In J. Warner Wallace’s Cold-Case Christianity, chapter 5, he leverages the work of two experts on the New Testament. He cites Dan Wallace on textual transmission, and Craig Blomberg on textual criticism. Let’s take a look at an article written by Craig Blomberg which presents 10 reasons why the gospels are reliable. (H/T Chris S.)
Here are points 4 and 5:
Fourth, ancient Jews and Greeks meticulously cultivated the art of memorization, committing complex oral traditions to memory. Even before the Gospels or any other written sources about Jesus were compiled, Jesus’ followers were carefully passing on accounts of His teachings and mighty works by word of mouth. This kept the historical events alive until the time they were written down.
Fifth, the ancient memorization and transference of sacred tradition allowed for some freedoms in retelling the stories. Guardians of the tradition could abbreviate, paraphrase, prioritize, and provide commentary on the subject matter as long as they were true to the gist or meaning of the accounts they passed on. This goes a long way to explaining both the similarities and the differences among the four Gospels. All four authors were true to the gist of Jesus’ life, yet they exercised reasonable freedom to shape the accounts in ways they saw fit.
Take a look if you want a quick overview of reasons why we should give the gospels the benefit of the doubt unless they prove faulty in one or more areas.
Habermas tries to make his case based on the “minimal facts” about Jesus that virtually all historians will admit to, regardless of where they line up theologically.
Here are his five minimal facts:
(1) Most scholars agree that Jesus’ tomb was discovered empty shortly afterwards. With almost two dozen reasons favoring this report alone, what best explains this? Other hypotheses do not account for all the data.
(2) Many eyewitnesses assert that they saw the risen Jesus, both individually and in groups. Even apart from the Gospels, we can establish this totally from just two passages in Paul’s “undisputed writings”:
Paul told the Corinthians that he had received the Gospel resurrection report from others (1 Corinthians 15:1-8).
The consensus critical view is that Paul probably obtained this material in Jerusalem, when he visited the eyewitness apostles Peter and James, the brother of Jesus (Galatians 1:18-24).
Paul returned to Jerusalem 14 years later and specifically checked out the nature of the Gospel message, again with eyewitnesses Peter, James, and now John (Galatians 2:1-10).
All the apostles agreed that Jesus appeared to them after his death (1 Corinthians 15:11).
(3) Further, critical scholars also agree that Paul received this material from the other apostles at an exceptionally early date-only about five years after the crucifixion. But since the others knew the reports before Paul did, we are right back to the events themselves. Even the best-known critical scholar today, non-Christian specialist Bart Ehrman, dates several Christian traditions as early as just a year or two after the crucifixion!
(4) But why should we believe that these eyewitnesses were being honest? We have first century sources that the three apostles mentioned above were all martyred: Paul, Peter, and James the brother of Jesus. Of course, people die for all sorts of ideas, but only for what they are convinced is true. But unlike others, the apostles were in a position to know whether or not they had seen Jesus Christ alive after his death. By being willing to die, scholars agree that they were convinced that Jesus had indeed appeared to them. At the very least, this addresses their honesty and conviction.
5) Of these eyewitnesses, Paul was a persecutor of the early Christians, and James was an unbeliever. Skeptical scholars accept this in both cases. But why did they become believers? Again, they were certainly in a position to know whether the risen Jesus had appeared to them.
This might be a good one to forward along to your skeptical friends, because of where it was published. It’s probably review for most Christians, but to someone who is new to historical Jesus studies, this might be a good conversation starter. What are the “undisputed” parts of the Bible, and which are the facts virtually everyone admits to? How did historians decide which books and which facts were more verifiable by historians, and which were not? Are the minimal facts enough to warrant the belief that Jesus rose from the dead?
the topic of failure is not one that is often discussed by Christians
failure #1: failure in the Christian life which is the result of sin
failure #2: when a Christian is defeated while trying to serve God
the consequences for failure #1 can be worse for the Christian
the consequences for failure #2 can be worse for the world as whole
how is it possible for a person to fail when they are obeying God? (#2)
how can it be that God can call someone to a task then let them fail?
failure is not persecution – persecution is normal for Christians
failure is not trials – testing is normal for Christians to grow
Bill’s failure:
Bill had submitted all the coursework for his second doctoral degree
but he had to pass a comprehensive oral examination
he failed to pass the comprehensive exam
Bill and Jan and his supporters had all prayed for him to pass
how could God allow this to happen?
Solution to the problem:
God’s will for us may be that we fail at the things we try in life
there are things that God may teach us through failure
Bill learned that human relationships are more important than careers
we need to realize that “success” in life is not worldly success
true success is getting to know God well during your life
and failure may be the best way to get to know God well
it may even be possible to fail to know God while achieving a lot
the real measure of a man is loving God and loving your fellow man
Practical:
give thanks to God regardless of your circumstances
try to learn from your failure
never give up
The ending of Bill’s story:
Bill spent an entire year preparing for a re-take of his exam
Bill was awarded his second doctorate “magna cum laude” (with great distinction)
Bill learned that American students are not well prepared for exams
the year of studying remedied his inadequate American education
in retrospect, he is thankful for the failure – he learned more
If you like this, you should pick up Craig’s book “Hard Questions, Real Answers“, which has a chapter on this problem. And here is a similar lecture that Dr. Craig gave at his home church in Atlanta on the same topic. I’m not posting this because I’ve had a catastrophic failure or anything. But I think in this economy, I am seeing a lot of my plans dashed and I am being forced to circle the wagons a little and take fewer risks. I am being forced to aim for smaller goals, and plan for future difficulties. It does bother me that I can’t comfortably take risks to achieve the best goals that I want to achieve. But I have to play the hand I’m dealt, and do what looks doable right now. Some of my friends are having the same problem of having to recalculate what is probable and what is possible.
WINTERY KNIGHT 