thousands of textual differences, arising from hand-copying over centuries. While most are minor, some affect key theological concepts.
- Lack of Originals: The original autographs of the New Testament are lost. The earliest complete manuscripts date centuries after the originals, leaving a gap filled with uncertainty.
- Intentional Changes: Scribes sometimes altered texts to align them with emerging theological views, such as the divinity of Christ or Trinitarian doctrine.
- Geographical Spread: Early Christian texts were copied in diverse regions, leading to textual divergences before the canon stabilized.
- Non-Professional Scribes: Many early manuscripts were copied by amateurs rather than professional scribes, increasing the likelihood of errors.
Yes, but:
Critics of Ehrman’s case argue that:
- Insignificant Variants: Most textual variants are inconsequential, such as spelling errors or word order changes, and do not affect core Christian doctrines.
- Textual Criticism: Scholars can reconstruct the New Testament text with high confidence using thousands of manuscripts and modern methods, mitigating the impact of lost originals.
- Doctrinal Consistency: Key Christian beliefs are supported by the overall textual tradition, even when specific passages are disputed.
- Ehrman’s Bias: Ehrman’s conclusions are viewed by some as overstated, emphasizing problems that textual critics have largely addressed.
What skeptics say:
Skeptics contend that the New Testament’s textual history undermines its reliability as a historical or divine document. They point to:
- Contradictory manuscripts that reflect early theological disputes.
- Theological edits, such as the addition of the Johannine Comma (1 John 5:7–8) or the longer ending of Mark (Mark 16:9–20), which question divine inspiration.
- The reliance on uncertain reconstructions, especially in passages with no textual consensus.
Between the lines:
Ehrman’s arguments focus on the process of transmission rather than the original composition. While his critiques highlight real issues, they also reflect broader debates about the relationship between divine inspiration and human mediation.
Zoom out:
Ehrman’s case doesn’t universally invalidate the New Testament but challenges a rigid view of its inerrancy. For many Christians, the reliability of the text transcends its imperfections, grounded in faith that God worked through fallible human processes.
The bottom line:
Bart Ehrman raises significant points about the New Testament’s textual history, emphasizing the human element in its transmission. However, the extent to which this impacts its theological or historical reliability depends on one’s presuppositions about faith, textual criticism, and divine involvement in scripture.
Follow Up Questions
What specific textual variants does Bart Ehrman identify as impacting key theological concepts within the New Testament? (Coming Soon)
How do scholars use modern textual criticism methods to address the issues of lost originals and textual variants in the New Testament? (Coming Soon)
In what ways might the geographical spread and regional differences in early Christian communities have influenced the textual divergences in New Testament manuscripts? (Coming Soon)
What role do non-professional scribes play in the transmission errors of the New Testament, and how significant are these errors in the broader scope of textual criticism? (Coming Soon)
Can the doctrinal consistency across diverse New Testament manuscripts be seen as evidence against the significance of scribal alterations and errors? (Coming Soon)
How do responses from critics of Ehrman's views on the New Testament's reliability address the concerns about intentional changes by scribes? (Coming Soon)
What examples of theological edits, such as the Johannine Comma or the longer ending of Mark, are most controversial, and what do they suggest about the process of canon formation? (Coming Soon)
How has the field of textual criticism evolved in recent years to address the challenges highlighted by Bart Ehrman regarding the New Testament's textual history? (Coming Soon)
What are the implications of Bart Ehrman’s findings for the everyday believer’s understanding of New Testament texts? (Coming Soon)
How do modern theologians reconcile the issues of human error and divine inspiration in the context of New Testament textual reliability? (Coming Soon)
Justin Bailey – Creator of ChristianAnswers.ai
All answers are curated and manually reviewed prior to being posted. Multiple language models are used to assist with verification.