TheDiddleyMan

Has anyone here read "the Historical Reliability of the Gospels"? What are his basic arguments?

Kevin

sidewinder

Uh...that the four canonical gospels are historically reliable. His arguments are very weak. He tries to argue for the historicity of events described in the gospels. It's a very simplistic approach to the gospels and one that fails miserably. He's a conservative Evangelical and they rely on the inerrant doctrine for their authority, so they go to extreme and ludicrous lengths to try to prove the historicity of the gospels and even the rest of the Bible. If you want to read a good interpretation of the Gospels, try Paula Fredericksen or even Raymond Brown (Catholic scholar).

Layman

Have you actually read the book?

sidewinder

I read this book about three years ago.

Layman

Where does he rely on the doctrine of inerrancy for his authority?

I ask because Blomberg seems critical of those claiming inerrancy and notes that inerrancy was not an early doctrine of the church.

[ March 14, 2002: Message edited by: Layman ]</p>

sidewinder

He is a conservative Evangelical and belief in the inerrancy of the Bible is an Evangelical doctrine. I don't recall if he mentioned the inerrancy doctrine but obviously that is his point in writing the book. He is defending the inerrancy doctrine.

I admit that I don't remember exactly what he said was the purpose of his book. However, I do remember that in the book, he argues for the historicity of some of those events which non-Christians have questioned were true or not. He also tackles some contradictions, trying to explain the contradictions away.

The whole point behind my first post is that there are much better gospel commentaries out there. I see the gospels as religious literature and appreciate the style of ancient religious writing. Why do Evangelicals feel compelled to try to prove that everything in the gospels is historical? Further, why do they feel compelled to try to explain away contradictions? The only reason is because their authority rests on an inerrant Bible and if they don't have an inerrant Bible, then their "faith is in vain."

[ March 14, 2002: Message edited by: sidewinder ]</p>

TheDiddleyMan

You mean Ray Brown Introduction to the New Testament? My library has it. He doesn't try to argue the historicity of the gospels, you mean? Does he believe in a literal resurrection and all?

Kevin

Layman

No he isn't defending inerrancy.

As I said, he actually agrues that inerrancy was not a doctrine of the church until recently. He actually argues that those who argue that it was are "misrepresenting the evidence."

Are you sure you read the book?

Vorkosigan

Raymond Brown is a conservative Catholic priest. As a result, there is little, if anything in his Intro that disagrees with the tenets that faith. On the other hand, it is an excellent survey of mainstream thinking in the field. I'd recommend it as a useful resource.

Michael

sidewinder

I think Ray Brown seems moderate or even liberal. I heard that conservative Catholics didn't care for his work. If you're looking for a book which argues for the historicity of the gospels, which would be written by a Christian, I have no suggestions.