Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why Paperback – February 5, 2007
by Bart D. Ehrman (Author)
4.5 out of 5 stars 1,726 ratings
For almost 1,500 years, the New Testament manuscripts were copied by hand––and mistakes and intentional changes abound in the competing manuscript versions. Religious and biblical scholar Bart Ehrman makes the provocative case that many of our widely held beliefs concerning the divinity of Jesus, the Trinity, and the divine origins of the Bible itself are the results of both intentional and accidental alterations by scribes.
In this compelling and fascinating book, Ehrman shows where and why changes were made in our earliest surviving manuscripts, explaining for the first time how the many variations of our cherished biblical stories came to be, and why only certain versions of the stories qualify for publication in the Bibles we read today. Ehrman frames his account with personal reflections on how his study of the Greek manuscripts made him abandon his once ultra–conservative views of the Bible.Read less
Report incorrect product information.
Print length
242 pages
Editorial Reviews
Review
“Offers a fascinating look into the field of textual criticism and evidence that Scriptures have been altered.” (Charleston Post & Courier)
“Whichever side you sit on regarding Biblical inerrancy, this is a rewarding read.” (Dallas Morning News)
“One of the unlikeliest bestsellers of the year.” (Washington Post)
“Misquoting Jesus is a godsend.” (Philadelphia Inquirer)
About the Author
Bart D. Ehrman is one of the most renowned and controversial Bible scholars in the world today. He is the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and is the author of more than twenty books, including the New York Times bestsellers How Jesus Became God; Misquoting Jesus; God’s Problem; Jesus, Interrupted; and Forged. He has appeared on Dateline NBC, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, CNN, History, and top NPR programs, as well as been featured in TIME, the New York Times, The Washington Post, The New Yorker, and other publications. He lives in Durham, North Carolina. Visit the author online at www.bartdehrman.com.
Customer Reviews: 4.5 out of 5 stars 1,726 ratings
Top reviews from the United States
Orwell Morgan
4.0 out of 5 stars Fascinating, Easy Read
Reviewed in the United States on November 7, 2017
Verified Purchase
Ehrman argues for two theses, one practical and one more abstract.
The practical thesis can be summarized as: We do not possess any of the original writings of the New Testament, and the copies we have are riddled with negligent and/or intentional alterations. Therefore, the New Testament we read today, which is based upon numerous altered copies, is not very close to the original text. And if the original text is the Word of God, the Word of God is lost.
The abstract thesis can be summarized as: For any text, both the author's and the reader's subjective beliefs and experiences condition the meaning of the words, and therefore color the interpretation of the text. As a result, there is no such thing as an objectively true interpretation of a text. The search for the "correct" meaning is fruitless. Therefore, no one can claim to know the true meaning of the text of the New Testament.
The upshot? The New Testament we read today is of human, and not divine, origin (practical thesis), and, in any event, any claim to "the One True Interpretation" is in principle false (abstract thesis).
I will not take a stand on Ehrman's claims but hope I've faithfully outlined them for people deciding whether to purchase the book. I am familiar with but not well-versed in either the New Testament or textual criticism. Nonetheless, I found his arguments and analysis easy to track. The broad historical information was interesting, and the biblical passages he focuses on to illustrate his points are engaging instead of arcane. Some may consider this book anti-religious, but Ehrman's tone is respectful and honest, not polemical. For such a short, accessible book, the reader can gain a lot from reading it.
Read less
247 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
Matthew RapaportTop Contributor: Philosophy
5.0 out of 5 stars Easy to read examination of the textual variations in the modern Bible and how they got there.
Reviewed in the United States on April 3, 2018
Verified Purchase
A well written book about the evolution of the Bible, particularly the New Testament, and how our present text came to be in all its various forms. Dr. Ehrman begins with a brief summary of his own life. From an "ordinary kid" he becomes a fundamentalist Christian believing the Bible to be wholly inspired. During his graduate program in a Christian school he develops an interest in the wide variety of historical documents that have, through many generations come down to us a our present Bible. He becomes, in short, a textual-scholar, and has an epiphany!
Ehrman quickly learns that there are no longer any "original texts" anywhere. The earliest texts found, more fragmented the farther back one goes, come from the 2nd century some 100 years after Jesus' death. None of the original Apostles, nor Paul are any longer alive at that point, and what early notes exist for geographically fragmented communities are already copies of lost originals. Even if the literal-original writing was "inspired by God" as fundamentalists claim, by the opening of the 2nd century the earliest copies of these writings have already passed through human hands and the real originals are no more. Except for the Christian community of Alexandria where professional scribes already existed, all of the early copies were made by amateur believers who, as it happened could read and write, and so copied texts for their congregations; sometimes well and sometimes poorly. It was not until late in the 4th century that more professional scribes assumed the copyist role.
Roughly the first half of the book is taken up with the history of textual criticism. Ehrman leads us through early (17th century) classification attempts and the techniques developed to determine which texts were "more original" than others. Ehrman notes that in many many cases even that matter cannot be decided with any finality. That the modern obsession with the text began after the Reformation is no accident. Protestant scholars were far more compulsive about the text than Catholics. Protestant theology and doctrine rests entirely on the text, while Catholicism has its priestly class for precisely the task of interpreting the text in what ever form it takes. By the 18th century, scholars had identified some 30,000 textual variations in the manuscripts that come together as the then relatively stabilized New Testament.
Most of these variations were simply mistakes made by non-professional copyists. Sometimes they left out a word or whole sentences. Sometimes what there were of literal originals were physically degraded even when first copied. Copyists sometimes had to "fill in the blanks", a smudged word, or a bleed-through from some earlier text on the page for example. So why not go back to the more professional Alexandrian texts and call those "closest to original"? Because while the vast majority of changes were copy errors, not all were merely that. Here and there changes were made for theological and socio-political reasons. In point of fact (something he does not mention) the Alexandrian scholars were among those who, by the early 5th Century, were considered among the heretical sects by the then solidifying Roman Church. Ehrman does not mention is the textual difference between the modern Western (Roman) and Eastern (Greek and Eastern European "Orthodox") churches. His aim is historical, and he does cover the early Greek texts whose alterations became mixed in with all of the others.
In the second half of the book Ehrman covers three types of changes made deliberately by one group of copyists or another so as to make the text easier to read and better line up with the various theological opinions and social controversies of the time, each propounded by groups of believers who were doing their own copying! In the end, Ehrman is forced to conclude that even the lost originals were probably not autodidacts (texts dictated by God) because if God had wanted Christians to have his un-corrupted words in perpetuity, He would have made sure the originals survived.
I gave the book 5 stars not because the book's subject was of great interest to me, but because Dr. Ehrman does such a marvelous job of treating a scholarly subject (many many references are provided) with easy to read language aimed at non-scholars of the subject like myself.
Read less
135 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
IMHO
4.0 out of 5 stars Fine Scholarship Ends in a Disjointed Conclusion
Reviewed in the United States on April 14, 2018
Verified Purchase
As a textual critic, Erhman does a thorough job of illustrating the meandering path the New Testament has taken from the original writings to what we read today. I don’t challenge his work as a critic and can easily accept the multitude of errors, amendments, exclusions, and modifications he presents. However, ones faith system doesn't necessarily depend on the validity of a virgin birth, the exact definition of the Trinity, or other miracles & orthodoxy. While one can’t deny these things, one can’t exactly confirm them either. That’s where Erhman loses me. He connects textual variations with a denial of orthodoxy – essentially, since God isn’t acting the way he expects, he abandons faith and uses textual criticism as proof. I don’t get that at all. There are hundreds of books about Abraham Lincoln. Some of them are near works of fiction and even the best have historical errors and bad assumptions. That doesn’t mean that Lincoln wasn’t the 16th President and never spoke at Gettysburg. I know the weight placed on the New Testament is much greater than any Lincoln biography, but that would seem to be a reason to extract what one can from the works rather than abandon them. It’s possible that the different gospels were included because they provided a different point of view. Maybe Mark was more data driven than Matthew and that difference allows another angle on Jesus’ teachings. I’m glad I read the book and appreciate Erhman’s scholarship, but I challenge his conclusions.
127 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
LucyA
5.0 out of 5 stars This book helped me understand why it is important for ...
Reviewed in the United States on August 4, 2018
Verified Purchase
This book helped me understand why it is important for ME to focus on the CONCEPTS of the Bible, not the specific words. Ehrman cites enough examples to convince me that oral history passed on the concepts, but the words, interpretations, sequence of events have been subject to change over the centuries.
56 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
See all reviews
Top reviews from other countries
Pie Master
5.0 out of 5 stars Essential for anyone with an interest in religion
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on July 7, 2020
Verified Purchase
For a non-christian absolutely fascinated with the Bible, the lasting resonance it has imbued mankind with is a constant source of great interest to me.
I've never truly understood how it came to be, and why it seems to be a confused collection of separate works, as opposed to a clear dictation from the all mighty. This book not only explains the origins, but it also does so with clarity and ease, and that's greatly appreciated.
Let me say this was an excellent book. The author it seems is a brilliant teacher. Clear explanations and written in a style that is vivid and engaging especially for what could be a slightly dour and dusty subject if you're not specifically into the history of the biblical text. Which I'm not really in any meaning full way.
My mind is dancing with curiosity even more so after reading. Yes, this book clearly demonstrates the Bible isn't divinely inspired as such, with so many glaring sometimes embarrassing examples of openly human intervention. But it's more than just those examples or errors alone for me.
I now want to know more, the original traditions that the first authors used to craft this most important of books, where did they come from? More questions, I want to dive deeper, which is a good thing as the author has written several books on this, and i now crave more!
Bart D Ehrman has found a new fan in me, this being the first book of his I've read. I will already be deep into the next one following on from this, probably finished it, by the time you read this.
Misquoting Jesus is essential reading for Christians and anyone outside of that with evem a slight interest in religion. It's great.
Read less
3 people found this helpful
Report abuse
nobody
4.0 out of 5 stars An Interesting Read
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on October 9, 2014
Verified Purchase
As a born again, Bible-believing Christian this has certainly given me food for thought. I see Ehrman is a scholar who has attempted (more or less) to deal honestly and scientifically with the text.
I have learned a great deal about the problems of textual criticism, and it was fun to read how early scribes may have altered the text in such a way that our modern reading has been affected by it. And how modern scholarship is attempting to recover the originals.
But it's the "more or less" that I have problems with. It is clear that Erhman has a slant, an agenda. I do not mean this in a derogatory fashion. We all have our slants and our agendas. And this has coloured his opinions. There were parts of the text where I really felt he was stretching it. It's hard to remember all of the areas i felt he was doing this, but just this morning I finished up the last chapter where he delves into the anti-Semitic reasons as to why early scribes may have changed the text. He speaks with such certainty, but like so much in this field his opinions are only conjecture. Perhaps very good and logical, but sitting there reading I was able to come up with other possible scenarios (using the principles he gives) as to why the text may have changed.
Ehrman tries to portray himself as a disinterested scholar, but it is clear he dislikes Christianity even though he has given his life to the study of it. That's fine. But one should be aware that this will affect the way one looks at the evidence and how one interprets it.
I believe Christianity is primarily about a relationship with Jesus Christ, which is why I am not too bothered by the idea that textual variants have appeared in the manuscripts. Fundamentalistic religion balks at the idea and squirms around it, but the Word is a Person, not ink on a page.
Read less
41 people found this helpful
Report abuse
S P Mead
4.0 out of 5 stars a good introduction to the ways in which the New Testament has changed
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on October 28, 2016
Verified Purchase
This is a very interesting and well written book, that examines how the manuscripts of the New Testament have been altered and adapted over time. The author, a biblical scholar, examines the historical process which has changed the New Testament. The original manuscripts - written during the latter part of the 1st century and the first part of the second century, no longer exist ... nor do the first copies that were made during the second 2nd century. Nor, indeed, do the initial copies of the copies - as made during the 3rd century. What we have access to are copies of the copies of the copies of the copies ... And the earliest such documents that still survive are from the 4th century. These manuscripts, written centuries after the originals, contain many differences. As such, we simply don't possess - and can't access - the originals. And what we do possess clearly show that many changes have been made.
Given that so many changes were made during the initial centuries following the writing of the original New Testament manuscripts, we can't know what those originals actually said. All we know is what later writers offer us ... and, as these later documents are so very different from each other, we've no idea which - if any - is more authentic. What's more, still later versions of the New Testament - such as the King James - are is various ways different from the earliest existing manuscripts. So further changes - throughout the second half of the first millennium, and during the first half of the second millennium - have been made. Sentences in the text have been altered; new sentences have been added!
What Ehrman does is provide us with a fascinating account on who changed the New Testament. This is a book written with a popular audience in mind, and it's straightforward to understand. I found it an enjoyable read ... But it is rather short (at some 218 pages), and it goes into little detail as regards what the alterations and changes actually are. Ehrman points out that such adaptations have been made, but says too little about their specifics. I would have enjoyed a more in-depth study. Fortunately, the author has written such a book - The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture: The Effect of Early Christological Controversies on the Text of the New Testament .
Read less
16 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Mr. A. R. Mcmahon
5.0 out of 5 stars The Bible is not the book it started out as...
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on March 23, 2015
Verified Purchase
Bart Ehrman has a consistent and convincing position on the reality of Jesus and the New Testament. Having read several of his books, it boils down to the story of a first century messianic preacher who was elevated to godhood in the generations that followed his death. In "How Jesus Became God", Ehrman examines that process and the external religious influences that spurred it on. In "Forged", he looks at how large parts of the New Testament were fraudulently attributed to Paul in particular to support the emerging orthodox Christian position against rival Christian views like Marcionism and Gnosticism. With "Misquoting Jesus", he's in the same territory but this time taking a closer look at the role of scribes and translators in accidentally and intentionally altering texts. This book spans a much longer time period from the Romans to the Enlightenment.
I think it's fair to say it complements his other works but if you were starting out on the works of Bart Ehrman, I'd try some of his other writings first - particularly the recent "How Jesus Became God". Ehrman is much heavier going than Reza Aslan ("Zealot"), but ultimately more rewarding. He may lack Aslan's fast paced story telling ability, but the analysis is more rewarding and deeper. That's not to diminish Aslan who has clearly gone for a more populist approach.
What Ehrman forces Christians to face up to is a combination of amateur, blundering scribes in the first centuries, deliberate alterations and "improvements" to the texts and a total absence of copyright law in the ancient world. Thousands of changes have wormed their way into the New Testament including accounts of Jesus's life and works that were inserted into the gospels from other sources. Theological agendas have removed offending words from the original texts and mistranslations have been repeated and accepted.
A fascinating book.
Read less
9 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Mr. Christopher Monk
5.0 out of 5 stars Fascinating, informative and
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on January 7, 2019
Verified Purchase
wow, what a fascinating book. Think you know your Bible then think again. It won't undermine your faith, nor prove agnostic or atheists right either, just make you rethink anything and everything you ever thought you knew. He occasionally says something like "I haven't the room to expound this or that", I wish he did, Iwanted it to go on and on. I have since bought other books by Bart and they are as good too. You don't need to be an expert or a Doctor of Divinity to understand, easy to read and to understand. Highly recommended.
Report abuse
===============
Want to Read
Rate this book
1 of 5 stars2 of 5 stars3 of 5 stars4 of 5 stars5 of 5 stars
Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why
by Bart D. Ehrman
3.88 · Rating details · 16,296 ratings · 1,344 reviews
For almost 1,500 years, the New Testament manuscripts were copied by hand––and mistakes and intentional changes abound in the competing manuscript versions. Religious and biblical scholar Bart Ehrman makes the provocative case that many of our widely held beliefs concerning the divinity of Jesus, the Trinity, and the divine origins of the Bible itself are the results of bo ...more
GET A COPY
KoboOnline Stores ▾Book Links ▾
Paperback, 266 pages
Published February 6th 2007 by HarperOne (first published November 2005)
Original TitleMisquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why
ISBN0060859512 (ISBN13: 9780060859510)
Edition LanguageEnglish
URLhttp://www.bartdehrman.com
Other Editions (40)
Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible & Why
Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why
Whose Word Is It?
Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible & Why
Misquoting Jesus
All Editions | Add a New Edition | Combine
...Less DetailEdit Details
EditMY ACTIVITY
Review of ISBN 9780060859510
Rating
1 of 5 stars2 of 5 stars3 of 5 stars4 of 5 stars5 of 5 stars
Shelves to-read edit
( 848th )
Format Paperback edit
Status
July 7, 2021 – Shelved as: to-read
July 7, 2021 – Shelved
Review Write a review
comment
FRIEND REVIEWS
Recommend This Book None of your friends have reviewed this book yet.
READER Q&A
Ask the Goodreads community a question about Misquoting Jesus
54355902. uy100 cr1,0,100,100
Ask anything about the book
Popular Answered Questions
Fascinating but somewhat dry reading of the history of textual criticism of the bible. You can essentially get the gist of the book by listening to one of the interviews that Ehrman has done for radio, which can be found online. A fascinating subject but the book is for people who want a greater level of details without going into a full academic dissertation.
7 Likes · Like 6 Years Ago See All 2 Answers
Thom This looks more like a review than a question...
flag
Wikipedia says the man is an agnostic atheist if that is true? It just seems so sad that God couldn't manage to at least give us the truth in the Hebrew and Greek texts. I know the English is a terrible mess.
1 Like · Like 4 Years Ago See All 2 Answers
Jessica The good news is, God did give us a reliable text, at least in every way that matters. The errors and changes in the Bible are as simple as typos, not…more
flag
See 2 questions about Misquoting Jesus…
LISTS WITH THIS BOOK
The God Delusion by Richard DawkinsGod Is Not Great by Christopher HitchensThe Demon-Haunted World by Carl SaganThe End of Faith by Sam HarrisLetter to a Christian Nation by Sam Harris
Notable Atheist Books
524 books — 989 voters
Jesus, Interrupted by Bart D. EhrmanMisquoting Jesus by Bart D. EhrmanThe Challenge of Jesus by N.T. WrightZealot by Reza AslanJesus and the Eyewitnesses by Richard Bauckham
Best Historical Jesus Books
124 books — 89 voters
More lists with this book...
COMMUNITY REVIEWS
Showing 1-30
Average rating3.88 · Rating details · 16,296 ratings · 1,344 reviews
Search review text
English (1286)
More filters | Sort order
Sejin,
Sejin, start your review of Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why
Write a review
Trevor
Feb 08, 2008Trevor rated it it was amazing
Shelves: religion
This really is a fantastic book. When Wendy recommended it I thought that it would be pretty much the same old stuff that one would expect when an Atheist recommends a book on Religion. Let me explain why this isn’t what you might expect.
Firstly, it is written by someone who I assume still considers himself a Christian. He begins this book by telling the reader his ‘life story’ – how he became a born again Christian at fifteen and how this lead him to become fascinated in The Bible. Not in the way other fundamentalists necessarily become fascinated by The Bible, but rather really fascinated – perhaps obsessed is a better word if you can view that word positively. He knew that The Bible was the ‘inspired word of God’ – but he also knew a few other things, like that it wasn’t originally written in English. So, he wanted to know, how close is the ‘current’ Bible to the ‘original’ Bible? That is the sort of question that can send one off on a lifetime’s adventure – and that is precisely what happens in this book.
He learns Ancient languages, including Greek, Latin and god knows what else. He studies in various (and, to a fundamentalist Christian, increasingly challenging) universities and finally has his faith – the simple-minded faith he started with – rocked to the core by what he learns.
When someone is this engaged, this excited and this informed about what they are writing and obsessed in it is impossible not to feel your pulse race as you read. And this guy loves his stuff.
I also really like it when someone says something that initially sounds paradoxical and then, once it is explained, makes complete sense. Take, for example, his maxim that if you have two versions of the same text and one version is easy to read and understand and the other is difficult, then the difficult one is most likely to be the original. This sounds almost perverse, but really it is obvious. If you were a scribe and you came across a piece of text, you would be much more likely to change it so as to simplify it than to change it to make it more difficult to understand. Numerous examples are given of parts of the Bible being changed (the last six verses of Mark being added is my favourite and a clear candidate for the most remarkable example) so as to make them easier to understand.
This isn’t a book that is seeking to rub the noses of Christians in the contradictions and mistakes inherent in The Bible, but what it is about is pointing out that rather than being inerrant, the New Testament is very much a human book telling a remarkable story in various and very human ways. The book ends with a wonderful explanation of the differences between the four Gospels and makes a compelling argument for why they cannot be read as if they were one book that need to be read to tell the one story, but rather four different tellings of the one story. It is not the similarities that are important in these stories, but their differences and what these differences mean is what is vitally important.
He spends much time addressing the differences between Mark and Luke – particularly the passion and the remarkably different portrayals of Jesus in these two Gospels. For this stuff alone the book is worth reading.
He also quotes some terribly interesting material regarding the transcription and duplication of the early manuscripts. To be honest, it is hard to imagine that this book survived its origins at all. He quotes one person who is charged with producing a copy of the New Testament who describes how he had to transcribe it letter by letter, given he could not read the language the New Testament he was transcribing was written in. Repeatedly we are told that if you compare the earliest manuscripts of the New Testament you will find that there are more differences between them than there are words in the New Testament. A nice line. Of course, like any evolutionary process, most of these differences are clearly errors and make little or not sense, are easily identified and are almost meaningless. However, some couldn’t be more important to understanding the nature of Jesus and the meaning of his life.
He also describes, and makes compelling cases for, intentional changes to the text made by early groups of Christians and their possible motivations for making these changes. I was particularly interested in this as it turns out Paul may not have been the misogynist old prig I’d always taken him to be. Paul’s requirement that women are not to speak in Church – something I tend to raise every time people talk about Women Bishops or Women Priests as my little contribution illuminating how irrelevant Christianity is in today’s world – is asserted to be probably a later addition and is clearly a view that is contradicted elsewhere in the same letter by Paul. Anything that helps remove or even just undermines some of the more obnoxious and objectionable ideas in the Bible (hatred of women, gays, Jews, blacks for instance) can’t be a bad thing.
Part of the reason the author says it is important to get some idea of the original text of the New Testament – for Christians and Non-Christians alike – is that The Bible is a cornerstone of our culture and this alone makes it an important document to understand. I don’t think this is as compelling an argument as he does – in fact, getting to the ‘original text’ is quite irrelevant to The Bible as a cultural artefact, as it wasn’t the original that impacted on our culture, but the innumerable ‘error filled’ versions throughout the years. Even if one was able to prove that the original version of the New Testament stated that Jesus was not the Son of God, but just a man who lived and died – what would that matter? Two thousand years of Western religious tradition would hardly vanish as a result – no matter how good the proof.
No, the point is that this book and the story it tells really doesn’t require external motivations to justify its telling. The history it explains is completely fascinating in itself. As someone who has spent the last seven years reading over what has been essentially the same document with very minor changes (enterprise agreements all have maternity leave clauses and hours of work clauses – but all are potentially different) I found this book utterly compelling. I think I could have quite enjoyed a life as a Biblical scholar, tracking changes to texts and researching why those changes might not have been accidental.
There are many people in the world to whom this book really should be made compulsory reading – for the rest of us no compulsion is necessary – it really is a pleasure to read.
(less)
flag186 likes · Like · 41 comments · see review
Juhem Navarro
Sep 10, 2007Juhem Navarro rated it really liked it · review of another edition
If you read the reviews written in the Barnes and Noble website, you’ll probably see three types of review:
1. The smart ass academic or pseudoacademic who says the book isn’t that good anyway
2. The fundamentalist Christian appalled at the idea of someone doubting the infallibility of the Bible
3. Your average Joe that finds the book quite interesting
In my case, I could be a #1 considering that I’m both a smart ass and an academic (or so I like to think). In the case ofMisquoting Jesus Cover biblical stuff, I’m more like a #3. I wouldn’t say it is the best book I have ever read, but it is a good book in three aspects.
The first aspect is readability. In this case, it is a short and entertaining book. Ehrman doesn’t go into unnecessary details on how textual criticism is conducted, but gives you an idea of how gruesome the process can be. Additionally, the side story of how he converted from a fundie believer in biblical literalism to an agnostic (or if you prefer an “atheist without balls” as Stephen Colbert called him) is both interesting and a little sad.
The second aspect is in the delivery of the goods. Some of the B&N reviewers complained that “Misquoting Jesus” is a misnomer, but I disagree. In several instances he mentions how the things that Jesus [supposedly] said were changed by scribes or even by the gospel authors (yes Luke, you know what you did). In this case the subtitle “The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why” is more revealing. This is because he tells us some of the more common reasons to make mistakes transcribing ancient texts (reason #1: no Microsoft Word, heck! not even Gutenberg Print). People got distracted, people got tired, others weren’t very good at neither reading nor writing yet were considered literate in a time when a very small percentage of people knew how to read or write. And sometimes they changed stuff to meet their beliefs (just like some people overlook the fact that Rick Ankiel probably used HGH because they like him). In this sense the book is revealing because he is not talking about conspiracy theories (sorry DaVinci Code fans) but about how incredibly human is this supposedly divine book.
Finally it provides a little perspective into what was going on during those early days of Christianity. Just like there are many interpretations these days, there were many interpretations in those days (and some way too odd). In a way the bible instead of being inspired, evolved for many many years until some loosely unified theology arose in which most could agree (Jesus is God, God is Jesus, both are the Holy Ghost…and nobody thinks it is a little schizophrenic?). I also used the word evolved combined with bible to piss off the intelligent designers out there.
Why I recommend this book? Because of the reasons stated above and because if it wasn’t for this book, we would need to read all the scholarship out there and maybe even learn Greek, Latin, Hebrew, Coptic, Aramaic, and whatever. Also, because it is pissing off fundies everywhere. (less)
flag107 likes · Like · 12 comments · see review
Jeffrey
Jun 28, 2008Jeffrey rated it it was amazing · review of another edition
Shelves: spiritual
Please, if you're Christian, read this. If you're religious, read this. If you're atheist, read this. I guess what I'm saying is read this. Misquoting Jesus reminds me of the game we played in elementary school. The teacher whispers a story in the ear of one child and it's whispered from one ear to the next until the last child tells the story out loud. And guess what? It's considerably different from the original. No dah! Well, imagine this . . . A book is copied over and over and over by monks that are human, prone to error, bias, deceit, and so on. And guess what? Jesus' story changes. No dah! Here's another point to consider. Even if the book were in its original form, you'd still have arguments. For what about the law "Thou shall not kill"? Not a lot of detail on what to do here. What if your country asks you to go to war, do you kill? What if someone threatens your child's life, do you kill? During a discussion, a student of mine of a particular Christian sect piped up and desired to end the discussion by saying, "Well, just do what the Bible tells you to do." OK, people have been doing that for years, and if there were only one way of doing things, why so many sects? Just look in the phone book and you get lost in all the churches in there. This is an essential book for anyone who wants a better critical thinking understanding of how "the story" can go astray based on what individuals think, feel, and hear, based on bias and personal filtering. A must read. (less)
flag79 likes · Like · 18 comments · see review
Mary ~Ravager of Tomes~
Jan 10, 2017Mary ~Ravager of Tomes~ rated it really liked it
Shelves: 4-star, year-2017
Before I write my review, I must emphasize that this book is not making a case against Christianity. It in no way seeks to destroy the your faith, your system of belief, or convert you to atheism/agnosticism. I feel this is an important disclaimer.
Something about me, I always feel very lost when it comes to selecting educational books on my own. I don't like to perpetuate false information, and it's overwhelming to select literature that maintains an interesting narrative while also providing facts and support for its claims.
Those qualifications, however, are exceeded in Misquoting Jesus.
As I stated earlier, this book doesn't set out to destroy your beliefs. Rather, it challenges you to consider how and why one of the most significant books in history was changed from it's original conception into the Bible we know today.
While reading this, I decided to view it in the same way a member of a jury may view a prosecutor's statements in a court case. The goal is not necessarily to prove what "for certain happened", but rather to raise questions based on logic and contextual evidence as to what "could have potentially happened instead."
Through examples, citations, and logical analysis, Ehrman contemplates how differences in the manuscripts of the New Testament were the product of scribes, both intentional and unintentional. While a large portion of these differences tend to be considered irrelevant, the fact that they exist in the first place is important to consider.
If these changes, clarifications, and mistakes exist in what we have of old manuscripts, it is reasonable to consider that the Bible we have today is not the same Bible that was written as the inspired Word of God during it's origination. Because of this, it is also reasonable to take the words of the Bible with a grain of salt.
I found the examples in this book fascinating to say the least, and I feel as though both Christians and non-Christians alike should consider giving this a read. Ehrman backs up his analysis with citations and references, along with a long history of formal education on this topic.
His arguments create a space for one to consider that reading the Bible should not necessarily be a literal experience. As someone who comes from a religious background, I have to agree with this conclusion.
I rated this a 4 stars because there were a couple times when sentences got a little bit convoluted and I was forced to re-read to make sense of it. But overall, a wonderful book that is, for the most part, written in layman's terms. For those of us interested in analyzing the Bible, this is a must-read. (less)
flag47 likes · Like · 13 comments · see review
Skylar Burris
Dec 23, 2007Skylar Burris rated it it was ok
Shelves: christianity, bible
While I found it interesting to see what differed in various manuscripts, I did not find any of these changes as sensational, apparently, as the back cover blurb writers did. Ehrman's subject and thesis are interesting, but, unfortunately, he is quite repetitive and his arguments are poorly organized. The introduction and conclusion are the clearest, most arresting portions of the book. The introduction is an intriguing spiritual autobiography, but his conclusion leans a little too heavily towards deconstructionism for my taste: he states there is no meaning inherent in text. It is certainly true that texts give rise to multiple interpretations, but it is equally true that some interpretations are more correct than others.
The book will be disturbing to those who regard the Bible as a single entity sprung full grown like Athena from Zeus's head. It will be far less disturbing to those whose Christianity has been rooted in an appreciation of both scripture and tradition. Although Ehrman's thesis was interesting, the problem is that you can take any of these phrases or words that are found in some New Testament manuscripts and not others and draw from that fact whatever implications you desire. The difference can mean something or next to nothing, and, to Ehrman, they seem to mean a bit too much. I often had the impression that he was making mountains out of molehills. Ehrman also often attributes complicated theological and social motives to scribes when much simpler motives would suffice.
Most of the changes and additions that were made were recognized as such and therefore were not incorporated into our modern Bibles. Even those very few additions or changes that were incorporated into our modern Bibles are inconsequential; it would not alter orthodox doctrine one iota if they were eliminated, because all of the doctrines they bolster find support elsewhere in uncontested passages of the New Testament. In fact, even in Ehrman's own argument, the orthodox ideas were formed and THEN verses were altered to support them; it therefore cannot be reasonably argued that these changes have in any way affected the formation of orthodox doctrine. It is not as if the creedal doctrines we have today are based on some misquoted text; the ideas came first, even before the textual changes; they were drawn from the scriptures as a whole, and not from any one single verse. What Ehrman does make a good case for (though this does not at all seem to be his goal) is the idea that the orthodox tradition is as valuable as scripture, which many denominations recognize explicitly and most recognize implicitly (by the fact that they accept the canon as a canon at all).
In the end, Ehrman is not saying anything new, anything that has not been said by textual critics for years and years and years. Somehow, though, he has managed to break through to a more general audience, and that takes talent. Unfortunately, however, that general audience may be ill informed about Christian history and theology and doctrine and its origins and may not be able to put the facts he reveals into context. I believe anyone who reads this should, for the sake of balance, also read Timothy Paul Jones's "Misquoting Truth."
(less)
flag34 likes · Like · 25 comments · see review
Alejandro
Feb 18, 2020Alejandro rated it really liked it
Shelves: reference-book, religion, book-about-books
Great reading about the foundation of Christian religion
THAT HOLY BOOK
The Bible, one of the most read book in the world, it's curious and quite ingenious how in the early beginning of Christian religion was selected and manipulated the several tons of scriptures that they were around and somebody needs to put them in some controlled order.
How the most "popular" scriptures were chosen to be the "official" ones, and how the Christian religion had to take over other popular celebrations to make its way to the people and becoming one of the most followed religious doctrines.
Also, how people often "quote" the Bible, when in many, MANY times, they are misquoting the Holy Book, but it's not anybody's fault in many cases, since even when a lot of the published stuff was put "in order", kings and scholars "changed" the canon, but not only from holy sources, but even from folk stories that comply with their wishes in how they wanted to conduct the collective mind.
Sometimes the reasons were well intended, sometimes don't, but at the end, it's the reader who decides how those scriptures helped to find spiritual help, mental guidance, or just a most needed relieve.
Amen.
(less)
flag30 likes · Like · 2 comments · see review
Kevin Shepherd
Feb 17, 2021Kevin Shepherd rated it really liked it
Shelves: reviewed, religion, own, history, non-fiction
There is a lot of information here to digest, mull over and sort through. Ehrman’s assertions are backed up by over 130 notations citing over 70 sources. This is no study for the faint of heart, and anyone who is dismissive after a mere perusal is asinine in their approach.
All preconceptions aside, ‘Misquoting Jesus’ is not an assault on the Bible. It is an intelligent, well composed refutation of the delusional concept of biblical inerrancy, and even though most of the scriptural inconsistencies (there are literally thousands!) are minor and inconsequential, many are not. Those who insist that the entire aggregate of errors, additions, deletions, and mistranslations are “trivial” either haven’t read the New Testament critically or just aren’t reading the same goddamn book as the rest of us. (less)
flag31 likes · Like · see review
Wendy
Jan 09, 2008Wendy rated it it was amazing
Recommends it for: those who like history, are curious about the Bible..whether skeptic or religious
As a biblical scholar, the author wanted to read the Bible in the languages in which it was first written and so studied them and went deeper into the texts. His decision to go deeper, to fully appreciate it, led him to find out as the old saying goes more than he bargained for. It led him to reevaluate his faith which had been based on a belief in the literal truth of what he had been taught it said and in the inerrancy of it as brought down thru the ages..as it was originally written.
What he discovered was that the Bible had been changed many times by those who were translating it, copying in, interpreting it, and even adding to it for a variety of reasons. He learned of all the various debates over the nature of Jesus and God and the schools of thought which were responded to by later copyists who "clarified" and reinforced their side of the debates by adding to the text.
He applied his expertise in analyzing the multilayered mysteries of alterations and has provided us a rich and fascinating glimpse into history including the context of various forms of Christian beliefs through the centuries, the purpose of some of the writers and the identification of multiple or single more ancient sources for some of the writing and its authorship and of controversies about the role and nature of Jesus which sparked such changes and forever changes the readers understanding of what the Bible can provide.
I thought perhaps one of the most interesting insights I gained is how rewriting, adding or editing was an accepted practice and not as so many today would imagine as sacrilidge and evil and not in keeping with the Biblical writings being "holy or sacred" texts.
The last person who consciously edited the new testament to strip it of what he thought was wrong, false, and irrelevant to its message was Thomas Jefferson who did so not as a surreptitious amender but who set off his version as standing on its own as an independent book, a slim volume known as The Jefferson Bible.
Not something that a current President or crop of candidates would DARE to admit to even thinking of doing in this time of evangelical religiousity .
Again, much is revealed about the temper of the times and how attitudes toward the Bible and its use has changed over time even within the last few hundred years thru books such as these. I heartily recommend it. (less)
flag25 likes · Like · 8 comments · see review
Shaun
Jul 20, 2014Shaun rated it really liked it
Shelves: non-fiction, read-in-2014
This was pretty good for what it was, a textual criticism of the Bible. Sure it's a little repetitive at times, but I think this is the result of the author trying to simplify and explain a complex topic to an ignorant (at least relatively ignorant) audience.
Bart Ehrman attended Moody Bible College and finished his Bachelors degree at Wheaton College. He then received his PhD and M.Div from Princeton Theological Seminary.
A born-again Christian, Ehrman's desire to understand the Bible led him to study ancient languages and develop the art and skill of textual criticism, a branch of text scholarship which concerns itself with the identification and removal of errors from text.
Through his studies he began to doubt that the Bible was indeed the inerrant word of God based on the fact that it suffered from centuries of editing problems. In his opinion, how can we trust that the Bible is God's word if the words have been (repeatedly) either intentionally or unintentionally changed.
Aside from the obvious indication that the Bible is not the absolute perfect word of God, or if it is, then surely the words of an incompetent one as the Bible was manipulated throughout history, I found this to be an interesting read.
I now better understand the origin of the Christian religion and it's refinement.
Reading this, I was reminded of discussions that we have in the US over our constitution and the "original" intent and our present interpretation. The fact that we've needed to amend our constitution speaks volume about the complications innate in trying to live by a document that was written in a different time and that's when we can verify and agree on the original wording.
Some things I learned:
Though this might seem obvious to others, the point that most if not all early Christians were unable to read had not been something I gave much thought to before. Even many of the early translators could not read and were merely reproducing symbols. This would seem to encourage errors of all kinds.
I had heard that the Bible was an incomplete canon representing various literary works at the time, but did not realize how many were excluded or how many of those included were collections of letters, some written by the original speaker and others written by others using that person's name.
I learned that at the time of Christ, there were three distinct groups of believers...those who believed he was merely a man, those that believed he was both man and "god" simultaneously, and those who believed he was a man inhabited by Christ's spirit. I also did not realize that a number of Christians believed that the God of the Old Testament was a different God from that of the New Testament. Thus the Christianity we know today was not born in its "pure" form but evolved over time. This seems like a no brainer, but until reading this book and despite being brought up a Christian, I had never explored this idea thoroughly.
I had no idea, nor did I think about, how many copies of the Bible were made using the most antiquated form of publication. I liked that Ehrman provided a number of examples of passages that were changed/added or taken away and the cultural context under which this was done. He also provided examples of the unintentional/editing errors that a process of dictation and hand copying texts that used no punctuation or spacing would tend to produce under even the best circumstances.
I also have a better understanding of the rift between Christianity and Judaism.
I definitely learned what textual criticism is and how it was/is (because we continue to fine new texts) used to try and recreate the original texts of the Bible as well as all the complications that make it difficult to actually do.
Interestingly, I read a review this morning that said most Christians already know all about these "problems" and they don't care, but I don't find that to be the case. I'm sure many Christians I know would find ways to rationalize the inconsistencies away, but the origin and possible errors in the Bible are not something that is openly discussed in most Churches and not something the masses are aware of.
I'm not sure whom I would recommend this to. Prior to reading this book, I did not view the Bible as the inerrant word of God (though I know many who do), but still I appreciated the history. I'm not sure how a believer would react to this. Yet whether a Christian or not, Christianity is a major player in the world we live in, and understanding it (good and bad) somehow seems worthwhile.
Ehrman is now an atheist. I would be interested in reading a book from a believer's perspective. It would be worthwhile, I think, to see how that person would deal with the issues Ehrman has brought up.
(less)
flag22 likes · Like · 7 comments · see review
Lena
Jul 26, 2007Lena rated it really liked it
Shelves: non-fiction, skepticism
Ehrman was just a teenager when he had a born-again experience that led him to devote his life to the study of Christianity. Hoping to help defend the Bible as the true word of God, he focused his studies on the origins of the Bible, only to discover that the history of a book whose words many faithful take as infallible truth is nowhere near as clear as most people would like to believe. It seems that God suffered the same fate as many great writers and had his words altered by numerous editors, from sloppy scribes to church leaders seeking to make the Bible support their particular interpretation the gospel. Ehrman details with convincing clarity how earlier versions of the Bible vary greatly on such teachings as the role of women in the church and even the divinity of Christ himself. Highly recommended for anyone affected by the idea that the Bible is the true and unaltered word of God.
(less)
flag18 likes · Like · 7 comments · see review
Nat
Apr 01, 2008Nat rated it it was amazing
A must for anyone who wants to know WHY the Bible isn't inerrant. A wonderful work by a biblical scholar who was motivated by his deep faith and only wanted to find the truth. One of the most interesting aspects is that the reader will come to understand how biblical scholars work and the methods they use to decide which text represents an older tradition than another text. Also, those new to the study of comparative religion will probably be amazed to learn (or refuse to believe) that some parts of the Bible were deliberately changed for political purposes, while others were changed due to mistakes, either of interpretation or of copy-error. In any case, a fascinating and well-written book. (less)
flag17 likes · Like · 3 comments · see review
Martin Pierce
Jun 16, 2012Martin Pierce rated it did not like it
There were minor variations in the New Testament manuscripts. This is old news.
Unfortunately, Ehrman, a former fundamentalist Christian, thinks it's such a big deal that it casts doubt on the veracity of the Christian faith. Practically nobody agrees, except for people like atheists who already have a bone to pick with Christians.
The truth is that no other ancient text is as well supported as the New Testament. Minor variations are to be expected. The ones we find the the NT manuscripts don't affect any significant doctrines. (less)
flag15 likes · Like · 6 comments · see review
==============
성경 왜곡의 역사 - 누가, 왜 성경을 왜곡했는가
바트 어만 (지은이),민경식 (옮긴이)청림출판2006-05-15원제 : Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why (2005년)
성경 왜곡의 역사
미리보기
정가
14,000원
판매가
12,600원 (10%, 1,400원 할인)
마일리지
700원(5%) + 멤버십(3~1%)
+ 5만원이상 구매시 2,000원
배송료
무료
Sales Point : 1,131
8.0 100자평(5)리뷰(19)
이 책 어때요?
카드/간편결제 할인무이자 할부소득공제 570원
절판 판권 소멸 등으로 더 이상 제작, 유통 계획이 없습니다.
절판
보관함 +
- 절판 확인일 : 2017-03-08
새상품 eBook 중고상품 (15)
판매알림 신청 출간알림 신청 16,900원
중고모두보기
중고로 팔기
기본정보
423쪽152*223mm (A5신)610gISBN : 9788935206490
주제 분류
신간알리미 신청
국내도서 > 종교/역학 > 기독교(개신교) > 성경의 이해
국내도서 > 인문학 > 교양 인문학
국내도서 > 종교/역학 > 종교일반 > 종교사
이벤트
알라딘 22주년, 모든 몰 동시 이벤트!
이 달의 문장 투표
이 달의 적립금 혜택
이 시간, 알라딘 굿즈 총집합!
책소개우리는 현재 사용하는 성서에 등장하는 바울이나 예수가 하는 말을 가감없이 그대로 읽고 있다고 생각하기 쉽다. 그러나 이 책이 밝히는 바에 의하면 이는 착각이다. 그건 역사상으로 성경이 전해져 내려오면서 왜곡된 부분이 있기 때문이라는 것. 표지에 등장하는 성경 필사 같은 과정에서 이러한 왜곡이 일어난다는 것이다.
성서 본문의 원형을 추적하는 '본문비평학(textual criticism)'을 전공한 지은이는 성서의 번역 필사, 인쇄 등 성서의 사본이 무수히 복제되는 과정에서 개입된 왜곡의 역사를 보여준다. 지금의 구약 39권 신약 27권의 성서가 구성되기까지의 과정을 시작으로, 오류와 오기는 물론, 고의적인 본문 첨가와 변경 등의 왜곡 사례를 깊은 신학적 지식을 바탕으로 소개하고 있다.
예컨대 그리스어로 된 초기 기독교 문서들은 소문자와 대문자를 구분하지 않았고, 단어와 단어 사이를 모두 붙여 쓰는 등 그 내용을 읽고 분석하기에 어려움이 있었다는 것. 그 가운데 책은 오기의 결과로 생겨난 다양한 이문(異文)들, 나아가 원래 성경에 없다가 후대에 삽입된 본문 등, 이제까지 접하지 못했던 성경과 관련한 놀라운 주장을 설득력 있게 제시한다.
티센도르프가 이집트의 성 캐더린 수도원에서 시내 사본을 발견한 이야기 같이 성서와 오류와 왜곡을 바로잡기 위한 본문비평학의 노력 역시 다루고 있다. 또한 영지주의·양자론과 기독교 사이의 논쟁, 유대인과 이도교와의 갈등 등 성서의 본문을 왜곡시키는 데 영향을 미친 교리적·사회적 요인 역시 소개한다.
목차
추천의 글
용어 해설
서론 - 잃어버린 원문을 찾아서
성서, 신앙과 행위의 지침서 / 글자 하나까지도 하나님의 영감으로 된 말씀 / 소수 엘리트만을 위한 성서 / 원문을 보존하지 않은 하나님 / 새로운 시각, 변화된 시각 / 신앙의 여정을 위하여
1장 성서의 기원
책의 종교로서의 유대교 / 책의 종교로서의 기독교 / 기독교 문서가 정경이 된 과정 / 기독교 문서의 독자들 / 낭독, 초기 기독교의 독서 방식
2장 초기 기독교의 필사자들
고대 사회에서의 필사 방식과 관행 / 기독교 문서 필사자들 / 필사 과정에서의 오류와 오기 / 고의적인 본문 첨가와 변경 / '원본문' 회복의 난제들 / 구체적인 실례 찾기 / 신약성서에 포함되지 않았던 본문 / 결론
3장 신약성서의 전승 과정: 편집, 사본, 이문에 대하여
기독교의 전문 필사자들 / 불가타, 라틴어 성서 / 처음 인쇄된 그리스어 신약성서 / 처음 발행된 그리스어 신약성서 / 존 밀의 그리스어 신약성서 / 본문비평장치가 야기한 논쟁 / 우리에게 남겨진 과제 / 사본에 나타나는 다양한 번개들 / 결론
4장 원문을 찾아 나선 사람들: 본문비평 방법론과 그 새로운 발견
리처드 사이먼 / 리처드 벤틀리 / 요햔 알브레히트 벵엘 / 요한 벳쉬타인 / 칼 락흐만 / 폰 티셴도르프 / 웨스트콧과 호트
5장 원독법 탐구의 중요성
본문비평 방법들 / 마가와 화가 난 예수 / 누가와 침착한 예수 / 히브리서와 버림 받은 예수 / 결론
6장 본문을 왜곡시킨 교리적 요인들
본문 전승의 교리적 배경 / 양자론과의 논쟁 / 가현설과의 논쟁 / 영지주의와의 논쟁 / 결론
7장 본문을 왜곡시킨 사회적 요인들
여인들의 교회에서의 역할 / 유대인과의 갈등 / 적대적 이교도들과의 논쟁
결론 - 성서의 변개는 현재진행형이다: 필사자, 저자 그리고 독자
필사, 1500년의 사슬 / 저자들의 본문 변개 / 본문 읽기의 요점
주
색인
접기
책속에서
때때로 필사자들은 성서 본문이 객관적인 사실과 다르다고 생각해 본문을 바꾸기도 했다. 마가복음의 시작 부분이 이 경우에 해당하는 것 같다. 저자는 '선지자 이사야의 글에 보라 내가 내 사자를 네 앞에 보내노니... 너희는 주의 길을 준비하라'(막 1:2-3)라는 말로 복음서를 시작한다. 문제는 인용문의 앞부분이 이사야서에 나오지 ... 더보기
추천글
제대로 된 신학교를 1년만 다니면 모두 아는, 그러나 교회에서는 아무도 가르쳐주지 않는, 성경 형성의 역사를 쉽게 설명.
- 김두식 (경북대학교 법학전문대학원 교수)
저자 및 역자소개
바트 어만 (Bart D. Ehrman) (지은이)
저자파일
신간알리미 신청
오늘날 가장 유명하고 논쟁적인 성서학자 중 하나로 그리스도교의 역사·문헌·전통에 대한 뛰어난 해설가다. 어만의 저작은 옹호자들과 비판자들 사이에서 계속 논쟁을 일으키고 있다. 노스캐롤라이나대학교 종교학과 교수로 《뉴욕타임스》가 선정한 베스트셀러 『성경 왜곡의 역사』, 『예수 왜곡의 역사』, 『예수는 어떻게 신이 되었나』, 『기독교는 어떻게 역사의 승자가 되었나』를 비롯해 30여 권의 책을 저술했다. CNN, NBC 및 역사채널(History Channel) 같은 텔레비전과 미 공영라디오(NPR) 프로그램에 출연해 복잡한 성서의 세계를 대중에게 명쾌하고 수월하게 풀어 주는 역할을 해 왔다. 또 《타임》, 《뉴욕타임스》, 《뉴요커》, 《워싱턴포스트》 등 매체에도 지속적으로 기고해 왔다. 누리집 http://www.bartdehrman.com에서 더 많은 정보를 얻을 수 있다. 접기
최근작 : <두렵고 황홀한 역사>,<기독교는 어떻게 역사의 승자가 되었나>,<고통, 인간의 문제인가 신의 문제인가> … 총 134종 (모두보기)
민경식 (옮긴이)
저자파일
신간알리미 신청
연세대학교 학부대학 조교수, 세계성서공회연합회(UBS) 아시아-태평양 지역 명예 번역자문, 연세대학교 신학과(B. A.), 연세대학교 대학원 신학과(Th. M), 독일 뮌스터 대학교(Dr. theol)
저서로는 『신약성서, 우리에게 오기까지』(서울: 대한기독교서회, 2008), 역서로는 『성서왜곡의 역사』(서울: 청림, 2006), 『중소형 교회 성공 리더십』(서울: 대한기독교서회, 2006), 『땅콩박사』(서울: 대한기독교서회, 2008), 『연세신학백주년기념 성경주석?마태복음』 등이 있다.
역서로는 『성경 왜곡의 역사』, 『젤롯』 등이 있다.
접기
최근작 : <참 스승>,<누가복음>,<신약성서, 우리에게 오기까지> … 총 13종 (모두보기)
Editor Blog[종교] 신은 어느 쪽이냐고 묻는 말들에 대하여, <저항과 반역의 기독교> l 2009-02-11
내가 좋아하는 단식은 이런 것이 아니겠느냐?불의한 결박을 풀어주고 멍에 줄을 끌러 주는 것,억압받는 이들을 자유롭게 내보내고모든 멍에를 부수어 버리는 것이다.-이사야 58,6...마르크스의 종교 비판은 계몽주의의 오래된 사상적 무게를 다시 획득하게 된다. 이는 천국 주위에 도사리고 있는 안개가 현혹의 이데올로기와 결합되어 있다는 인기의 유용성을 가리킨다. ...
출판사 소개
청림출판
도서 모두보기
신간알리미 신청
최근작 : <다시 브랜딩을 생각하다>,<오늘부터 뉴욕으로 퇴근합니다>,<포스트 코로나 일상의 미래>등 총 307종
대표분야 : 경제학/경제일반 3위 (브랜드 지수 294,988점), 리더십 4위 (브랜드 지수 81,057점), 트렌드/미래예측 5위 (브랜드 지수 97,701점)
북플 bookple
이 책의 마니아가 남긴 글
친구가 남긴 글
내가 남긴 글
친구가 남긴 글이 아직 없습니다.
마니아 읽고 싶어요 (2) 읽고 있어요 (1) 읽었어요 (28)
이 책 어때요?
구매자
분포
0% 10대 0.3%
4.2% 20대 7.5%
9.7% 30대 22.4%
7.8% 40대 29.8%
1.3% 50대 13.9%
0% 60대 3.1%
여성 남성
평점
분포
8.0
33.3%
41.7%
20.8%
0%
4.2%
100자평
등록
카테고리
스포일러 포함 글 작성 유의사항
구매자 (5)
전체 (5)
공감순
아마 한국주류기독교에게는 금서일듯. 그러나 성서에 대한 '사실'에 좀더 가까이간 책 구매
bookshelf 2009-08-13 공감 (8) 댓글 (0)
Thanks to
공감
순진하고 미련한 기독교인으로 남겠나? 부단히 노력하고 탐구하는 지식으로 남겠는가? 구매
랜던 2011-03-16 공감 (2) 댓글 (0)
Thanks to
공감
맹목적으로 성경 무오설을 믿는 기독교인들에게 꼭 일독을 권합니다. 구매
thsong71 2009-02-03 공감 (2) 댓글 (0)
Thanks to
공감
우리나라 그리스도교 신자들이 꼭 읽었으면 하는 책. 성직자들은 과연 이런 걸 알까 구매
이장님 2009-05-15 공감 (1) 댓글 (0)
Thanks to
공감
종교화된 교회에서 과연 얼마나 받아 들일지..... 구매
1000 2009-03-11 공감 (1) 댓글 (0)
Thanks to
공감
마이리뷰
구매자 (9)
전체 (19)
리뷰쓰기
공감순
진정한 성서 이해의 길잡이. 새창으로 보기
개봉에 발맞추어 다빈치 코드 한국 광고 전권책임자인 한기총이 고래고래 고함을 질러준 덕분에 첫 주인 지금 영화 다빈치 코드는 대성공을 거두었다. 어떻게 보아도 아는 사람들은 아주 잘 알고 있는 비정통적(원래는 이단이라고 해야겠지만, ‘비정통’을 뜻하는 이단의 원래 의미가 사라지고 ‘악’으로 바뀐 지금은 쓸 수 없는 말일 것이다) 이론에 추리물이라기보다는 종교 스릴러일 뿐인 작품 - 즉 영화화하기는 쉽지 않고, 실제로 영화도 ‘덜 된 셜록 홈즈에 덜떨어진 인디아나 존스’라고 혹평하고 싶은 작품임에도 ‘어리석은 신도들은 이런 픽션물을 진실이라고 받아들일 것이다’고 생각하셨는지 전심전력을 다해 반대광고해주신 분들 덕택에 그러한 인기를 끈 것이다. 다시 말하자면, 저 분들께서는 믿음을 가진 이들이 저런 것을 - 진실을 - 거짓을 판단하지도 못할 만큼 맹목적인 믿음을 강요하고 중세 이전 라틴어 성경만을 움켜쥐고 있던 썩어빠진 신성 장사꾼들처럼 우민화 정책을 시행해왔다는 뜻이겠지. 이 책 [성경 왜곡의 역사]는 성경에 얽힌 진실과 거짓, 덧씌워진 거짓과 덧씌워진 진실을 구분하기 위한 가장 확실한 안내서라고 할 수 있다. “다양한 해석에 들어 있는 특별한 관점과 의미를 일깨우는 책이자 성서의 교리적 편협성에서 해방되어 비로소 우리의 삶, 그 다양한 현실 속에서 진실의 문이 열리는 경험을 해주는 책”이라는 찬사는 결코 거짓이 아니다. 무엇이 거짓인 지 알아야 거짓을 피해갈 수 있고, 무엇이 진실인지 알아야 진실을 따를 것 어닌가. 이 책은 성서를 진정으로 이해할 수 있는 진정한 성서 이해의 길잡이이다.
- 접기
yuy04 2006-05-30 공감(25) 댓글(0)
Thanks to
공감
성경 왜곡의 역사에서 읽어낼 것. 새창으로 보기
이 책을 읽기에 앞서 시대 배경에 관한 두 가지 정도의 사전 지식이 필요하다. 하나는 초기 기독교사에서 대다수의 기독교인들이 책을 읽지 못했다는 것과, 또 다른 하나는 구텐베르크가 인쇄술을 발명하지 훨씬 전이었으므로 책을 여러 권 내기 위해서는 일일이 베껴야 했다는 것이다.
낭독자와 필사자가 필요한 시기였다는 얘기. 필사자와의 관계에서 낭독자는 만들어진 책을 읽어주는 역할 이상을 요구받지 않았을 것으로 추정할 수 있지만 필사자의 경우엔 조금 달랐다.
기독교가 급속히 확산되면서 성경에 대한 요구가 커졌던 건 당연한 일. 따라서 시장 수요를 충족하기 위해 필사자들은 쉴새없이 책을 베끼고 또 베껴야했다. 하지만 기하급수적으로 늘어나는 수요에 산술급수적으로 대응하는 구조로는 턱없이 부족했다. 수요와 공급의 불균형이 심화되자 전문적인 능력을 갖추지 못한 수많은 필사자들이 시장에 흘러 들어왔다. 당시로선 어쩔 수 없는 상황이었지만, 그것이 성경 왜곡의 빌미가 될 줄은 아무도 몰랐다.
원문을 옮겨 적다보면 아무래도 실수가 있게 마련이다. 그것은 필사 전문가조차 피해갈 수 없는 과제였다. 그런데 경험이 전무한 초기 기독교인들이 필사자로 나서면서부터 의도하지 않은 문제가 발생했다. 유사한 단어가 원문의 본래 단어를 대체하고 비슷한 구문은 동일한 구문인 줄 알고 아예 빼버렸던 것. 그러다 보니 원문과 사뭇 다른 사본들이 활개를 쳤다. 여기에 사본을 제대로 베끼지 못한 사본을 원문 삼아 필사한 또 다른 사본들이 유통되는 등 부정확한 사본이 확대 재생산되었다. 후대 사본 중에는 앞선 사본의 오류를 잡으려고 구문의 위치를 바꾼다든지, 잘못된 단어를 교정하는 등의 노력을 기울였지만 결과적으로 부정확한 필사를 부추기고 말았다.
오류가 반복되는 악순환의 연결고리를 끊어야 했다. 관심은 원문을 찾는 데로 모아졌다. 그리고 그것마저 여의치 않자 원독법 탐구라는 본문 비평의 방법을 모색하기에 이르렀다. 그것은 시대 상황을 고려한 내외적 판단 잣대를 가지고 성경에 나타난 단어 또는 구문 상 오류를 원문에 가깝도록 유추 해석하는 방식이다. 하지만 원문이 없는 상태에서는 이마저도 또 다른 해석상 오류를 남길 개연성이 얼마든지 있었다.
이 책을 읽다보면 오늘날 성경이란 이런 저런 오류가 집적된 불완전한 책이란 생각을 갖지 않을 수 없다. 그래서 과연 믿을 만한 책인지에 대해 의심하지 않을 수 없을 것이다. 그리고 그렇듯 불완전한 성경을 정경으로 믿고 있는 크리스천들을 한심하게 생각할 수 있을 것이다. 더군다나 존 밀이 3만 군데가 넘는 오류를 찾아냈다는 부분에 이르러선 성경의 가치를 송두리째 부정하지 않을 수 없는 결정적인 증거를 찾아냈다고 큰소리칠 수도 있을 것이다.
하지만 성경에 3만개 이상의 오류가 있다해서 그것에 비할 때 정확한 구문이 수천 또는 수십만 배에 달할 성경 전체적인 관점에서 볼 때, 그리고 그 오류가 대부분 구문과 단어에 해당하는 한 본래 성경이 맥락적으로 이야기하고자 하는 바를 간단히 부정할 수 있을 것이라고 믿는 것부터 단견이 아닐까? 그것은 특정상황을 일반화하려는 심리학적 오류에 다름 아니기 때문이다.
오류는 수정하라고 있는 것이지 그 오류가 속한 전체를 간단없이 부정하라고 있는 것이 아니다. 이 책의 가치 또한 ‘그러니까 성경은 없어져야 한다’는 데 있는 것이 아니라 성경을 원문에 가깝게 복원하려는 노력을 통해 성경이 이야기하고자 하는 바에 귀 기울일 수 있어야 한다는 대중적 관심을 불러일으킨 데 있다.
원문을 찾으려는 노력과 원독법을 동원해 성경을 해석하려는 시도 모두 성경을 보다 올바르게 이해하고자 하는 의도에서 비롯된 것이라는 점에 주목해야 한다. 그런 이유로 이 책을 이 땅의 크리스천에게 먼저 권한다. 아울러 기독교에 비판적인 이들에게도 일독을 권한다.
- 접기
이카루스 2006-08-27 공감(3) 댓글(0)
Thanks to
공감
하루빨리 구입해야 할 책 새창으로 보기 구매
나같은 경우, 영화를 고를 때 먼저 영화를 본 사람들의 영화평을 보고 결정하는 경우가 많다. 이때 영화를 고르는 나름대로의 나만의 취향이라면, 되도록이면 평이 극단적으로 상반되는 영화를 고른다는 것이다. 극단적인 호평이나 극단적인 악평만을 받는 영화는 될 수 있는 한 보지 않는다. 양 극단 모두 나에게는 취향에 맞지 않는다. 이렇게 해서 ‘건진’ 영화가 몇 편 된다.
내가 이 책을 고른 것도 바로 그러한 이유 때문이었다. 알라딘의 마이리뷰를 읽어 보니, 말 그대로 극단의 평이 서로 엇갈려 있었다. 어느 분의 경우 별점을 만점인 5개를 준 반면, 어느 분은 별점을 1개(차라리 ‘벌점’이라 할 만한) 주었다. 이보다 더 첨예한 극단을 어디서 만나랴?
결과적으로, 이 책은 말 그대로 건진 보물이었다.
이 책은 그동안 신약성서를 읽어 오면서 품어왔던 많은 의문들에 대해 희미하나마 해결의 실마리를 보여 주었다. 가령, 어느 복음서에는 나오는 장면이나 말씀들이 다른 복음서에서는 눈씻고 찾아볼 수 없는 등등의… 이러한 모순들은 어디에서 유래하는가? 한때 교회를 잠깐 다닐 때 전도사로부터 신약의 4복음서는 흔히 말하는 共觀의 관점에서 씌어진, 공관복음서라고 배웠던 기억이 난다. 그러나 이 책에 따르면 전혀 그렇지 않다. 전혀 공관적이 아니란 말이다. 각 복음서의 기자는 각자의 취향에 따라 다른 복음서를 참조하기도 하고, 특히 실체가 드러나 있지 않은 ‘Q문서’라는 것에 크게 의존했다는 것을 이 책은 철저한 고증을 통해 증명하고 있다. 또한 그것의 변천 과정도 각 사본들의 철저한 대조 및 합리적인 추론을 통해 되짚어내고 있다.
개인적으로 예전부터 가장 많은 관심이 갔던 요한복음(한 알의 밀알이 떨어져… 내가 제일 좋아하는 성구이다)의 경우는 이단인 그노시즘의 색채가 너무 강해 정경 채택 과정에서 많은 논란이 있었다고 들었다. 만약 이 과정에서 요한복음이 정경 채택에서 탈락되었다면 어떻게 되었을까? 그렇게 되었다면 우리는 요한복음을 1945년 나그함마디에서의 대사건과 같은 극적인 발굴을 통해서나 접할 수 있게 되지 않았을까? 물론 이같은 가정도 요한복음이 발견되지는 않았지만 어딘가에 감춰져 있다는 사실을 전제로 한다. 그 언젠가 빛을 보게 될 날을 기다리며…….
몇 년 전 출판된 ‘예수는 신화다’란 책이 기독교 관련단체의 압력으로 인해 절판되었다고 들었다. 평소 이같은 주제에 대해 많은 관심이 있었기에 다행히 절판 이전에 사서 읽어볼 수 있었다.
이같은 맥락에서라면, 이 책도 조만간 ‘예수는 신화다’와 같은 전철을 밟게 되지는 않을까 걱정된다. 보수적이고 근본주의적인 한국 개신교의 축자영감설과 성경무오설에 정면으로 배치되기 때문이다.
진실을 알기를 원하는 독자들이여, 절판의 칼날이 그 위에 떨어지기 전에 빨리 구입해 읽어 보시기를.
- 접기
pain69 2006-08-10 공감(3) 댓글(0)
Thanks to
공감
[도서] 성경 왜곡의 역사-누가, 왜 성경을 왜곡 했는가를 읽고 새창으로 보기
제목 : 성경 왜곡의 역사-누가, 왜 성경을 왜곡 했는가Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why, 2005
저자 : 바트 어만
역자 : 민경식
출판 : 청림출판
작성 : 2007.08.31.
“성서는 매우 인간적인 책이다.”
-본문 중에서-
이 기록은 화창한 주말의 날씨에 한적한 공원 등의 벤치에 앉아 독서를 즐기던 저에게 성경에 기록된 말씀이야말로 진리랍시고 형광펜까지 죽죽 그어진 부분을 펼쳐들고 열심히 설교를 해주셨던 모든 분들께 바쳐볼까 합니다.
책은 우선 이번 책에 대한 추천의 글로서 시작의 장을 열게 됩니다.
그렇게 신학교에서 신약학을 공부하면서 이번 책에 대한 집필의 주제를 품게 되었다던 저자의 어린 시절부터 현재에 이르기까지의 삶을 되돌아보는 것으로 이어지는 기록은[서론-잃어버린 원문을 찾아서], 로마제국과 유대교의 신화적 전통의 차이점을 기점으로 기독교의 모태가 된 ‘정경’이 만들어지게 된 배경이 소게됩니다[1장. 성서의 기원]. 그리고 ‘책의 종교’라 말하는 유대교와 기독교의 기록문서가 처음 어떻게 제작되었는지에 대해 필사자들의 이야기가 나오게 되는데요. 그 과정에서의 의도적이거나 의도하지 않은 변조에 대해 말하기 시작합니다[2장. 초기 기독교의 필사자들]. 계속해서 ‘신약성서’를 기준으로 각각의 언어로 번역되는 필사서에서 발견되는 서로 다른 내용에[3장. 신약성서의 전승과정], 복제에 복제를 거듭해 그 진실성이 불확실해진 성서의 원문을 추적해나가는 사람들과 그 나름대로의 방법 등의 소게가 나오게 되는데요[4. 원문을 찾아 나선 사람들], 그 방법에 대한 실증적인 예시가 좀 더 상세하게 전개되기 시작합니다[5장. 원독법 탐구의 중요성]. 거기에 감히 의도적이라 할 수 있을 변조에 대한 이야기[6장, 7장. 본문을 왜곡시킨 교리적, 사회적 요인들]와 함께 저자는 그 나름의 결론을 내리게 되는데……[결론. 성서의 변개는 현재진행형이다]
아아. 결론부터 적어보자면 재미가 반이고 지루함이 반이었습니다.
재미있었던 부분은 학과 관련으로 공부를 하며 만난 여러 책들과 최근 접하게 된 영화 ‘장미의 이름The Name Of The Rose, 1986’, 소설 ‘내 이름은 빨강MY NAME IS RED, 1998’까지 접하며 각각의 ‘진리의 서’들이 초기에 어떻게 제작되고 유포되었는지에 대해 많은 공부의 시간을 가져볼 수 있었다는 것이고, 지루했던 부분은 이 책에서 저자가 자신의 주장을 증명하기 위한 설명으로 성서의 내용을 논리적으로 비교 분석하며 설명한 부분이었는데요. 그래도 이번 책을 읽으면서는 ‘필사’라는 것을 아직 모르고 있었을 어린 시절에 우연히 접한 적 있던 다큐멘터리의 내용이 떠올라버려 그만 흥분해버렸습니다.
하지만 문제의 다큐멘터리라는 것이 너무 오래된 기억 속에 존재하던 것이었기에 증거랍시고 열심히 찾아보긴 했었지만 그 출처를 명확히 할 수 없게 되었다는 사실이 그저 아쉬울 뿐이었는데요. 대신 그 내용으로 성경이 만들어지는 과정에서 ‘정경’과 ‘외경’으로 나뉘게 된 사연을 말하고 있었다고 적어봅니다. 아무튼, 이번 책을 통해서는 그동안 ‘기록’이라는 것이 시간의 흐름 속에서 어떻게 변질되어가는 지에 대해 많은 사람들의 생각을 읽고 듣고 생각해왔던 저에게 있어서 위에서도 잠깐 언급한 ‘길거리의 복음 전파자’들의 억지 같던 논리에 대해 조금이라도 논리적인 답을 해줄 수 있게 되었다는 점에서 안도감을 느껴볼 수 있었습니다. 하지만 ‘논리’라는 것 자체가 진실 된 기록을 왜곡한다고까지 열변하시던 그분들의 모습이 뒤이어 떠오르니, 흐음. 글쎄요. 이 세상의 흐름은 그런 다양함으로서 존재한다고도 하니 그냥 그러려니 넘겨볼까 합니다.
기록. 그리고 그것을 복제해나가던 과정인 ‘필사’. 요즘에야 컴퓨터가 많이 보급되어있다고는 하지만 그래도 누구나 최소 한번쯤은 필사라는 행위를 경험해보셨을 것이라 감히 생각해보는데요. 아직 젊은 나이인 저일지라도 최근처럼 고성능의 컴퓨터가 보급되었던 시절이 아닌 디스켓으로 컴퓨터를 부팅 하고 하드디스크라는 것이 존재하지 않았던 컴퓨터의 학창시절을 지냈었기에 숙제나 벌칙 등으로 인해 손으로 하얀 지면 한 장 이상에 빡빡하게 글씨를 적는, 일명 ‘빡지’라는 것을 해보았던 기억이 있습니다. 그리고 그 내용이라는 것이 인쇄된 원문의 내용을 똑같이 손으로 베껴 쓰는-복사를 하는 것이었기에 그것을 ‘필사’의 경험이 있다 말할 수 있다는 것인데요. 가장 최근 기억으로도 자필로 작성한 리포트를 제출하라하시기에 출력한 리포트를 다시 손으로 열심히 베껴 쓴 기억이 있습니다. 또한 지우개나 수정액이 때마침 보이지 않아 그 수많은 글씨 사이에 ‘오타’를 그냥 남겨 버리거나 문장과 문장 사이에 비슷한 음절이 있었기에 자기도 모르게 중간의 한 뭉텅이를 날려버린다거나, 다른 사람의 리포트에 대해 그것이 마치 자신의 생각인양 교묘하게 재구성해본 추억들이 이번에 읽은 책에 묘사되는 필사자들의 모습과 비슷하게 느껴졌다는 것은 비단 저만의 착각이 아니기를 바랄 뿐입니다. 그런데 제가 인지하며 살아가고 있는 이 세상에서 가장 막강한 힘을 과시하는 종교의 성서인 ‘성경’에도 이런 문제가 있었다는 것을 누군들 상상이나 해보셨을까나요?
그래서 이번에는 살아가는 이 세상에 대해 과연 우리가 얼마만큼의 영역을 ‘인지’ 하고 있는가에 대해 생각해 보았습니다.
일반적인 감각이라는 오감-시각, 청각, 촉각, 미각, 후각-을 중심으로 우리는 시시각각 과거가 되어버리는 현재를 인식하고 있습니다. 그리고 그 인지영역을 벗어나라버리게 되면 ‘신비한 TV 서프라이즈 70화(2003년 8월 17일자로 방영)’에 나오는 도나 히그비 박사의 ‘무의식에 의한 불가시 현상’에다가 소설 ‘은하수를 여행하는 히치하이커를 위한 안내서The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy’에서 개인적으로 좋아하는 말인 ‘다른 사람의 문제’까지 같이 말할 수 있을 상황이 되고 만다는 점에서, 그리고 가까운 예로 ‘내가 할줄 알면 다른 사람은 당연 할줄 알아야 한다’는 심리를 예로 들 수 있기에, 아마 현대를 살아가는 사람들은 고대의 문헌 기록자들에 대해 얼마만큼 알고 있는가에 대해 묻고 있는 저자의 모습에 나름대로 이해의 시간을 가져볼 수 있었는데요. 현재보다 확연히 높은 문맹률을 자랑하던 고대에 농업과 수산업 등에 종사하던 분들이자 예수의 제자가 되는 이들에 대해서 우리는 무엇이 진실 된 ‘기원’인지, 거기에 한점 의심 없는 순수한 믿음으로서 모든 것을 자신 있게 장담할 수 있는가를 고민해보게 되었습니다.
그렇다고 여기서 종교적인 문제를 거론하고자 한 것이 아니니 다시금 책에 대한 이야기를 해봐야 할 것인데요. 이 책에서는 하나님의 말씀과 예수님의 이야기를 기록했다는 이 기록물들이 무형의 ‘말씀’들을 ‘활자’로서 기록했다는 점에서 그 형태가 변경되었으며, 그것이 전파되고자하는 나라의 언어로 ‘번역’되었으며, 또 그 과정에서 이 이런저런 다양한 이유로 인해 의도적이었든 비의도적이었든 ‘변질’되었다는 것을 말하고 있다는 점에서 ‘종교’를 빼버린다면, 우리가 접하고 있는 거의 모든 저작물들에서도 위와 같은 이야기를 말 할 수 있음을 발견하실 수 있게 될 것입니다.
가까운 예로. 황순원 등의 한국현대소설의 여러 출판물들을 펼쳐보면 <일러두기>부분을 통해 ‘표기는 원문의 효과를 고려하여 발표당시의 표기를 중시했으나, 방언은 살리되 의미전달을 위해 되도록 현대 표기법을 따랐다. 띄어쓰기는 개정된 한글 맞춤법에 따랐다’ 등으로 안내가 되어있음을 확인해 볼 수 있는데요. 한때 한국현대소설을 전자문서로 보관해본답시고 워드작업을 해본 적이 있던 저로서는 각 출판사별로 미묘한 차이를 가진 것도 있으며 한번씩은 문장이나 문단 단위로 잘려 나가있는 것도 만나보곤 했습니다. 그리고 컴퓨터를 통해 직접 손으로 종이에 글씨를 쓰는 것이 아니라는 것뿐이지 타자기마냥 키보드를 두들기며 전자지면에 글씨를 일일이 적는 행위는 필사가 형태만 바뀌었을 뿐이라 할 수 있기에 오늘날의 책 또한 시간의 흐름 속에서 계속되는 ‘변화’를 경험중이라는 것에 쉽게 부정을 하지 못하실 것입니다.
거기에 외국 번역본 중 각 언어영역에 따른 방언과 같은 미묘한 언어 사용법의 차이로 인해 번역시에 그 의미를 효과적으로 전달하기위한 변형이 가해지기도 하며, 같은 책일지라도 번역가에 따라 작품이 변해버리고 만다는 사실은 현재 수집중인 ‘스티븐 킹’이라는 소설가의 작품에서 다채로운 번역본을 통해 확인해볼 수 있었습니다.
시대에 따라. 사람에 따라. 그리고 이념에 따라 같은 이름으로 미묘한 변화를 거듭해나가는 책-기록물. 이번 책의 저자분은 ‘성경’에 대한 이야기를 바탕으로 위에 적어둔 말을 했다지만, 저는 그것을 “책은 매우 인간적인 기록이다.”라고 고쳐보고 싶습니다. 왜냐하면 이 책 또한 기록물에 대한 새로운 해석을 동반해-어쩌면 기원을 찾아가는 방향을 제시했을 수도 있지만-원문이라는 진실이 사실상 사라졌다고도 할 수 있을 현재에서 또 하나의 ‘이론’으로서 또 다른 미래로의 길을 열게 되었을지도 모를 일이기 때문입니다.
그럼 ‘책-기록’에 대해 제가 가장 좋아하는 말을 마지막으로 이번 기록을 마치고자합니다.
“역사는 힘 있는 자의 기록이다. 하지만 진실은 언젠가 드러나기 마련이다.”
TEXT No. 493
[아.자모네] A.ZaMoNe's 무한오타 with 얼음의신
- 접기
무한오타 2007-09-04 공감(2) 댓글(0)
Thanks to
공감
책의 종교가 갖는 함정 새창으로 보기 구매
일반적으로 유대교와 그리스도교를 책의 종교라고 하는 것 같다. 실제로 이슬람 전성기에 이슬람은 자신들의 세력권 안에있는 그리스도교에 대하여 관대한 입장을 취하였는데(이베리아 반도에서의 일부기간은 예외지만) 그 이유중 하나가 그들이 책의 종교였기 때문이라는 주장을 얼마전에 본 책에서 보았다.
유대인들에게는 히브리성경(구약)이라는 책이 있고 그리스도교도들에게는 성경(신약-구약도 포함하겠지만)이 있으며, 무슬림들에게는 꾸란(대개 영어로 코란이라고 하지요)이라는 책이 있다, 이들 각각의 책들은 그 해당 종교에게는 절대적인 의미가 있고 그 책들의 내용 해석에는 엄청나게 다양한 견해가 있을 수 있다고 생각해 왔다. 그런데 이 책 성경 왜곡의 역사는 보다 충격적이다. 우리가 신약이라고 하는 책, 바로 그리스도교의 정경이랄 수 있는 이 책이 최초의 저자들이 쓴 것과 다르게 변개되었다는 사실과, 그 대표적인 내용, 그리고 보다 원본에 가까운 사본을 찾아가는 방법 등에 대해 말하고 있다.
사실 나는 그리스도교도가 아니라서 성경에 별 관심이 없었다. 그런데 대한민국 사회에서 살아가다보니 어쩔 수 없이 그들과 간접적으로 라도 얽힐 수 밖에 없고, 그동안 보아 온 소위 '한국 기독교'의 모습은 실망스러운 경우가 많았다. 하여, 이번에 이 책을 읽어보게 되었는데 읽기를 잘한 것 같다. 내용이 괜찮다는 얘기다. 더구나 그리스도교 성직자이자 연구자인 사람이 저술한 것이기에 성경에 대한 음해니 뭐니 하는 시비의 소지도 없을 것 같다.
우리는 대부분 종교를 선택하는 인생을 살아간다. 종교를 갖지 않는 선택을 하거나 태어나기도 전에 특정 종교에 속해 버리는 경우도 있지만, 요는 우리들 중 대부분은 종교의 창시자가 아니라는 것이다. 그런데 우리는 마트에서 수박 한통을 사면서도 이리저리 살펴보고 두드려 보고 심지어 옆사람에게 물어보기까지 하면서 종교를 선택함에 있어서는 별로 신중한 것 같지 않다. 소위 모태신앙을 가지는 사람의 항변도 예상 되지만 그것도 핑게에 불과한 것이다. 성인이 되어 정신세계가 여물 나이가 된 후에 자신의 의지로 얼마든이 다른 종교를 선택할 수도 있는 것인데, 어쩌면 확신도 없으면서 자기방어에 급급한 것은 아닌가?
요즘 종교관련 서적을 좀 살펴보고 있다. 그렇다고 지금까지 종교 없이 잘만 살아오다가 갑자기 종교에 의지하고 싶어서가 아니다. 우리 사회에서 쉽게 접할 수 있는 종교에 대하여 알아볼 필요를 느꼈기 때문이라고 해 두자. 알아야 선택을 하든가 싸우든가 할 것이 아닌가?
하지만, 지금까지 책을 일고 이리저리 생각해 보면 아무 종교도 선택할 것 같지는 않다. 사실 불교가 아주 살짝 끌리기는 하는데 내 의식의 성장을 위한 방편 또는 도구 이상의 의미를 갖지는 못할 것 같기도 하다.
아무튼 이 책을 선택하고 차근차근 읽어보다 보면 마지막에 저자가 한 말이 공감이 가기는 한다. '처음에는 성경 변개에 대하여 화가 났으나 거듭되는 연구를 하다보니 화가 누그러 지더라'는 말이...
중요한 것은, 대한민국에는 아직도 '성경무오설', '축자영감설'을 무슨 전가의 보도인양 끌어안고 있는 사람이 적지않다는 점이다.
- 접기
이장님 2009-05-15 공감(2) 댓글(0)
Thanks to
공감
