Simple Challenge for Kent Brandenburg

Mr. Brandenburg has posted an article in which he states:

Bart Ehrman, in Misquoting Jesus, had nine propositions that he developed in the course of the book. In his debate with Ehrman, James White could not challenge the assessment that he himself agreed with eight and a half of the propositions in Misquoting Jesus. The only thing they disagreed about was the interpretation of the evidence. And this is the kind of thing that is the source for non-KJS bibliology.

(source – Article titled “Brainwashed Bibliology”)

Now, the last sentence of this paragraph is just wrong. It is true that Dr. White disagrees with Dr. Ehrman about the interpretation of the evidence, but that is far from the only thing that Dr. White disagrees with Dr. Ehrman about.

But here is the challenge for Mr. Brandenburg. It is a simple challenge with two parts:

1) Demonstrate that you know what the nine propositions are by listing them, and
2) Identify which, if any, of those propositions you yourself disagree with.

After all, just because Dr. Ehrman is an apostate and agnostic doesn’t mean that every proposition he states is wrong. Surely you don’t think that Dr. White has to defend the truth by disagreeing with true statements, do you? So identify the erroneous propositions from those nine that you believe Dr. White should have disagreed with.


4 Responses to “Simple Challenge for Kent Brandenburg”

  1. Kent Brandenburg Says:

    Hello Francis.I listened to the debate and they only disagreed on the interpretation of the evidence. It would be hard to refute the last point, because of it’s ambiguity. I said, “the kind of thing that is,” and I explain what I’m talking about in the whole post.Regarding your challenge, in the debate, Ehrman said that his book had nine propositions. He didn’t say what those were and he didn’t list them. However, White didn’t refute that statement by Ehrman either.My assumption, however, is that the nine propositions were the basis for the nine chapters of his book—an introduction, seven chapters, then a conclusion. I’m going to put my disagreements in CAPITAL LETTERS below.1. Introduction: The Bible is a human book that must be dealt with in a human way. THIS IS THE HALF THAT WHITE DISAGREE WITH, I PRESUME. THE BIBLE ISN’T JUST A HUMAN BOOK, BUT HE DOES DEAL WITH IT IN A HUMAN WAY. I DON’T. TEXTUAL CRITICS DON’T WANT THEOLOGICAL PRESUPPOSITIONS TO GET IN THE WAY OF THE EVIDENCE.2. Christianity was a bookish religion, like Judaism, that said certain books were authoritative scripture. I CAN’T AGREE WITH THIS BECAUSE IT IS ANOTHER HUMAN EXPLANATION, THAT ESSENTIALLY MUST CANONIZE THEIR BOOKS BECAUSE OF THEIR BOOKISHNESS.3. We don’t have those authoritative texts. WE DON’T HAVE THE PARCHMENT, BUT THAT ISN’T WHAT GOD PROMISED TO PRESERVE. HE PROMISED TO PRESERVE THE WORDS.4. There are lots of differences among our manuscripts, differences created by scribes who were reproducing their sacred texts. I BELIEVE THERE ARE LOTS OF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SINAITICUS AND VATICANUS, BUT NOT BETWEEN THE BYZANTINE MANUSCRIPTS OR THE TR EDITIONS.5. We have invented methods for reconstructing the test of the New Testament and for recognizing the ways that it came to be change din the process of its transmission. I AGREE THAT MEN DO THAT, BUT I DON’T BELIEVE THAT IT SHOULD BE DONE.6. The textual changes play a significant role in how the passages in question are interpreted. I BELIEVE TEXTUAL CHANGES DO PLAY A ROLE IN WHAT THE TEXT MEANS, SO I AGREE WITH THIS.7. Scribes changed the text based on theological considerations. I CAN’T KNOW THAT. THAT’S A CONCLUSION THAT I WON’T MAKE.8. Scribes changed the text based on social considerations. DITTO WITH NUMBER 7.9. The scribes of the New Testament text changed scripture based upon what was in their own minds. SOME SCRIBES DID, BUT WE REJECT THOSE TEXTS. WE SEE THEOLOGICAL BIASES IN CERTAIN COPIES AND THE CHURCH REJECTED THOSE TEXTS.There you go, Francis Turretin.

  2. Kent Brandenburg Says:

    It was your challenge, so now what?

  3. Turretinfan Says:

    I think your comments clarify a lot, and present a more moderate position than your original claims.As far as I am concerned, this is a controversy that I am willing to let go, in view of your clarification, unless you have some desire to see it stirred up.I appreciate your providing the answers that you provided, and I thank you for taking the time to respond to me.-TurretinFan

  4. The White Man Says:

    There’s an apparent contradiction here.KB:”7. Scribes changed the text based on theological considerations. I CAN’T KNOW THAT. THAT’S A CONCLUSION THAT I WON’T MAKE.”But only a few lines later:”WE SEE THEOLOGICAL BIASES IN CERTAIN COPIES AND THE CHURCH REJECTED THOSE TEXTS.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: