At robertson redating the new testament Chat with local sluts no registration needed
The New Testament, then, passes the bibliographical test and must, by far, be graded with the highest mark of any ancient literature. This test asserts that one is to assume the truthful reporting of an ancient document (and not assume either fraud, incompetence or error) unless the author of the document has disqualified himself by their presence.For example, do the New Testament writers contradict themselves?Is there anything in their writing which causes one to objectively suspect their trustworthiness? There is lack of proven fraud or error on the part of any New Testament writer.But there is evidence of careful eyewitness reporting throughout the New Testament.
The kinds of things the Gospel writers include in their narratives offer strong evidence for their integrity.His careful historical writing has been documented from detailed personal archaeological investigation by former critic Sir William Ramsay, who stated after his painstaking research, “Luke’s history is unsurpassed in respect of its trustworthiness.” 9 A. Sherwin-White, the distinguished historian of Rome, stated of Luke: “For [the book of] Acts the confirmation of historicity is overwhelming.Any attempt to reject its basic historicity even in matters of detail must now appear absurd.” 10 Papias, a student of the Apostle John 11 and Bishop of Hierapolis around 150 A.D., observed that the Apostle John himself noted that the Apostle Mark in writing his Gospel “wrote down accurately… (III, XIX, XX) assert that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and John are all based on reliable eyewitness testimony (His portion on Luke is missing).whatsoever he [Peter] remembered of the things said or done by Christ. for he was careful of one thing, not to omit any of the things he [Peter] had heard, and not to state any of them falsely.” 12 Further, fragments of Papias’ Exposition of the Oracles of the Lord, ca. 13 Even 200 years of scholarly rationalistic biblical criticism (such as form, source and redaction approaches) have proven nothing except that the writers were careful and honest reporters of the events recorded and that these methods attempting to discredit them were flawed from the start. Habermas in Ancient Evidence for the Life of Jesus, and other texts, indicates that “a broad outline of the life of Jesus” and His death by crucifixion can be reasonably and directly inferred from entirely non-Christian sources.
If it is impossible to question the world’s ancient classics, it is far more impossible to question the reliability of the New Testament.