If you're new here, you may want to get regular updates via如果你是新这里，你可能想通过定期更新 RSS feed RSS提要 . 。 Thank you for visiting!谢谢您的访问！

The book “该书“ Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed The Bible and Why错误引述耶稣：背后谁改变了圣经故事和为什么 ” from Prof. Bart Ehrman can be described as an introduction to New Testament textual criticism for beginners, in which he explains the subject in the context of his own background, relating his journey from being an Evangelical Christian to becoming a world renowned New Testament scholar. “从巴特教授埃尔曼可以说是对新约考证为初学者，他在其中解释了他自己的背景情况介绍的主题，涉及从一个基督教福音他的旅程成为著名学者的世界新约。 Besides DC Parker's除了直流帕克 “Living Text of the Gospels” “生活文本的福音” , Ehrman's ，陆国际律师事务所的 “Misquoting Jesus” “错误引述耶稣” seems to be the only book on textual criticism designed specifically for the non-expert readers.似乎是对设计的非专业读者特别考证唯一的书。

In short, Ehrman explains the copying practises of the earliest period and how the texts of the New Testament writings were corrupted as they were copied and recopied.总之，埃尔曼解释复制最早期间的做法，以及如何在新约圣经的著作，案文被损坏，因为它们被复制和重新复制。 He begins by introducing the diverse writings produced by the early Christians, such as gospels, Acts, apocalypses, Church orders, apologies etc. Briefly, the formation of the canon is also discussed and we are informed about the literacy level among the early Christians.他开始，启示，教会的命令，道歉等简言之，形成了佳能还讨论，我们对早期基督徒之间的知识水平，引进了通知，如早期的基督徒福音，行为，所产生的各种著作。 Thereafter we are introduced to the world of the copyists and Ehrman explains how the early scribes copied texts, the different types of errors that were made (intentional and unintentional) and the problems associated with the copying of texts.此后我们介绍给世界的抄写和陆国际律师事务所介绍了如何早期文士复制文本，该作了（有意和无意的），并与文本复制有关的问题的不同类型的错误。

It is quite interesting to learn that even pagan critics of这是很有趣的学习，即使批评的异教徒 Christianity基督教 , such as Celsus, were quite aware at an early date that the Christian writings were being corrupted by the scribes and even Origen had to complain about the numerous differences between the gospel manuscripts.如塞尔苏斯，是早日的基督教著作被损坏的文士和奥利甚至有抱怨的福音手稿之间的许多差异相当了解。 Marcion, an early Christian, corrupted the text of certain New Testament writings available to him and Dionysius is quoted who complains that his own writings have been modified just as “the word of the Lord” had been tampered.马吉安，早期基督教，败坏了某些新约圣经的著作文本提供给他，狄奥尼引述谁抱怨说自己的著作已被修改，只是为“耶和华的话”被篡改。 Marcion, of course, accused other Christians of corrupting the texts.马吉安当然，指责腐败案文其他基督徒。 In an earlier writing, “The Orthodox Corruption of Scriptures”, Ehrman demonstrated in detail how proto-orthodox Christians corrupted the New Testament writings on occasions.在早先的写作，他说：“圣经”正统腐败，埃尔曼显示详细了解原东正教基督徒损坏的情况下，新约圣经的著作。 It seems that the early Christians were quite aware that the writings in their possession had undergone corruption and were still being corrupted and they frequently accused each other of tampering with the texts.看来，早期的基督徒是很清楚，在他们身上的著作中经历了腐败和仍然被损坏，他们经常指责与文本的相互干扰。

I was amazed to learn how statistically small additions or deletions within texts could change the entire meaning of passages and even books.我吃惊的是，如何统计小增删文本内学习可以改变整个通道，甚至书籍的意义。 Ehrman discusses at length certain examples in this regard and shows that even unintentional changes can result in changes that alter the meaning of texts.埃尔曼详细讨论了在这方面具有一定的例子，即使在无意改变可以改变结果，改变了文本的意义。 To quote Ehrman (pp. 207-208) :引述陆国际律师事务所（页207-208）：

“It would be wrong, however, to say – as people sometimes do – that the changes in our text have no real bearing on what the texts mean or on the theological conclusions that one draws from them. “这将是错误的，不过，我想 - 因为人们有时 - 这在我们的文本中的变化，没有什么意思的文字或在他们得出的一个结论，真正的神学影响。 We have seen, in fact, that just the opposite is the case.我们看到，事实上，相反的是，仅仅如此。 In some instances, the very meaning is at stake depending on how one resolves a textual problem: Was在某些情况下，在股权的意义是非常取决于如何解决了一个文字的问题：是不是 Jesus耶稣 an angry man?一个愤怒的人？ Was he completely distraught in the face of death?他完全是在面对死亡发狂？ Did he tell his disciples that they could drink poison without being harmed?他有没有告诉他的弟子，他们可以不受到伤害喝毒药？ Did he let an adulteress off the hook with nothing but a mild warning?难道他让一个什么也没有关闭，但温和的警告钩淫妇？ Is the doctrine of the Trinity explicitly taught in the New Testament?是明确的三位一体学说在新约圣经教导？ Is Jesus actually called the “unique God” there?耶稣其实是所谓的“独特的上帝”吗？ Does the New Testament indicate that even the Son of God does not know when the end will come?请问新约显示，即使神的儿子不知道什么时候会结束？ The questions go on and on, and all of them are related to how one resolves difficulties in the manuscript tradition as it has come down to us.”的问题不胜枚举，其中都涉及一个如何解决在手稿的传统，它已回落到我们的困难。“

The above are just a few problems.以上只是其中几个问题。 Another interesting problem is whether the doctrine of the atonement is taught in the gospel according to Luke?另一个有趣的问题是，究竟是赎罪的学说是在福音教据卢克？ Further, there are immense textual problems within passages such as the sayings on divorce and remarriage in the gospels此外，通道内有巨大的文本问题，如在福音的离婚和再婚的说法 ^{1 一} and the Lord's Prayer among others.和上帝祷告等等。

It is important to realize that Ehrman is not the first person to have discovered these textual problems.重要的是要认识到，陆国际律师事务所是不是第一人，他们发现这些文字上的问题。 Instead, textual critics are quite familiar with them but seldom are these textual difficulties discussed in books aimed at the lay readers so that many people continue to adhere to the mistaken belief that there exist no significant textual problems within the New Testament effecting important theological matters.相反，文字评论家都对他们相当熟悉，但很少是在普通读者的书籍，旨在讨论这些文字的困难，使许多人继续坚持错误地认为存在着在新约神学影响的重要事项没有显着的文本问题。 Clearly, shoddy apologists such as Giesler and Josh McDowell have done a lot to propagate a false image of the textual preservation of the gospel text – misleading countless around the globe.显然，如麦克道尔和Josh吉斯勒伪劣辩护士也做了不少宣传误导了无数世界各地的福音的文字文本保存的假象 - 。 Ehrman sets the record straight.埃尔曼设置连续记录。 In another recent book, co-authored with Bruce Metzger, we read:在另一项最近的一本书，合作与布鲁斯梅茨格创作，我们读到：

“Nor are these variant readings, taken as a whole, of little consequence. “也不是这些不同的读法，作为一个整体，没有什么后果。 On the contrary, many prove to be critical for questions relating to the New Testament exegesis and theology.”相反，许多被证明是至关重要的问题，有关新约圣经注释和神学。“ ^{2 2}

Thus it would appear that scholars are now beginning to discuss the difficult issues more openly.因此看来，学者们现在开始讨论棘手的问题更加公开。

It seems clear that the Gospels are not so well textually preserved as some people would have us imagine and that there exist many variations which have profound effects and bearings upon the meaning of texts and theological issues.它似乎很清楚，不是福音原文保存这么好像某些人希望我们想像，而且存在着具有深远影响，并呼吁文本意义轴承和神学问题很多变化。 Some may refer to the “the oldest Christian manuscripts” and how these are “most reliable”, not realizing that Ehrman, and others, have pointed out numerous times that the earliest manuscripts are precisely the most problematic – revealing the most variations, which indicates that the texts of the gospels were in a state of flux in the earliest period of their transmission.有些人可能是指“最古老的基督教手稿”，以及这是“最可靠”，没有意识到陆国际律师事务所等，都指出，最早的手稿，正是最有问题 - 揭示了大多数的变化，这表明无数次该文本的福音，在一个国家的流量在其传输最早时期。

A detailed discussion of the manuscripts of the New Testament, based on writings of scholars such as Prof. Ehrman and others, is to be found作者：新约学者著作的基础上，如教授陆国际律师事务所和其他手稿，详细的讨论，可以找到 here这里 . 。

Moreover, the problem of the “original text” is also discussed by Ehrman and he states that many textual critics are now beginning to doubt even if there is such a thing as an “original” to be restored.此外，“原始文本”的问题，也讨论了陆国际律师事务所，他指出，现在许多文字评论家甚至开始怀疑是否有这样的一个“原始”的事情得到恢复。 He explains the problematic nature of the issue and why we cannot get back to the “original” text itself in light of the copying practises of the first three centuries.他解释问题的问题的性质，为什么我们不能让光线在复制回“原始”文本本身的前三个世纪的做法。 Therefore, we can only hope to recover early forms of the text, not the “originals,” and hope that these early forms are relatively close to the lost “originals”.因此，我们只能希望早日康复形式的文本，而不是“正本”，并希望这些早期形式比较接近失去“正本”。

Besides the above issues, Ehrman provides a fascinating discussion of how the various New Testament editions were produced, particularly the one by Erasmus based on a handful of late manuscripts, and how Christians reacted when certain individuals here and there stumbled across variant readings.除了上述问题，陆国际律师事务所提供了如何在各种版本的新约中有精彩的讨论，特别是对少数晚期手稿伊拉斯谟的基础之一，基督徒如何反应时，某些人在这里和那里跌倒在变读。 The story of the interpolation of 1 John 5:7 (the only clear formulation of the Trinity) is amazing ?了约翰一书5:7（唯一的三位一体明确制定插值故事）是惊人的？ the way it was inserted into the text and the reaction of some when it was removed.它的方式是插入到文本和一些反应时被删除。 Moreover, Ehrman goes on to explain how he eventually came to the conclusion that the New Testament writings were not inspired based on his evaluation of the New Testament text and its transmission.此外，埃尔曼接着解释他终于来到了，新约圣经的著作不是基于他灵感的新约文本及其传播评价结论。

We would recommend this book to anyone who wishes to learn about the textual criticism and transmission of the New Testament writings.我们会推荐这本书给任何人谁希望了解的考证和新约圣经的著作的传播。 If the reader does not know anything about this complex subject, then this is where the reader should start.如果读者不知道这个复杂的课题任何东西，那么这就是读者应该开始。 After going through “Misquoting Jesus,” it should be much easier for the reader to read books aimed at those who already know something about the subject.经过“错误引述耶稣去，”应该是更容易为读者在阅读那些已经知道谁对这个问题的目的是什么书籍。

1. This was not discussed by Ehrman but addressed in detail in DC Parker's这是由陆国际律师事务所，但没有讨论中，详细讨论区帕克 “The Living Text of the Gospels”他说：“福音生活文本” [ [ back背面 ] ]
2. Bruce M. Metzger & Bart D. Ehrman, The Text Of The New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration , 2005, Fourth Edition, Oxford University Press, p.布鲁斯米梅茨格和巴特四陆国际律师事务所， 在新约中的纯文字：其传输，腐败和恢复 ，2005年，第4版，牛津大学出版社，第 284 [ 284 [ back背面 ] ]