The unexpected agreement between Dr. Bart Ehrman's skepticism and the KJV Only fanatics

"When you subjugate it to the human laboratory for testing and twisting and probing, it takes on a different nature.  If it isn't preserved perfectly, then it lacks in authority, something less than full authority."  This is a quote about the Bible from Kent Brandenburg, and it has something that he might not be happy to hear about in common with the leading agnostic critic of Biblical accuracy alive today, Bart Ehrman.  Bart is a well known critic, with best selling books like Misquoting Jesus and How Jesus Became God to his name.  One of the most crucial conclusions that Dr. Ehrman makes in his rejection of the Bible that we have today is that it isn't the same as the original as penned by the Apostles.  If we don't have the original, God must not have preserved it, if God didn't perfectly preserve it, he must not have given it in the first place.  If the modern Bible isn't a perfect copy of the original autographs, if it has any errors (despite its historically unheard of 97% accuracy), it is no longer the Word of God.  KJV Only fanatics take this same view of the preservation of Scripture.  Their answer to Bart's dilemma is to posit a new revelation from God that occurred in 1611 (don't mention to them the typographical/spelling/printing mistakes of that edition, it won't be welcome).  The King James Bible to them is a perfectly preserved English version of what the Apostles wrote, so much so that many of them have dismissed the relevance of an original autograph should one be found in some cave like the Dead Sea Scrolls, and so much so that some of them (Sam Gipp for example) contend that the only way to hear the Word of God today is for the people of the world to learn English to read the KJV (Don't point out the obvious racist white superiority behind this line of thinking, just because God treats all men equally doesn't mean they have to).  How do we know that the KJV is a perfect edition in every way, especially since in their view that's the only way it will be God's Word?  You'll have to take that on faith.
  Dr. Ehrman yearns for a perfect Bible, doesn't have one, and has lost his faith, the KJV Only crowd yearn for a perfect Bible, so they've pretended they have one.
The sad thing is, we have an amazing Biblical text today.  All of the original readings have been preserved within the manuscript tradition, none of what the Apostles wrote has been lost.  The Bible is more readily available and accessible than ever before all over the world in hundreds of languages with new ones being translated every year.  The Word of God has never been closer to ordinary people, too bad the skeptics and the fanatics can't see it.

* Note * Kent Brandenburg should not be identified with the KJV Only crowd of Ruckman/Gipp/Riplinger (which he rightly dismisses as an untenable position), both groups believe in "perfect preservation", the first as found in the KJV, Kent's group as found in the Textus Receptus (TR definition).  To prefer the TR is a defensible position, just as it is defensible to prefer the KJV, the TR was the Greek text basis for Tyndale, the Bishop's Bible, the KJV, the Geneva Bible, Luther's German NT, and the New King James, but to be TR ONLY is almost as erroneous as the KJV Only position in that it posits a perfect moment in Church history when the text of God's Word needs to be frozen, when all scholarship and textual criticism needs to cease.  The problem with that, is that there is no one TR (it isn't a manuscript, but a published collation of a few late Byzantine texts that were available to Erasmus), there are many published additions of Erasmus/Stephanus/Beza that were the result of their efforts at textual criticism, so why must these men be the only authorities that can offer God's people his Word?  The TR is a good text, but the Majority text is better, and the Critical Eclectic text is better still.  Christians in the 16th century like Erasmus did a great job considering the manuscripts they had available to them at the time, but we have no need to limit ourselves to what they knew then.  God has indeed preserved his Word, in EACH generation, that effort continues to this day through the work of Godly men who continue the work of their ancestors in the faith. 

Sermon Video: "From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded" - Luke 12:35-48

In this passage, Jesus tells two related parables about servants and managers of servants who need to be vigilant and faithful in the completion of their assigned tasks.  In both cases, those servants who do what is expected of them are rewarded and those who neglect their duty are punished.  The meaning of the parables is also related to the return of the Son of Man, a time that Jesus emphasizes once again will be an unexpected hour.  In light of the promised, but unknown time, of the return of Jesus, Christians must needs be prepared to do the work of the kingdom, not putting off till later what we may not then get a chance to accomplish.
The conclusion of Jesus, relating to both parables, is that those who have been given much from God, will in turn have much demanded of them from God.  The judgment of God will fall heaviest upon his own people if they fail to imitate his Son, for they are without the excuse of ignorance, for they know what God expects of them.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: What, me worry? - Luke 12:22-34

In this passage, Jesus offers some of the most practical, yet difficult, advice you will ever hear when he says, "do not worry about your life".  Worrying is exceedingly detrimental to our health and well-being, and we'd all love to worry less, but the problem is that we don't know how to make this happen; worry, anxiety, and fear seem to strong for us.
Jesus offers multiple reasons why his followers ought not to worry, even about the necessities of life like food and clothing, beginning with the reason that "life is more than food, and the body more than clothes."  Even if the bulk of our time and resources are devoted to the act of living, that is not the purpose of life.  We were created to be more than just alive.  In addition, Jesus offers the example of the ravens, who without effort are provided for by God, and the lilies who make for themselves a flower more beautiful than human hands could make.  Both of these forms of life are the result of our Creator's joy in the creative process, and neither are beneath his notice.  If God cares for such as these, surely he cares for you whom he values far more as a human being created in his likeness.
The reasons from Jesus for us to not worry continue with his assertion that worrying doesn't accomplish anything positive, but is itself evidence of faith that is lacking.  If we trusted God more, we would worry about our lives far less.  In the end, the perspective of knowing that God is in control, we certainly are not, and that God's care and concern for us extends from the basics of life all the way up to our hopes and dreams, is the key to keep worry at bay.  We already trust God with our souls, having chosen to live by faith, we just need to keep going and trust God with a far smaller thing, our tomorrow.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

The purposeful exaggeration of Bart Ehrman on Textual Variants

I'm in the process of reading Darrell Bock and Daniel Wallace's excellent book, Dethroning Jesus: Exposing Popular Culture's Quest to Unseat the Biblical Christ, and their first chapter confirms something I've noticed (not uniquely) about the writings and interviews of Biblical scholar, skeptic, and former evangelical, Bart Ehrman who is most famous for his book, Misquoting Jesus.  Dr. Ehrman routinely lists facts about the text of the N.T. that are not disputed by believing Biblical scholars, in fact most of what he says is very educational and helpful, but then he ends his recitation of the facts with a conclusion that is hardly necessary and in fact a rather significant amount of hyperbole.  For example, when listing off the most important textual variants that affect our ability to know the original text, Ehrman begins with Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53-8:11 (the longer ending of Mark and the woman caught in adultery), as if these two texts are somehow not already well known for having been late additions to the text.  Those two additions, thirteen and twelve verses, are by far the most significant "changes" to the text, but neither passage has anything to do with Christian Orthodoxy, neither proclaims an exclusive doctrine, and concluding that both are not original doesn't hurt the Christian faith one bit.  How are these examples of significant changes that will destroy our faith?  The other passages listed by Ehrman in Misquoting Jesus (p. 208) as being a danger to the accepted Biblical text are: Mark 1:41, Hebrews 2:8-9, John 1:18, I John 5:7-8, and Matthew 24:36.  In Dethroning Jesus, Bock and Wallace look at each reference in turn, only to uncover that whether or not Jesus is "angry" in Mark 1:41 is not going to shake the foundations of the Church, nor will it harm us to have to see the Trinity in the totality of the N.T. instead of relying upon the late addition of I John 5:7-8, something that Erasmus knew was inauthentic over 500 years ago.  In the end, Ehrman is much sound and fury, eloquently stated with passion to be sure, but rest assured, his earth shattering revelations are far from it.

Sermon Video - "Who will get what you have prepared for yourself?" Luke 12:13-21

In this passage, Jesus uses the occasion of an inheritance dispute that is brought to him to instead give a warning about the perils of greed which he illustrates with a parable about a rich man with an abundant harvest who in his prosperity fails to consider his obligations to God.  The words of Jesus are a direct attack on the notion that the accumulation of things can somehow have anything to do with the purpose and meaning of life, "a man's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions."  Wealth is a fickle purpose in life, dependent upon factors beyond our control and liable to be taken away as quickly as it may come, far better to devout oneself to being "rich toward God", a purpose with lasting implications and eternal rewards.  With death as the inevitable end to life, and everything we accumulate destined to be left behind for others to claim, only a fool would chase after wealth and neglect God.

To watch the video, click on the link below: