Christians Can Be Confident in the Historicity of the New Testament!

Dr. Craig explains how New Testament scholarship is becoming more favorable as time marches on!
See the full podcast episode here: • Craig Keener on the Hi...
For more information visit: www.reasonablefaith.org
We welcome your comments in the Reasonable Faith forums:
www.reasonablefaith.org/forums/
Be sure to also visit Reasonable Faith's other channel which contains many full-length videos, debates, and lectures: / reasonablefaithorg
Like the Reasonable Faith Facebook Page: / reasonablefaithorg
Follow Reasonable Faith On Twitter: / rfupdates
Follow Reasonable Faith on Instagram: / reasonablefaithorg
Follow Reasonable Faith on TikTok: www.tiktok.com/@reasonablefai...

[@pattube]

A fantastic little book thats very much meant to be an introduction to the historical reliability of the NT (or at least the Gospels) is Can We Trust the Gospels? by Peter Williams (PhD, University of Cambridge). Williams is a tremendous biblical scholar. His little book packs quite a punch despite its pint size. Chapter 3 "Did the Gospel Writers Know their Stuff?" alone is worth the price of the book. He could easily expand this chapter into a book of its own, which I hope he does someday. Williams also is the main person behind thr Tyndale House New Testament which is an excellent edition of the Greek NT.

[@evidencebasedfaith6658]

Thanks for the tip. I'm currently reading Risen Indeed by Gary Habermas, but now I'm going to read this one as well.

[@JonTopping]

Agreed, that's been one of my favorite books on the subject, it's fantastic, very accessible to read too.

[@JonTopping]

Oh also, I'm sure you know, but Richard Bauckham's "Jesus and the Eyewitnesses" is essentially a more robust version of the sort of stuff you found in Williams' book. If you liked that definitely check it out.

[@pattube]

@@JonTopping Absolutely! Bauckham's book is another must read. Also make sure to get his updated second edition, not the first, because there are some improvements. That said, it's definitely a much longer and scholarly work, so it's not for everyone, not for a popular audience, not for people with no or little background. Or at let not unless a person is really enterprising and willing to dive headfirst into the scholarship (which I realize there are people like that out there, and they're amazing)! But in general I wouldn't necessarily recommend it to people in general, though it'd be a good second or third read after reading a more introductory book like Can We Trust the Gospels or (more advanced) Jesus and the Gospels (now in its third edition) by Craig Blomberg. For example, there are so e controversial positions that Bauckham stakes out in Jesus and the Eyewitnesses (e.g. Bauckham doesn't believe the traditional line that the apostle John is the author of the Gospel of John, he thinks it's a different John).

[@prime_time_youtube]

Great info, thanks Dr. Craig.

[@Health4mation]

Dr Craig, thank you for all you do. I greatly respect and love you. God bless you

[@hichamboulos1155]

Amen!

[@TheMirabillis]

How on Earth does anyone really know today that anything written in the Gospels ( or any Historical Book ) happened the way that it says that it happened ? It all comes back to faith. You either believe a historical document is true or you don’t. I think the historical argument for anything written in the Gospels is shockingly awful.

[@drcraigvideos]

Are you familiar with the criteria of authenticity that historians use to identify historical facts? If not, Dr. Craig outlines them here: www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/question-answer/establishing-the-gospels-reliability. - RF Admin

[@TheMirabillis]

@@drcraigvideos Are there any eyewitnesses alive today that actually seen Jesus walk on water or turn water into Wine ? No ? Then it just comes back to faith ( as I said in my first comment ).

[@Mentat1231]

​@@TheMirabillis Do you think believing the French Revolution happened is pure faith because no one is still alive who saw it happen?

[@TheMirabillis]

@@Mentat1231 Yes, Absolutely. If there are no living eye-witnesses and no cameras, then anything we read in a history book has to be taken on faith. Just because there were X amount of manuscripts and X amount of Scholars means absolutely nothing. Namely, if they believe that what is written is true, then they are doing it by faith ( the same as anyone else who believes a historical document to be true ).

[@Mentat1231]

@@TheMirabillis I see.

[@snake1625b]

I guess that's too bad for the Christians or desiring converts before 1900. We have the privilege of being more confident in our beliefs because of the time we were born in? Imagine all the people born before 1900 who wanted to convert but didn't have the historical argument. They're burning in hell

[@drcraigvideos]

Not everyone needs the same amount or degree of information in order to believe. In his omniscience, God knows exactly who would most benefit from additional information and, if they would believe, can guarantee that they are born in a time and place in which they have that information. Conversely, God knows who, even if they were given the information, would not believe. Thus, no one is left out due to their birth circumstances. - RF Admin

[@stevecinneide8183]

WTH is this the Blair Witch Project?