So many times we hear from those we try to share the good news of Christ with that the gospels are just hearsay, written long after the time of Jesus, and are not eyewitness accounts. Where do they get this idea? They get it from many modern scholars, but not from the actual evidence of the text! They conclude that the gospel accounts are unreliable. Is this conclusion justified?
The idea that the gospels are documents that are far removed from original eye witnesses by a long process of anonymous communication of oral tradition is a popular idea today. Some modern scholars also view...
Why was the Resurrected Christ only seen by believers? Doesn't that make it suspect, because they were biased? Why aren't there reports from unbelievers? These are questions often posed by the skeptic. Do we have a good answer for them?
What they are really asking for is eyewitness reports from people without any particular vested interest in what they claim to have seen. They believe that this is the only kind of witness that would be unbiased and trustworthy. But this reasoning is flawed on several counts:
If we ignored all historical writings where the writer had an interest...
What about some of the more recent attempts to explain away Christ's resurrection? Were the resurrection accounts legends that grew up around an ordinary man? Did He not really die on the cross, as put forth in the book The Jesus Papers? Was the tomb of Jesus actually found?
Let's look at the facts:
Not legends
Early eyewitness testimony based on appearances is basis for the origin of the belief in the resurrection, not later legends arising.[1]
There is no parallel historical case for legends developing so quickly after the events themselves.[2]
Legends...
In the previous two articles, we looked at the false charge that the resurrection of Christ was borrowed from pagan myths. We saw in the first article that there were many fallacies in this theory, and we provided rebuttal for specific charges of myth-borrowing in part 2 of this series. Now we want to look briefly at the unique character of the death and resurrection of Christ to show how it makes no logical sense for it to have been borrowed from any pagan mythology.
His death and resurrection, unlike pagan myths, were events firmly rooted in history. Claims of resurrections in other...
In my previous article I listed six fallacies of the theory that the resurrection of Christ was borrowed from pagan myths. In this article we will separate myth from fact, and truth from exaggeration, as we look at some examples.
Attis:
The Claims: Attis was a saviour slain for mankind, he was crucified on a tree on "Black Friday", after three days he was resurrected. The taurobolium connected with the religion of Attis and Cybele was a blood baptism by which one was born again.
The Truth: Attis was never recognized as a "saviour", only as a protector of tombs. Attis was not crucified...
Has a bible skeptic told you that the resurrection account of Jesus was borrowed from pagan myths, and therefore was not real history? Your child may come home from college with a shattered faith after hearing from a professor that many pagan religions had saviour-gods who died and rose again, and so the story of Jesus was made up history. Even though most well-informed scholars have abandoned this idea, it is still very popular among internet skeptics and atheist web sites, and may sway someone who is not properly informed. I want to show you in this series of articles that these so-called...
Let's bury once and for all the idea that the disciples of Christ put words in Jesus's mouth or invented history! Here are at least 17 reasons below that show that what Jesus said and did was accurately reported.
1.Eyewitnesses: At the time of writing there were many eyewitnesses, including hostile ones, who could have discredited any inventions. This could be true even forty years laer. Many of even the more skeptical scholars will admit this possibility. Josh McDowell quotes Laurence McGinley: “First of all, eyewitnesses of the events in question were still alive when the tradition had been...
One of the most powerful reasons we can believe the New Testament is real history, is that most of the original apostles and other disciples died to bring us this history. As many have said, no one dies for what they know is a lie, so if they died for their beliefs, we can be sure they were not inventing history. It is also true that the original eyewitnesses of Jesus died for what they witnessed and knew to be true, not from second hand reports such as martyrs in other religions and cults.
But some critics have tried to cast doubt on whether or not the original apostles or other early disciples...
So did they find the tomb of Jesus? Has the resurrection been disproved? Not a chance! This is just another one of the recent attempts to dupe who the promoters count on being the un-informed public.
The Jesus tomb: There was a tomb, an ossuary or “bone box,” found in Jerusalem in 1980 which reportedly had the names of a Joseph, Mary, Mariamne Mara (whom they took for Mary Magdalene) and a “Jesus son of Joseph.”A film documentary was made in 2007 by James Cameron and Simcha Jacobovici suggesting it was the family tomb of Jesus. But practically no serious scholars give this idea...
It's the Easter season, and at this time of year, we always see the usual articles calling into question the resurrection of Christ. Most times these articles cite contradictions in the resurrection accounts. Did Jesus appear in Galilee (Matthew's and Mark's Gospel ) or Jerusalem (Luke's and John's gospels) ? One angel or two? Angel outside the tomb or inside? Can all the appearances be harmonized, or are they hopelessly contradictory? What you have here are four writers with different perspectives and emphases.•Matthew (Matt. 28:16 ) records only an appearance to disciples in Galilee-but...