The Dead Sea Scrolls prove the corruption of the Bible because The Dead Sea Scrolls prove that there are many differences between the Masoretic Hebrew text and the text of the Septuagint and this is corruption.
There are 1200 years between Moses and the Dead Sea Scrolls, and this is a long period sufficient theoretically and practically to change the entire text, and between Isaiah and the Dead Sea Scrolls, 600 years. So for someone to claim that The Dead Sea Scrolls prove the authenticity of the Bible is kind of deceiving because there is huge gap between the Original text and the Dead Sea Scrolls.
We read in the book of the Qumran monks Hermits and their manuscripts. A book from the Coptic Church in Egypt, authored by a monk from the desert wilderness Shehit (Father Raphael El-Baramousy), he said:
These manuscripts did not solve any of the problems in the Bible, such as first, most of the books of the Bible are written by unknown authors and during unknown Dates, and the problem of texts that insult God and some sexual texts. Did the Dead Sea Scrolls manuscripts solve any of these problems? It didn’t happen.  Second, the books of the Bible in The Dead Sea Scrolls different from the books of the current Bible. To clarify this The number of The Dead Sea Scrolls is 1,000 manuscripts, of which only 200 manuscripts are considered sacred books that today scholars call them Biblical manuscripts, and the remaining 800 manuscripts include interpretations such as the interpretation of the Book of Habakkuk and Nahum or books of special Laws of Jews who lived there, such as the Book of the Community Rule, and the rest are non-holy Today, non-canonical books such as the Apocrypha books that the church does not consider sacred today and are not recognized today, such as the Book of Jubilees, the Book of Enoch, the Commandments of the Twelve Patriarchs, and the Apocryphal Book of Genesis. There is also a manuscript that tells the story of creation in a way different from the way of creation found in the Book of Genesis. We do not find any manuscript about the Book of Esther in the manuscripts, nor do we find the feast of Purim taken from it. From the Book of Esther and thirdly, the texts of the Dead Sea Scrolls do not match the texts of the current Bible. There are Books which are not considered Holy today that exist in the Dead Sea Scrolls. So, there are differences between the Holy Books we have Today in the Bible and The Dead Sea Scrolls. The Dead Sea Scrolls are divided into four types in terms of text. The first type, some of which are identical to the Hebrew Masoretic text adopted by the Jews, the second is similar to the Greek Septuagint translation, which is older than the manuscripts of the Masoretic text and it was the Holy Bible of the Church for a long time., the third type is similar to the Samaritan Torah, and the fourth type is a text that different from the texts of the three types.
The subject of the compatibility of the Dead Sea Scrolls manuscripts with the current Bible is a lie promoted by some priests in order to deceive Christians and make them adhere to Christianity. Unfortunately, many Christians believe them without verifying the truth of what they say. To make the matter clearer, I will give two examples in which the Dead Sea Scrolls manuscripts differ from the currently accepted Hebrew text. This is evidence that the Dead Sea Scrolls manuscripts prove that the Bible has been corrupted.

JazakaLlahu khair Bro Paul. Good to see Dr Bart Ehrman here

Always interesting to listen to experts.

Alhamdulilah for Islam the only truth

Bart Ehrman is a brilliant scholar of biblical criticism.

Collaboration of the century! Amazing video as always indeed!

My favorite bible professor

What a duo to watch.  Mashallah!!

You should get Ross Nichols to talk about the Moses scrolls/ Shapira scrolls

I remember watching a video many years ago, of Hamza Yusuf talking about the Dead Sea Scrolls, and how Israel and the Vatican agreed to not release them in full, and wouldn't release them (even to scholars) until the year 2050.
Hamza Yusuf said they weren't releasing them because the scrolls prove that there's only one (legitimate) religion Allah (SW) accepts, and that's of course Islam, which also proved that Jesus was a Muslim, and debunking Christianity.,

Merci beaucoup, très intéressant

can it be they hide some or many of the dead sea scroll? they only published the safest one ?

This man was a phenomenon in his prime...

Can you please illustrate this on a timeline graph

You must get him back on. I can't understand why he's not muslim....his scholarship tells him one thing about Christianity after putting emotion aside.....but when it comes to Islam he lets emotion get in the way of his scholarly method

QUUR'AN Ch 6 V92: .....'Say: Who revealed the Book which Moses brought, a light and  a guidance to men, YOU MAKE IT INTO ( SCATTERED) PAPERS WHICH YOU SHOW AND WHICH YOU HIDE?

Fact not Fiction ☪️ 🕋 🕌 ☪️  Islam
Is the only religion on earth 🌍 from the beginning of time to the end of time Judgment day 🏴‍☠️ 🔥 Anything else is a man made religion It's your responsibility and choice to decide Good luck guys 👍🏻

Paul, what do you take out of this conversation? This is a bit of a high level talk and I wonder what you think of it. What are your conclusion?

Did I miss the introduction??

a few more interesting questions for our inquiring scholars:  7. Sharia’s cruelty and the claim that every person has value
If truth includes the equal worth of persons, how can a law that grades people and maims
them be that truth?
Classical Sharia is not a vague ethic of mercy. It is a penal and status code. The texts fix both the
punishments and the inequalities:
• Amputation of the hand for theft (Quran 5:38).
• Flogging for sexual immorality (Quran 24:2); stoning for married adulterers in the sahih
hadith. Umar is reported to have said the stoning verse had been in the Quran and was lost.
• Crucifixion, cross-amputation, or exile for hirabah, “spreading corruption in the land” (Quran
5:33).
• A husband’s right to strike a wife he fears will rebel (Quran 4:34). Classical tafsir did not read
this as a metaphor.
• A woman’s testimony counted as half a man’s in financial contracts (Quran 2:282). A
daughter’s inheritance is half a son’s (Quran 4:11).
• Jews and Christians may live as dhimmis only if they pay jizya “until they pay the tax and are
humbled” (Quran 9:29). Classical fiqh set a non-Muslim’s blood money below a Muslim’s,
and a woman’s below a man’s.
A system can be called contextually harsh. It cannot, without contradiction, be called the final
expression of a truth in which every person has the same value. Equal value means a thief is still a
person whose body is not raw material for a deterrent, a woman is not half a witness, and an
unbeliever is not a revenue source who must be made to feel subdued. The usual reply is that God
owns human beings and may assign ranks and penalties. That reply saves the text by abandoning
the premise. If God’s law grades worth by sex and creed and authorizes maiming, then either equal
human value is false, or this law is not the truth about human value.
8. Retold stories that look heard, not revealed
Why does a book that claims to correct the Bible contain the kinds of mix-ups oral
transmission produces?
Several Quranic retellings were already a problem for Christian hearers in the first centuries of
contact.
Ten questions from Islam’s own sources
Page 4
Mary is addressed as “sister of Aaron” (Quran 19:28). Najran’s Christians asked about this, and
Sahih Muslim 2135 records Muhammad’s reply: people were named after earlier prophets, so it is an
honorific, not a statement that she was Miriam. That reply is early. It also concedes the wording was
strange enough to need one. The plain reading still places Mary in Aaron’s family, which is where a
listener who had blurred Miriam and Mary would put her.
Haman, in the Bible the minister of the Persian king in Esther, appears six times as a builder and
courtier of Pharaoh in Moses’ Egypt (Quran 28:6, 28:8, 28:38, 29:39, 40:24, 40:36). Muslim
apologetics sometimes cite an Egyptian name that sounds similar. The narrative role is the biblical
Haman’s, moved a thousand years and a country west.
The golden-calf episode blames “the Samaritan” (Quran 20:85–97). Samaritans as a people
postdate Moses by centuries. Dhul-Qarnayn in Quran 18:83–98 follows the route, the wall against
Gog and Magog, and the horns of the late-antique Alexander Romance, not a known historical king
independent of that legend.
One or two of these can be argued. Together they are the signature of a preacher who knew the
stories as they circulated on the caravan roads, not of an author reading the earlier books in heaven.
9. A lawgiver exempt from his own law
Why does the final moral law bind everyone except the man who delivered it?
Other Muslim men are capped at four wives (Quran 4:3). Muhammad is given an open list: the wives
already married, captives of war, cousins who emigrated with him, and any believing woman who
offers herself, “a privilege for you only, not for the other believers” (Quran 33:50). Traditional counts
put his wives at eleven to thirteen.
Quran 33:37 presents his marriage to Zaynab bint Jahsh, the divorced wife of his adopted son Zayd,
as something God arranged so that adopted sons’ ex-wives would be lawful. The political and sexual
problem is solved by a revelation that arrives for his case. He also receives a fifth of war booty by
name (Quran 8:41).
A moral law that suspends itself for its messenger is the pattern of a ruler writing exceptions, not of a
standard imposed from outside the ruler. The theological reply is that a prophet may receive a
private ruling. That reply makes the ruling unverifiable: any convenience can be renamed a privilege.
10. The Quran we have is a caliph’s edition
If the text was perfectly preserved from the moment of revelation, why did a caliph have to
burn the other copies?
Sahih al-Bukhari 4987 is explicit. About twenty years after Muhammad’s death, Hudhayfa warned
Uthman that armies from Syria and Iraq were reciting the Quran differently and would split the way
Jews and Christians had. Uthman had Zayd ibn Thabit and three Quraysh men produce a standard
text, in the Quraysh dialect where they disagreed. He sent that copy to the provinces “and ordered
that all the other Quranic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be
burnt.”
Ten questions from Islam’s own sources
Page 5
Companion codices differed. Ibn Masud’s is the best known: he omitted the first and last two surahs
and arranged the rest differently; Ubayy ibn Ka‘b’s included material others lacked. Shia tradition
adds that Ali had a codex of his own. The Muslim reply is that Uthman saved the community from
dialect drift and that the burnt copies were incomplete personal notes. Bukhari does not say that. It
says the recitations already differed enough to frighten a commander, and that the solution was
political destruction of every rival manuscript.
A text standardized by a caliph, in one tribal dialect, after the variants were burned, can still be old. It
cannot be the claim usually made