Category Archives: Historical Reliability of the Bible

Arguments suporting the Bible’s reliability as a collection of historical documents, with a particular emphasis on the New Testament

04.22.15
by

Ben Witherington Critiques Bart Ehrman’s Book, Misquoting Jesus

Misquoting_JesusThis is the last in our series of posts sharing Ben Witherington’s critiques of Bart Ehrman’s work.  Today, we share a critique of Misquoting Jesus:  The Story of Who Changed the Bible and Why.

I have to ask the question:  Does Bart Ehrman have any original thoughts?  This book, like his others, contains many criticisms that are old, as well as busted.  Misquoting Jesus asserts that belief in the divinity of Christ, as well as many other core tenets of Christianity, are basically the result of scribes altering the original texts over the centuries, either intentionally or unintentionally. Continue reading →

04.15.15
by

Ben Witherington Critiques Bart Ehrman’s Book, Jesus Interrupted

Ben-Witherington

Dr. Ben Witherington

Below is the description from Amazon.com of Bart Ehrman’s book, Jesus, Interrupted:  Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (And Why We Don’t Know About Them):

The problems with the Bible that New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman discussed in his bestseller Misquoting Jesus—and on The Daily Show with John Stewart, NPR, and Dateline NBC, among others—are expanded upon exponentially in his latest book: Jesus, Interrupted.  This New York Times bestseller reveals how books in the Bible were actually forged by later authors, and that the New Testament itself is riddled with contradictory claims about Jesus—information that scholars know… but the general public does not.  If you enjoy the work of Elaine Pagels, Marcus Borg, John Dominic Crossan, and John Shelby Spong, you’ll find much to ponder in Jesus, Interrupted.

Continue reading →

04.09.15
by

Ben Witherington Critiques Bart Ehrman’s Book, Forged

Bart Ehrman

Dr. Bart Ehrman

Bart Ehrman is the man that gives Christians more heartburn than any other academic these days.  Erhman is a well-known Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.  He is a specialist in New Testament textual criticism, and he has written a wide range of books that are, in my opinion, damaging the Christian faith by repeating and amplifying various false theories.

Ehrman is an agnostic, but he didn’t start out that way.  Raised with a fundamentalist background, he seems to have “rebelled” against that during his time as an academic, and now works to deconstruct the Christian faith. Continue reading →

03.20.15
by

Who Wrote the Gospel of Matthew?

"The Evangelist Matthew Inspired by an Angel" by Rembrandt

The Evangelist Matthew Inspired by an Angel, by Rembrandt

Of the four gospels, critics direct most of their fire at those of Matthew and John.  This is, in part, because Matthew and John are the only two gospels that tradition says are direct, eyewitness accounts, written by original disciples of Jesus.  If Matthew and John are eyewitness accounts, then they greatly strengthen the case that the gospels are historically accurate documents…and some skeptics do not want that.  Critics also challenge the authorship of these gospels because the evidence regarding them is sometimes confusing, making it more difficult to discern who actually wrote what. Continue reading →

03.18.15
by

A Historical Case for The Resurrection of Jesus

Caravaggio_-_The_Incredulity_of_Saint_Thomas (2)

The Incredulity of Saint Thomas by Caravaggio

Easter is just around the corner, that time each year when Christians celebrate the death and resurrection of Jesus.  Christians believe that Jesus was God in the flesh, who came to earth and allowed himself to be sacrificed for the sins of each human being, paying the wages of sin on our behalf.  Three days later, the teaching goes, Jesus overcame death via the resurrection and, through Him, provides each one of us a path to eternal life.

It makes for an interesting—and quite incredible—story.  Skeptics down through the ages have attempted to disprove it, directing their fire at the key pieces of the story:  1.) Jesus’ death by crucifixion; 2.) His burial in a tomb; and 3.) Various elements related to the resurrection itself. Continue reading →

03.15.15
by

Defending the Gospel of John

Sculpture of Jesus and the “Beloved Disciple,” John, early 14th century

Of all the gospel accounts, the Gospel According to John is the most controversial.  It stands apart from the three “synoptic” gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke.  John is more sophisticated theologically and contains some of the most beautifully-written verses in the New Testament.  It was, according to Christian tradition, written by the Apostle, John.  John was one of Jesus’ 12 original disciples, and is referred to as the “Beloved Disciple” of Christ.  This work is important not only because of its theological insights, but also because it supposedly reflects an eyewitness account of Jesus’ ministry and teachings. Continue reading →

02.03.15
by

Is the Bible Reliable? – Part II

In Part I of this three-part series, we explored some of the external evidence supporting the Bible’s historical reliability.  However, being reliable does not make a book the inspired and inerrant Word of God.  To help demonstrate inerrancy, we now look at the internal evidence to see if the Bible displays the unique fingerprints of God’s influence.  And we find signs of his inspiration all throughout the Bible. Continue reading →

12.30.14
by

Dealing with the Bible’s Apparent Contradictions

The Scribe, George Cattermole, 1800-1868, from The Cooper Gallery

The Scribe, George Cattermole, 1800-1868, from The Cooper Gallery

Critics have tried for at least 2,000 years to discredit the biblical texts.  One of their most common charges is that the Bible is full of contradictions that prove it is neither “divinely inspired” nor “inerrant.”  Rather, it is just another example of fictional literature, produced by primitive people trying to explain the world around them.  Is the Bible really “full of contradictions” as some claim?  Or are there reasonable explanations for these textual difficulties that can maintain the Bible’s credibility and authority?  Let’s take a look. Continue reading →