tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post8760825064110519516..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: Eyewitness control of the gospel traditionRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-64896002024895475582009-06-11T22:05:39.230-04:002009-06-11T22:05:39.230-04:00Thanks Steve and Jason, very good additional comme...Thanks Steve and Jason, very good additional comments.<br /><br />I would add to Jason that my point wasn't that some 'core' facts are reliably preserved whereas some lesser details weren't, although I would also agree with that: my point was that these facts need only have been preserved accurately in certain important contexts, so that regardless of the credulity of the common believers, for someone with time and resources and desire to carefully investigate, the genuine facts were available. But thanks for your additional examples of the extensive interaction between Christians and between Christians and the outside world.<br /><br />I think evangelicals in many cases have let the ball down in historical argumentation and consistently underestimate the resourcefulness of the skepticism they are trying to overcome. They stick with their bullet point arguments, trying to argue a priori for the reliability of certain key events, whereas what is needed is a more comprehensive historical approach that is rigorous in placing early Christian literature within a reliable time frame and assessing the availability of reliable information to the evangelists. Luckily some scholars, like Keener, are wising up to that and taking a much broader look at a much wider range of material. I hope as time and resources allow to do a comprehensive examination of the primary sources myself. I think I'm getting a feel for them as well as the strengths and weaknesses of current apologetic approaches.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-11647977174764547022009-06-11T20:03:55.646-04:002009-06-11T20:03:55.646-04:00(continued from last post)
- We have a large amou...(continued from last post)<br /><br />- We have a large amount of information about the claims that circulated in the earliest generations of church history. In addition to the New Testament examples J.D. cited, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Origen, and other early Christian sources discuss a vast amount of claims and counterclaims that were circulating in their day and in earlier generations. Justin Martyr gives us some of the details of disputes between Jews and Christians regarding the meaning of particular Old Testament passages, Irenaeus discusses a large variety of heretical beliefs in detail, Origen interacts at length with a treatise written against Christianity by a second-century source, etc. Anybody who has read much of the patristic literature should know that there are many places where even highly obscure beliefs are mentioned and interacted with. We hear of the theory that Revelation was written by Cerinthus, we hear of a minor dispute over whether Paul wrote 2 Timothy, etc. We don't have every conceivable piece of information we'd like to have. The same is true of Greek history, American history, etc. But we have enough information, and we see enough interest among the early sources in discussing such things, to place a heavy burden on the shoulders of those who want to argue for a theory that leaves no trace in the historical record where so many sources would have been in a good position to know about and discuss what the theory implies. The early Christians seem to have had the interest and means to hear about the claims that were circulating about Christianity in a wide variety of contexts.<br /><br />- Sometimes the ancient sources tell us that a particular issue was undisputed or nearly undisputed. There seems to have been universal or nearly universal agreement early on concerning some aspects of Christianity, including points that modern critics sometimes dispute, such as Jesus' existence, the empty tomb, and the authorship of some of the New Testament documents. If such beliefs originated as false rumors, then those rumors must have succeeded in uprooting and replacing the truth across a wide spectrum of locations, individuals, communities, belief systems, etc. That's unlikely.Jason Engwerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17031011335190895123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-87739272242051348822009-06-11T20:03:28.272-04:002009-06-11T20:03:28.272-04:00I would add the following, some of which builds on...I would add the following, some of which builds on what's already been said:<br /><br />- The same questions can be asked in other historical contexts. What about false rumors concerning Greek history, Roman history, Jewish history, American history, etc.? Do critics of Christianity apply their reasoning to those other contexts?<br /><br />- As J.D. mentions, not all historical facts are of equal worth. A core of information can be reliably preserved at the same time that lesser details aren't reliably preserved. As I noted in an earlier discussion with J.D., once we accept some of the facts that are credibly reported by the early Christians, such as Jesus' fulfillment of some prophecies, His resurrection, and what He taught about apostolic authority, a case can be made for the scriptural status of the New Testament documents. Once that factor is involved, then we have more reason to trust the authors and to trust them on details, not just generalities or a core of information.<br /><br />- Some non-Christian sources were eyewitnesses as well. Just as the early Christians were interested in telling their side of the story and passing on information from one generation to another, so were the early opponents of Christianity. One of the checks on the spreading of information within Christian circles would be interaction with non-Christian sources. Even professing Christian groups had reasons to be critical of one another. Heretics who opposed Paul had an interest in what was claimed about him, heretics who rejected a particular gospel had an interest in what was claimed about that document, etc. I've written some articles on that sort of hostile corroboration of Christianity, and I can provide links if anybody is interested.<br /><br />- J.D. mentioned networking and gave some examples from the writings of Paul. I'll repost a quote from Craig Keener that I often cite, since it gives more examples than what J.D. discusses:<br /><br />"Suggesting that the Fourth Gospel is not directly dependent on the Synoptics need not imply that John did not know of the existence of the Synoptics; even if (as is unlikely) Johannine Christianity were as isolated from other circles of Christianity as some have proposed, other gospels must have been known if travelers afforded any contact at all among Christian communities. That travelers did so may be regarded as virtually certain. Urban Christians traveled (1 Cor 16:10, 12, 17; Phil 2:30; 4:18), carried letters (Rom 16:1-2; Phil 2:25), relocated to other places (Rom 16:3, 5; perhaps 16:6-15), and sent greetings to other churches (Rom 16:21-23; 1 Cor 16:19; Phil 4:22; Col 4:10-15). In the first century many churches knew what was happening with churches in other cities (Rom 1:8; 1 Cor 11:16; 14:33; 1 Thess 1:7-9), and even shared letters (Col 4:16). Missionaries could speak of some churches to others (Rom 15:26; 2 Cor 8:1-5; 9:2-4; Phil 4:16; 1 Thess 2:14-16; cf. 3 John 5-12) and send personal news by other workers (Eph 6:21-22; Col 4:7-9). Although we need not suppose connections among churches as pervasive as Ignatius' letters suggest perhaps two decades later, neither need we imagine that such connections emerged ex nihilo in the altogether brief silence between John’s Gospel and the 'postapostolic' period. No one familiar with the urban society of the eastern empire will be impressed with the isolation Gospel scholars often attribute to the Gospel 'communities.'" (The Gospel Of John: A Commentary, Vol. 1 [Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 2003], pp. 41-42)<br /><br />(continued in next post due to Blogger's space limitation)Jason Engwerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17031011335190895123noreply@blogger.com