Freethought & Rationalism Archive

dost · 04-02-2006, 11:13 PM

I am presently reading the following book by the Evangelical scholar and apologist, Craig Blomberg:

The Historical Reliability of the Gospels (or via: amazon.co.uk), 1987, Inter-Varsity Press.

Can someone point out any critiques of this book and critical reviews published in journals?

I think the strongest defences of the historicity of the New Testament have been offered by the British scholar Donald Guthrie in his mamoth introduction to the New Testament, who is most certainly an extremely learned and knowledgeable scholar. But again, I haven't come across any critical reviews.

Josh McDowell is so poor that I didn't bother reading him after tolerating two pages. Craig Blomberg, in contrast, is quite scholarly.

Toto · 04-02-2006, 11:40 PM

Check the Amazon review:

Quote:

He gives a masterful study of the Synoptic Problem, arriving at the two (or four) document hypothesis as the most satsifactory solution. Next he engages in a cogent critique of modern methods of Biblical criticism, pointing out the worth of such methods as well as their preconceptions and limitations.

He then undertakes a study of the historicity of the Gospel stories, and turns in the most compelling scholarly argument I have ever read for the historical reliability of the resurrection narratives. So far, so good. Five stars up to this point.

Unfortunately, it is in his assessment of Gospel historicity that he goes astray. Blomberg argues repeatedly for the "camcorder exactness" of the Gospel stories. If the Gospels say it, that's exactly the way it happened, and any discrepancies from one story to the next are merely "apparent" discrepancies, which can be ironed out with enough imagination. As one who has made a career of evaluating and presenting testimony, I find that discrepancies in testimony don't equate to falsehood, and that it is neither necessary nor wise to pretend that there are no discrepancies in testimony.

Blomberg appears to begin with the conclusion of historical accuracy and to sift the evidence for arguments supporting his conclusion. . . .

Mainline scholars tend not to give reviews to outrightly apologetic books.

dost · 04-03-2006, 04:53 PM

Thanks for your reply Toto.

Nonetheless, I think that mainstream scholars should not totally avoid dealing with arguments at least from Evangelical scholars such as Craig Blomberg.

Anyway, there is an interesting critique of Blomberg by Earl Dhortey (sp?) in his response to Lee Strobel.

04-02-2006, 11:13 PM	#1
dost Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: London Posts: 82	critical reviews of Craig Blomberg I am presently reading the following book by the Evangelical scholar and apologist, Craig Blomberg: The Historical Reliability of the Gospels (or via: amazon.co.uk), 1987, Inter-Varsity Press. Can someone point out any critiques of this book and critical reviews published in journals? I think the strongest defences of the historicity of the New Testament have been offered by the British scholar Donald Guthrie in his mamoth introduction to the New Testament, who is most certainly an extremely learned and knowledgeable scholar. But again, I haven't come across any critical reviews. Josh McDowell is so poor that I didn't bother reading him after tolerating two pages. Craig Blomberg, in contrast, is quite scholarly.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-03-2006, 04:53 PM	#3
dost Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: London Posts: 82	Thanks for your reply Toto. Nonetheless, I think that mainstream scholars should not totally avoid dealing with arguments at least from Evangelical scholars such as Craig Blomberg. Anyway, there is an interesting critique of Blomberg by Earl Dhortey (sp?) in his response to Lee Strobel.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.