0 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 5 (0 votes, average: 0.00 out of 5)
You need to be a registered member to rate this post.

National Cathedral Lecture – Misquoting Jesus

Here is a version of my lecture “Misquoting Jesus.”   Some of you have seen a different version of the lecture (I’m sure I’ve posted one!); I’m particularly fond of this particular one, both because of its setting in the Washington National Cathedral and because, well, I just think I was on better form than usual.   The lecture was given on Feb. 6, 2007.


Suggestions for Improving the Blog (Its Content)
Ideas for Raising More Money on the Blog



  1. Avatar
    JudithW.Coyle  August 10, 2014

    What a treat this Sunday morning.

  2. Josephsluna
    Josephsluna  August 10, 2014

    Good ole bart lol standing for what he believes in. I support you brother

  3. Avatar
    rivercrowman  August 10, 2014

    Thanks Bart.

  4. Avatar
    Deaconess  August 10, 2014

    I just listened to the entire talk…and very much enjoyed it and was enlightened by it. Thank you Bart!

  5. Avatar
    prestonp  August 10, 2014

    How did the books and letters, written thousands of years ago by numerous people from wide ranging backgrounds and beliefs and socioeconomic lifestyles, that exalt jesus (that we call the n.t.) become the most widely read, most trusted, most influential, life changing, revolutionary and controversial documents of all time, including this generation?

    How do people speak in tongues today?

  6. Avatar
    shakespeare66  August 11, 2014

    I was wondering if you have created any sort of timeline for the “events” of the creation of the Bible. That is, have you detailed what you consider would be the approximate time that the first full version of the Gospel of John was done, when the Bible was completely completed, etc. etc.?

    • Bart Ehrman
      Bart Ehrman  August 11, 2014

      No, I never have. The problem is that we simply don’t know when some of the books were written, let alone edited, either in absolute terms (when was Ephesians written) or in relative ones (is James before or after 1 Peter), etc….

      • Avatar
        shakespeare66  August 11, 2014

        So then these are just guesses, or is there some merit to these dates?


        • Bart Ehrman
          Bart Ehrman  August 12, 2014

          No, this is a fundamentalist site. Notice that it indicates that the world (as in, our universe) came into existence in 4004 BC!!! (not, like, 13.8 billion years earlier than that….)

      • Avatar
        gavriel  August 11, 2014

        Is there any recent tendency among leading scholars today to “move” the traditional dates assigned to the various New Testament writings? For instance many NT Introductions (including yours) give a date for Acts to the 80’ties and some possibly as late as about 100 CE. The Acts Seminar of Westar suggested not long ago the early decades of the 2. century. Is this still a fringe opinion?

        • Bart Ehrman
          Bart Ehrman  August 12, 2014

          Yes, the big move these days is about the book of Acts, putting it up to 120 CE or so. I was initially skeptical, but so many people seem to be getting on board, that I’ve decided that I need to read the arguments more thoroughly. It’s on my agenda for the fall.

          • Avatar
            BrianUlrich  August 12, 2014

            Wouldn’t that also involve moving Luke?

          • Bart Ehrman
            Bart Ehrman  August 13, 2014

            Yes, I think so!

  7. Avatar
    willow  August 11, 2014

    Wow! Such brains (yours), and beauty (the Cathedral), all in one place! It just doesn’t get better than this.

    But of course, this isn’t to say that you aren’t beautiful too, Bart. ‘-)

You must be logged in to post a comment.