The Gospel of Judas Iscariot

Originally Posted by SuperBobby

After reading a rather lengthy Washington Post article concerning Mr. Ehrman and his book, I don't even think that it is worth discussing. Mr. Ehrman is not a believer (it is recorded in the article that he is an agnostic) and therefore I would hold him incapable of telling the truth concerning God.

He has an axe to grind against the Christ of faith.
I have seen Muslims use his work as a defense of their position of the unreliability of the Injeel (gospel). Not to mention Ehrman has next to nothing in the way of sources to back up anything he says. None of his articles use much in the way of sources at all. He is trying to rewrite the history of Christianity to what he THINKS is right..instead of using the proper historical documents and truth.

Oh My God. Are you saying you know more than Bart Ehrman?

Summary of Curriculum Vitae

* Ph.D. Princeton Theological Seminary (magna cum laude), 1985
* M.Div. Princeton Theological Seminary, 1981
* B.A. Wheaton College, Illinois (magna cum laude), 1978

Principal Areas of Research Interest: New Testament Interpretation; History of Ancient Christianity (first three centuries), especially Orthodoxy and Heresy, Formation of the Canon, NT Manuscript Tradition, Historical Jesus, and Apostolic Fathers;

Secondary Areas of Interest: Jewish-Christian Relations in Antiquity; Greco-Roman Religions; Christianization of the Roman World.

Bart Ehrman is the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor and Chair of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He came to UNC in 1988, after four years of teaching at Rutgers University.

Prof. Ehrman completed his M.Div. and Ph.D. degrees at Princeton Seminary, where his 1985 doctoral dissertation was awarded magna cum laude. Since then he has published extensively in the fields of New Testament and Early Christianity, having written or edited nineteen books, numerous articles, and dozens of book reviews. Among his most recent books are a college-level textbook on the New Testament, two anthologies of early Christian writings, a study of the historical Jesus as an apocalyptic prophet (Oxford Univesity Press), and a Greek-English Edition of the Apostolic Fathers for the Loeb Classical Library (Harvard University Press).

Prof. Ehrman has served as President of the Southeast Region of the Society of Biblical literature, chair of the New Testament textual criticism section of the Society, book review editor of the Journal of Biblical Literature, and editor of the monograph series The New Testament in the Greek Fathers (Scholars Press). He currently serves as co-editor of the series New Testament Tools and Studies (E. J. Brill) and on several other editorial boards for monographs in the field.

Winner of numerous university awards and grants, Prof. Ehrman is the recipient of the 1993 UNC Undergraduate Student Teaching Award, the 1994 Phillip and Ruth Hettleman Prize for Artistic and Scholarly Achievement, and the Bowman and Gordon Gray Award for excellence in teaching.

Those are Bart Ehrman's credentials. Can I see yours now? Please, enlighten me.
You're the expert, remember?

Originally Posted by Some Zealot

The reason they were burned because they were blasphemes and complete trash.

Yes, and you know this because you've read them, right?
I remember this one time, me and Jesus were baking some cookies, and he let me read the texts.

Originally Posted by Some Tard

If you go by the bible alone, the dates ALL match up. If you bring in outside sources, then there are some SMALL discrepancies, but nothing that is a big issue for the reliability of it all.

By the bible alone? Hahahahahaahahahahahfshgdgfdklnasfgsjhdhsedlizhurg fxjiofstrey465zsfdtr
Sorry, was laughing a little too hard. That's like saying "Well, if you're in my room, and you close your eyes, based on hearing alone, it's a circus!"
Doesn't mean it's a fucking circus, now does it? Doesn't mean you should turn this thread into a giant circus either.

Originally Posted by Some Moron

It means 'God's Word'. In other words, the "whole bible".

The Bible is not the word of God. Sorry, not anymore it isn't. Remember the telephone game? Well try playing that for a few centuries. It's NOT the word of God. It's not even what it was in the beginning. The Bible in a whole, is tainted.

Originally Posted by Some Idiot

When you use moronic sources like the Ehrman guy, then yes. Go to a Christian debate Forum and bring him up. You'll be shot to pieces in 5 minutes. And there, you will get proven sources.

Yes, while I'm at it, I'm going to a forum about Satanism and I'll preach the word of God to them. I'll convince them that God is their saviour, and they'll be rational about it.

How about you do me a huge fucking favour? YOU give me proven sources. You're playing this hide-and-seek-because-I-don't-know-what-the-fuck-I'm-talking-about-and-I-don't-want-to-look-like-an-idiot game.

Originally Posted by Some Douchebag

Christmas is a very important celebration in the church, and for Christians. What I was trying to get at is the fact that is has very little to do with your personal walk with God as a Christian, or your eternal salvation.

What eternal salvation? I've got it right here, it's called alcohol.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Bradylama

So hey, like, wasn't the bible canonized by the Romans?

I dunno. Maybe the Emperor and a couple of dudes with funny hats know more about the truth of God than anybody else did.

Constantine and the Council of Nicea.

And most likely. HORSEHAIR CREST FOREVER.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by SuperBobby

True, but you can't have a vendetta against it either.

Reznor, you're comments aren't even worth replying to, but I'll say this:
I don't care how many degrees he has. His mission is to belittle the Christian faith and doing it without real proof..nothing more. Therefore he is not a reliable source. Like I said...go to some Christian forums where they have a few scholars there. They'll give you sources and proof that he is a liar.
And yes, those other gospels did NOT have enough proof or reliable sources that they were valid. That is why they never made it into the bible.

You obviously know NOTHING about the preservation of the bible over the last 2000 years +. You are clueless.
You probably haven't even heard of the Dead Sea scrolls found in 1948. When they translated the OT book of Isaiah 58 years ago from the DS scrolls, they compared it to the 'then current' Isaiah in the bible and found the meaning had been preserved PERFECTLY. And if you have any real knowledge in studying this sort of thing, you would know that. Not to mention, Isaiah is arguably one of the most important books in the Old Testament.
Alcohol??? Yeah I figured as much.

Sorry, but don't fucking say "PROOF" in a religious debate.
Faith = Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.

Been so preferved perfectly that Lucifer still remains in the bible? Right?

How about you do like I said. How about you REFUTE what he has said. I never said Christian forums. I said YOU. Can you fucking read?

I guess not if you're reading a fucking bible. $500 says your knuckles drag on the floor.

No of course I haven't heard of the Dead Sea Scrolls. I still have black and white television.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.