Read Online More Than a Carpenter by Josh McDowell, Sean McDowell - Free Book Online Page A
Authors: Josh McDowell, Sean McDowell
Tags: Religión, Christology, Christian Theology, Christian Life, Spiritual Growth, Spiritual & Religion, apologetics
Ads: Link
source for information about Jesus. Because of this, in the past two centuries many critics have attacked the reliability of the biblical documents. There seems to be a constant barrage of charges that have no historical foundation or that have been proved invalid by archaeological discoveries and research.
While I (Josh) was lecturing at Arizona State University, a professor who had brought his literature class approached me after an outdoor “free speech” lecture. He said, “Mr. McDowell, you are basing all your claims about Christ on a second-century document that is obsolete. I showed in class today that the New Testament was written so long after Christ lived that it could not be accurate in what it recorded.”
I replied, “Sir, I understand your view, and I know the writings on which you base it. But the fact is, those writings have been proven wrong by more recently discovered documents that clearly show the New Testament to have been written within a generation of the time of Christ.”
The source of that professor’s opinions about the records concerning Jesus was the writings of the German critic Ferdinand Christian Baur. F. C. Baur assumed that most of the New Testament Scriptures were not written until late in the second century AD from myths and legends that had developed during the lengthy interval between the lifetime of Jesus and the time these accounts were set down in writing.
By the twentieth century, however, archaeological discoveries had confirmed the accuracy of the New Testament manuscripts. Early papyri manuscripts (the John Rylands manuscript, AD 130; the Chester Beatty Papyri, AD 155; and the Bodmer Papyri II, AD 200) bridged the gap between the time of Christ and existing manuscripts from later dates.
Millar Burrows, for many years professor of biblical theology at Yale Divinity School, says:
Another result of comparing New Testament Greek with the language of the papyri [discoveries] is an increase of confidence in the accurate transmission of the text of the New Testament itself. 1
Such findings as these have increased scholarly confidence in the Bible.
William F. Albright, who was the world’s foremost biblical archaeologist, writes,
We can already say emphatically that there is no longer any solid basis for dating any book of the New Testament after about AD 80, two full generations before the date between 130 and 150 given by the more radical New Testament critics of today. 2
He reiterates this view in an interview for Christianity Today.
In my opinion, every book of the New Testament was written by a baptized Jew between the forties and the eighties of the first century AD (very probably sometime between about AD 50 and 75). 3
Sir William Ramsay, one of the greatest archaeologists ever to have lived, was a student of the German historical school, which taught that the book of Acts was a product of the mid-second century AD and not of the first century as it purports to be. After reading modern criticism about the book of Acts, Ramsay became convinced that it was not a trustworthy account of the facts of its time ( AD 50) and therefore was unworthy of consideration by a historian. So in his research on the history of Asia Minor, Ramsay paid little attention to the New Testament. His investigation, however, eventually compelled him to consider the writings of Luke, the author of the book of Acts. The archaeologist observed the meticulous accuracy of the historical details, and gradually his attitude toward the book of Acts began to change. He was forced to conclude that
Luke is a historian of the first rank. . . . This author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians. 4
Because of the book’s accuracy even on the minutest details, Ramsay finally conceded that Acts could not be a second-century document but belonged rather to the mid-first century.
----
What Do You Think?
Have there been any biblical archaeological discoveries in recent years that
While I (Josh) was lecturing at Arizona State University, a professor who had brought his literature class approached me after an outdoor “free speech” lecture. He said, “Mr. McDowell, you are basing all your claims about Christ on a second-century document that is obsolete. I showed in class today that the New Testament was written so long after Christ lived that it could not be accurate in what it recorded.”
I replied, “Sir, I understand your view, and I know the writings on which you base it. But the fact is, those writings have been proven wrong by more recently discovered documents that clearly show the New Testament to have been written within a generation of the time of Christ.”
The source of that professor’s opinions about the records concerning Jesus was the writings of the German critic Ferdinand Christian Baur. F. C. Baur assumed that most of the New Testament Scriptures were not written until late in the second century AD from myths and legends that had developed during the lengthy interval between the lifetime of Jesus and the time these accounts were set down in writing.
By the twentieth century, however, archaeological discoveries had confirmed the accuracy of the New Testament manuscripts. Early papyri manuscripts (the John Rylands manuscript, AD 130; the Chester Beatty Papyri, AD 155; and the Bodmer Papyri II, AD 200) bridged the gap between the time of Christ and existing manuscripts from later dates.
Millar Burrows, for many years professor of biblical theology at Yale Divinity School, says:
Another result of comparing New Testament Greek with the language of the papyri [discoveries] is an increase of confidence in the accurate transmission of the text of the New Testament itself. 1
Such findings as these have increased scholarly confidence in the Bible.
William F. Albright, who was the world’s foremost biblical archaeologist, writes,
We can already say emphatically that there is no longer any solid basis for dating any book of the New Testament after about AD 80, two full generations before the date between 130 and 150 given by the more radical New Testament critics of today. 2
He reiterates this view in an interview for Christianity Today.
In my opinion, every book of the New Testament was written by a baptized Jew between the forties and the eighties of the first century AD (very probably sometime between about AD 50 and 75). 3
Sir William Ramsay, one of the greatest archaeologists ever to have lived, was a student of the German historical school, which taught that the book of Acts was a product of the mid-second century AD and not of the first century as it purports to be. After reading modern criticism about the book of Acts, Ramsay became convinced that it was not a trustworthy account of the facts of its time ( AD 50) and therefore was unworthy of consideration by a historian. So in his research on the history of Asia Minor, Ramsay paid little attention to the New Testament. His investigation, however, eventually compelled him to consider the writings of Luke, the author of the book of Acts. The archaeologist observed the meticulous accuracy of the historical details, and gradually his attitude toward the book of Acts began to change. He was forced to conclude that
Luke is a historian of the first rank. . . . This author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians. 4
Because of the book’s accuracy even on the minutest details, Ramsay finally conceded that Acts could not be a second-century document but belonged rather to the mid-first century.
----
What Do You Think?
Have there been any biblical archaeological discoveries in recent years that
Similar Books
The Evil That Men Do: FBI Profiler Roy Hazelwood's Journey Into the Minds of Sexual Predators
Stephen G. Michaud, Roy Hazelwood
