THE HISTORICAL RELIABILITY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
by: Jill Graham
One of the key points in proving the truth of Christianity is showing that the New Testament writings are historically reliable. Without this foundation, it is impossible to know if the story of the life and teachings of Jesus that has come down to us can be trusted, and thus if the Jesus presented in the New Testament is worthy of reasonable faith. Muslims claim that the New Testament documents have been corrupted and that
Christians do not have access to the true teachings of Jesus through their Scriptures.1
Higher critics and groups such as the Jesus Seminar assert that the New Testament is marred by fictitious inventions and legendary additions, and that the Jesus of history is far different from the Jesus presented in the gospels.2 Post-modernist relativists challenge that truth about history, including the truths about the historical Jesus, cannot be known with any degree of certainty.3 These challenges must be answered, and a
positive case built for the historical reliability of the New Testament if Christianity is to
remain a viable faith in our world today.
As F.F. Bruce cautions in his introduction to his book on the historical reliability of the New Testament documents, the teachings of Confucius or Plato can stand regardless of the traditions about their lives that have come down to us, but the truth of the teachings of Jesus is intimately connected to his real life in history and the reliability of the Christian story.4
F.F. Bruce writes:
Read FULL ARTICLE
by: Jill Graham
One of the key points in proving the truth of Christianity is showing that the New Testament writings are historically reliable. Without this foundation, it is impossible to know if the story of the life and teachings of Jesus that has come down to us can be trusted, and thus if the Jesus presented in the New Testament is worthy of reasonable faith. Muslims claim that the New Testament documents have been corrupted and that
Christians do not have access to the true teachings of Jesus through their Scriptures.1
Higher critics and groups such as the Jesus Seminar assert that the New Testament is marred by fictitious inventions and legendary additions, and that the Jesus of history is far different from the Jesus presented in the gospels.2 Post-modernist relativists challenge that truth about history, including the truths about the historical Jesus, cannot be known with any degree of certainty.3 These challenges must be answered, and a
positive case built for the historical reliability of the New Testament if Christianity is to
remain a viable faith in our world today.
As F.F. Bruce cautions in his introduction to his book on the historical reliability of the New Testament documents, the teachings of Confucius or Plato can stand regardless of the traditions about their lives that have come down to us, but the truth of the teachings of Jesus is intimately connected to his real life in history and the reliability of the Christian story.4
F.F. Bruce writes:
The Christian gospel is not primarily a code of ethics or a metaphysical system; it is first and foremost good news . . . [which is] intimately bound up with the historical order . . . This historical ‘once-for-all-ness’ of Christianity, which distinguishes it from those religious and philosophical systems which are not specially related to any particular time, makes the reliability of the writings which purport to record this revelation a question of first-rate importance . . .The character of Jesus can be known only from the New Testament records; the influence of his character is therefore tantamount to the influence of the New
Testament Records.5
Read FULL ARTICLE
No comments:
Post a Comment