Terry: Bart Ehrman is a sincere scholar. I have read some portions of his books and I think he is right in many issues, though we can't know exactly many details of the first century. But I agree with him that the Gospels were written not to teach accurate history, but the authors had a theological agenda for their christian comunities. I have taken notes for the Gospels, but I am firstly writing about the Old Testament, in which we have even more unhistorical accounts.
English is not my native language, so I am writing these topics in Spanish. In Spanish there are a few web pages exposing the Bible contradictions. This is why I think I have to do my contribution by compiling good arguments. I was reading this forum, and I found very interesting researchings, like those of Leolaia, AlanF, etc.
I have to clarify that I am not an atheist, but I am not worried about defending the Bible as witnesses and evangelicals do. I just want to expose contradictions, and facing the contradictions without blindness can help us to be free and think by themselves.
For many years I believed that the Watchtower was the Channel of God because I thought this organization had the true interpretation of Daniel prophecies. I lost my friends and many things for following these stupid guys of the governing body. However , now I understand that we don't need to read Carl Olof to see that 1914 is wrong. We have an easier way by understanding that Daniel is a forgery that was produced to give confort to the Jews who were facing the Antiocus' persecution.