Dr. Bart Ehrman Sums it all up BIBLE NOT RELIABLE

[Jaysyn]

thinking evangelical's

A new oxymoron to add to my collection.

[Minimalist]

This model was particularly promoted by Walter Bauer, but investigation shows that on a number of counts ‘orthodoxy’ was closer to what was believed in the earliest stages of Christianity than the beliefs of other groups.

As a matter of fact, in an earlier work, Lost Christianities (2003) Ehrman gives a compelling account of early gnostic christians and shows how they were systematically exterminated by the later "orthodox" xtians. We know that the church went back and re-wrote history to suit themselves. That does not make it true.
The work is far too long to summarize here as there were far too many gnostic groups. If you'd like to read it I have an electronic version. PM an email address, remza, and I'll send it to you.

Ehrman constructs conflicts behind variant readings and then posits this conflict as a historical absolute by which he judges which readings are original.

This is, essentially, what "textual criticism" does. If you don't like the science because it doesn't end up telling you what you want to hear that is your problem, not Ehrman's. As he notes in the book, he is not the first to come up with these issues. People have known for centuries that the so-called inerrant bible is filled with screw-ups.

Ehrman is inconsistent in his use of criteria by which to judge an earlier reading.

Sorry. This amounts to whining without specific examples.

However, the ensemble of readings that he proposes as earlier has not been recognised by textual critics to be plausible as a whole.

Huh? The whole point of the book is that these errors ( some minor - others major and definitely political!) have been known for centuries. The basic facts that these so-called gospels were written anonymously at least 40 years after the fact is understood by all but the blindest of fundies.

If that's a "thinking evangelical" I'll pass. He's nothing more than an apologist.