Tanggapan Profesor Darrell Bock dan Profesor Ben Witherington III terhadap Ehrman

Seorang member CLDC bernama J.P. Jones, memosting klaim dari Bart D. Ehrman. Cuplikan klaim Ehrman yang diposting Jones saya cantumkan di bawah ini:

We don’t have the originals of any of the books of the New Testament. We have copies that are much later, sometimes even centuries later the copies we have all differ from one another – they were changed by scribes
 We have 5000 manuscripts in the original Greek language there are hundreds of thousands of differences
most of the differences don’t matter. Some differences are significant for meaning or doctrine errors are propagated because the next scribe inherits the mistake of their source copy a large gap between the time of writing and the first extant copy means more errors have crept in

Setelah membaca cuplikan klaim Ehrman ini, saya mengirim pesan kepada Profesor Darrell L. Bock (penulis buku: Dethroning Jesus – bersama Profesor Daniel B. Wallace – yang pernah diundang ke Indonesia untuk menanggapi, salah satunya, buku Ehrman yang berjudul: Misquoting Jesus). Pesan senada juga saya kirimkan kepada Profesor Ben Witherington III (beliau juga pernah diundang ke Indonesia untuk memberikan ceramah tentang Injil-injil Ekstra Kanonik).

Berikut ini, saya akan cantumkan balasan pesan dari Profesor Darrell L. Bock dan Profesor Ben Witherington III melalui inbox FB saya:

Profesor Darrell Bock:

The basic answer is we have so many manuscripts that we have a very good idea of what the original text said. Most differences are obvious (Miss spelled words or issues of word order that do not impact meaning). The NT is the best attested ancient text we have. Good Dan Wallace, he has responses to these kinds of claims.

Profesor Ben Witherington III:

Deky, I have already responded many times over to this. You will find critiques of this view on my blog at Beliefnet. Just Search my blog there with the name of Ehrman cross listed. Ehrman is wrong about the implications of text criticism. There are no alterations of doctrinal significance overall. Why not? Because though there may be some question of whether this idea was originally present in text, it is also present in text Y where there is no textual problems. So, Ehrman is simply trying to confuse people on this matter. There are plenty of textual variants, but we do already have manuscripts from the second century A.D. and while we are at it, we have nothing this good when it comes to the text criticism of the Koran.

Sebagai referensi tambahan mengenai tanggapan dari kedua profesor di atas secara lebih luas dan juga tanggapan dari profesor Craig L. Blomberg dan profesor Dan Wallace, lihat link-link di bawah ini:

1)      Profesor Ben Witherington III: http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/search?q=ehrman

2)      Profesor Darrell Bock: http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Christianity/2006/03/Misinformation-About-Misquotingthe-Bible.aspx

3)      Profesor Craig L. Blomberg: “Review of Misquoting Jesus, by Bart D. Ehrman,” dalam: http://www.denverserminary.edu/dj/articles2006/0200/0206