Counterpoint: Foundation of faith essential in interpretation of gospel

As another Easter approaches, many Christians may be wondering, “Is Jesus really alive … since Bart Ehrman, author of ‘Misquoting Jesus,’ tells me that he isn’t?”

I received expressions of concern from some who read the Washington Post story in the Bangor Daily News’ Religion & Spirituality section last month. I am grateful for the opportunity to respond to Ehrman’s assertions in the story about the “lack of evidence” for the Christian faith.

I happen to agree with Ehrman that the story of the woman caught in adultery (John 7:53-8:11) is not part of the Gospel of John. The best manuscript evidence essentially proves that John did not write it. (This does not, however, automatically mean that the story is “fiction,” as Ehrman claims; it may be true, just not Scripture.) I also agree that 1 John 5:7b was not written by John. Mark’s Gospel probably ends at 16:8 rather than 16:20.

But do these conclusions shake my faith in Scripture or the Christ revealed there?

By no means.

My faith does not depend on whether Jesus forgave an adulteress or not. (He’s been forgiving adulterers for centuries!) My faith depends on precisely what the Scriptures say it should depend on: the decisive events of Jesus of Nazareth’s death and Resurrection.

“For I delivered to you as of first importance … that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve” (1 Corinthians 15:1-6). Indeed, as Paul later says, “If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins” (15:17). This is what really matters, and about this central fact, all ancient copies of the New Testament are in complete agreement: Matthew 28; Luke 24; John 20-21; Acts 1-2; 1 Corinthians 15; Philippians 3; 1 Thessalonians 4, just to cite the major passages.

The discrepancies among the New Testament manuscripts are only a problem if we attribute inspiration to the scribes rather than the original authors. That’s why the Moody statement quoted in the original article says that “the original autographs [the first editions written by Paul, Matthew, Mark, Luke, etc.] … were verbally inspired by the Holy Spirit.”

Concerning the copies, the great British scholar F.F. Bruce writes: “Fortunately, if the great number of manuscripts [5,700!] increases the number of scribal errors, it increases proportionately the means of correcting such errors [through the science of textual criticism]; … The variant readings about which any doubt remains among textual critics of the NT affect no material question of historic fact or of Christian faith and practice.” (“The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?” pp. 20-21.)

Ehrman may have justifiable doubts about the story of the adulteress or the end of Mark’s Gospel. But what is he going to do with the remaining 99.9 percent of the New Testament manuscripts that clearly proclaim that Jesus is the eternal Son of God, that God raised him from the dead, and that he now reigns as lord of the world and head of the church? The discrepancies among the copies, which are actually very minimal, do not call into question any of the central facts about Jesus that the church confesses in, for example, the Apostles’ Creed.

And since Jesus is alive, we do well to consider what he said about his designated spokesmen, the Apostles.

He said they would be “guided into all the truth” by the Spirit and made to remember all that Jesus had taught them (John 14:25-26; 16:12-14). He made them his authoritative witnesses because they were eyewitnesses, especially of his Resurrection (John 15:26-27; Acts 1:21-22; 5:30-32; 10:40-42; 13:31; 26:16; 1 Corinthians 15:5-8; 1 John 1:1-4).

Eventually, they recorded their teachings in the 27 books we call the New Testament. Jesus’ authority as risen Lord guarantees the truthfulness of their writings.

Ultimately, this gets down to an issue of presuppositions and faith commitments. It was not the evidence that led Ehrman to abandon his faith in Christ.

Rather, it was the abandonment of his faith in Christ that led him to reinterpret the evidence. Ehrman allowed his experience (for example, of famine in Ethiopia) to interpret his view of God and Scripture, rather than allowing God and his word to interpret his experience.

Christian believers, on the other hand, do not see Ehrman’s evidence leading us to doubt God’s word, but rather to a deeper and abiding trust in how he has preserved it for us down through the centuries, so that by the encouragement of Scripture, we might have hope (Romans 15:4). And so the church says on the testimony of Scripture this Easter and always: “Christ is risen! He is risen indeed!”

The Rev. Brian D. Nolder, Master of Divinity, is pastor of Pilgrim Orthodox Presbyterian Church, Bangor.