Bart D. Ehrman and James D. Tabor: How the Bible was changed

The Bible stands as one of the most influential literary, religious, and cultural bodies of work in human history. Yet for modern readers, the question of how this collection of writings reached its present form is often obscured by centuries of tradition, translation, and theological interpretation. Two prominent scholars—Bart D. Ehrman and James D. Tabor—have played major roles in bringing these historical processes to public awareness. While they differ in their methods and emphases, both argue that the Bible as we know it did not drop from heaven fully formed. Instead, it evolved through a complex interplay of editing, translation, theological dispute, and historical circumstance. Their research opens a window into how both the Old and New Testaments were shaped, re-shaped, and preserved over time.

Bart D. Ehrman: The Textual Critic’s Perspective

Bart D. Ehrman, a professor of New Testament studies, approaches the question of biblical change from the angle of textual criticism—the scholarly discipline that compares surviving manuscripts to reconstruct earlier forms of texts. For Ehrman, the most striking fact about the New Testament is that we possess no original manuscripts. Instead, we have thousands of handwritten copies produced over centuries, many of which contain significant variations.

In his landmark works such as Misquoting Jesus and The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, Ehrman demonstrates that scribes—both intentionally and unintentionally—altered the texts they copied. Some changes were simple mistakes: misspellings, skipped lines, accidental repetitions. Other changes, however, reflected theological concerns. Early Christian communities were not monolithic; they held competing beliefs about the nature of Christ, the role of Jewish law, or the meaning of salvation. Scribes, influenced by their own beliefs or by doctrinal pressures, sometimes modified passages to support what later became “orthodox” Christianity.

For example, Ehrman highlights differences in how manuscripts describe Jesus’ divinity. Some scribes strengthened statements about Jesus’ divine status, likely in response to early Christian groups—such as adoptionists—who believed Jesus was human and later exalted by God. Other changes appear to harmonize contradictory accounts across different Gospels, smoothing rough edges in the narratives to create a more uniform theological picture.

Ehrman also emphasizes the role of translation. Every translation is an act of interpretation, and choices made by translators inevitably shape how modern readers understand ancient ideas. The shift from Hebrew and Greek into Latin, and later into vernacular languages, introduced new layers of meaning—sometimes clarifying the text, sometimes obscuring it.

For Ehrman, the Bible’s evolution is not a threat to faith but an invitation to engage honestly with history. By understanding how the texts were copied and preserved, readers gain deeper insight into the communities that treasured them.

James D. Tabor: The Historian’s and Archaeologist’s Perspective

James D. Tabor, a historian of ancient Judaism and early Christianity, approaches biblical change from a historical and archaeological angle. While Ehrman focuses largely on manuscripts, Tabor examines the broader historical processes that shaped both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament. His work, including The Jesus Dynasty and Paul and Jesus, argues that the earliest followers of Jesus held beliefs quite different from the Christian doctrines later established by the Church.

Where Ehrman emphasizes textual changes, Tabor emphasizes ideological and historical ones. His central claim is that the earliest Jesus movement was a Jewish, apocalyptic, and Torah-observant community led initially by Jesus and then by his brother James. According to Tabor, this movement was gradually overshadowed by the theology of Paul, whose interpretation of Jesus as a divine, cosmic savior went beyond what Jesus or his earliest followers taught. The conflict between the Jerusalem-based movement and Paul’s Gentile mission forms a crucial part of the story of how Christian scripture developed.

From Tabor’s perspective, the Bible was “changed” not only through copying but through the triumph of certain theological voices. Canon formation—the process by which certain books were included in the Bible and others excluded—reflects this struggle. Writings revered by early Jewish followers of Jesus, such as the Gospel of the Hebrews or the Odes of Solomon, did not survive in the canon, while texts aligned with emerging orthodox theology became dominant.

Tabor also draws heavily on archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls to illuminate the Jewish world in which the Bible arose. The Scrolls reveal a diverse landscape of beliefs within Second Temple Judaism—apocalyptic expectations, messianic hopes, and different interpretations of law and purity. These ideas shaped early Christian writings, yet later theological developments often obscured or reinterpreted this Jewish foundation. Tabor argues that recovering this context is essential to understanding how early ideas about Jesus, resurrection, and divine intervention evolved.

Points of Convergence

Despite their differing approaches, Ehrman and Tabor share several key conclusions:

1. The Bible is the product of history, not a static document.
   Both scholars emphasize that the Bible was shaped through centuries of human effort and conflict.

2. Early Christianity was diverse.
   Competing movements—Jewish-Christian, Pauline, Gnostic, apocalyptic—interpreted Jesus in different ways, and texts reflect these disagreements.

3. Later orthodoxy reshaped the past.
   As the Church consolidated power, it preserved certain writings, suppressed others, and sometimes altered existing texts to align with emerging doctrine.

4. Understanding the Bible requires returning to its historical context.
   For Ehrman, this means studying manuscripts; for Tabor, it means reconstructing the world of ancient Judaism.

Points of Difference

While Ehrman and Tabor intersect at many points, they differ in emphasis:

• Ehrman focuses on textual transmission, showing how scribes altered New Testament manuscripts and how translations further shaped meaning.

• Tabor focuses on historical development, arguing that early Jewish forms of Christianity were reshaped—sometimes dramatically—by later theological movements, particularly Pauline Christianity.

Why Their Work Matters

Together, Ehrman and Tabor have helped popularize the academic study of Christian origins. Their work underscores that wrestling with the Bible’s history does not diminish its significance. Instead, it deepens appreciation for the complex human story behind its formation. The Bible became what it is through centuries of debate, devotion, and reinterpretation—a testament to the enduring power of its ideas and the communities that preserved them.

By illuminating how the Bible was changed, Ehrman and Tabor invite readers—not to discard the text—but to understand it more fully, historically, and honestly.