Often it appears to the Christian that all is against us. We seem to have lost the war over abortion, new definitions of marriage, homosexuality, evolution, and on and on. To many Christians, we are left with a fragile truth filled with holes, myth, legend, and falsehoods. In the end, it may seem that faith is hope against reality and not simply hope against hope. But we would be wrong. . .
Biblical scholarship works like detectives sifting through evidence, archeology, and sources outside the Bible itself. The faithful scholarship finds more to bolster the claims of Scripture than to destroy them. Like a
detective sorting through clues, such faithful scholars find surprising evidence not only to the early dating of the New Testament but to the canon of the New Testament and to its truthfulness (it is what it claims to be and it says what it claims to say).
Take, for example, the case of Justin Martyr, one of the early Christian writers typically called the Apostolic
Fathers. He lived from 100-160 AD -- barely a hundred years after the death
of Jesus. We know something of this fellow. He was a convert who wrote apologetic works defending the
Christian faith. Part of his importance to us is the earliness of his writing as well as the region form which he wrote -- from the area of Samaria, between Judea and
Galilee.
According to Justin Martyr,“It is said that he [Jesus] changed the name of one of
the apostles to Peter; and it is written in his memoirs that he changed
the names of others, two brothers, the sons of Zebedee, to Boanerges,
which means ‘sons of thunder’….”
You might also note the reference to St. Peter’s “memoirs.” No this is not the so-called Gospel of
Peter which dates from much later and is not authentic. In fact, it is the Gospel of St. Mark and from this and other clues we have come to recognize that John Mark, the author of the Gospel,
was the companion, translator and scribe for Peter and the recorder of St. Peter's memoirs. If you think this a stretch, how about the fact that only in the Gospel of St. Mark are James and
John referred to as “Boanerges" or Sons of Thunder.
Skeptics try to distance the New Testament from the actual time and even geography of our Lord and His life. They would suggest that the text is not accurate, mythology has been mixed with fact, and legend reported as history. These voices of doom and gloom, think here Bart Ehrman, have long ago given up the faith and seem to be on a crusade to persuade us of their doubts that they pass off as facts. If, however, the early church fathers give witness to the reliability of the New Testament and to the early character of its witness, we have something to counter their speculation. If Justin Martyr could speak of Peter’s “memoirs”
and mention a detail found only in the Gospel of St. Mark, then it gives credibility to the accuracy both of the account and the timetable of the New Testament witness.
So what am I trying to say? That you do not need faith -- that we have enough evidence to silence the loudest skeptic? No, only this. The claims of Scripture are not fanciful but reasonable. The Word of the Lord is not myth or legend but the reports of witnesses on the ground who were guided in their witness by the Spirit. It takes as much faith to invent ways not to take Scripture at its word as it does to believe what it says and to trust that it does what it promises. We are heirs of an astonishingly rich tradition and not a people with meager resources to support the claims of Scripture. Before you abdicate your faith to the loud protests of the skeptics, read a little more. Like Luther wrote and we sing, The Word they still shall yet remain. . . the Kingdom ours remaineth.
18 comments:
You've got the wrong James as the author of the epistle. James, the son of Zebedee, was killed early on, as Acts 12:2 records. The author of James is generally understood to be James of Jerusalem, i.e., the brother (or cousin) of our Lord, and the individual who was so prominent in the early church, as seen in Acts 15 and Galatians 1-2.
Nonetheless, your overall point still stands: there is a real treasure trove of 2nd century AD evidence that the New Testament had been written long before the close of the 1st century AD.
I always find it interesting how Protestants use the Church Fathers when it proves what they believe but then reject the teachings of the same Fathers when they teach contrary to Protestantism.
Our Roman friends do the same thing.
For further reading........
https://www.amazon.com/Bible-Difficulties-Seeming-Contradictions-William/dp/0758618468
@Joseph Bragg, yes, like how Roman Catholics conveniently ignore and skip those comments by the Early Church Fathers that blow the concept of the Papacy out of the water, but ... details.
:)
I think Bragg is EO, but not sure. He's sure on here a lot, lamenting how misguided Lutherans are, and how "the battle is already lost" etc.
Yes - EO and yes lamenting.
Reason assesses. Faith trusts. Given the work of faithful scholars and archaeologists, it is safe to say that the history of modern biblical criticism is the history of being wrong. Unfortunately, the Church continues to try imitate the secular culture rather than being faithful.
Oh for the love David, tired argument. And sgain you miss the point of what Pastor Peters is saying.
And your argument wasn't seriously fatigued?
No. We have many David Gray, Car Vehse and Anoymous types on our side that seriously hamper the road to unity as Christ prayed for. Rather than coming to the table for true, civil discussion types like you destroy any progress with your invective. At least Pastor Peters, as I have said a million times, knowing the differences that exist between us, takes the high road without sacrificing
his beliefs and looks to the things we have in common. You do not. Carl does not. Anonymous, whoever he/she does not. You don't have chairty in your heart just arrogance and pride. That's how I see it. Just saying.
" You don't have chairty in your heart just arrogance and pride. That's how I see it."
"Anonymous, you’re a tired buffoon."
Sure.
Yup....Luther was fond of using invective when it suited his purposes. Sure sounds like people like you don't like taking the same medicine you dish out.
If you can't see the hypocrisy...
Moving on.....
Mr. (Fr.?) Bragg,
Your lamentation is noted. However, it comes across as patronizing. I appreciate that you care about us, but the constant "the battle is already lost" stuff is just silly. The battle is already won by Him. It is finished, as He said.
Now, if we are outside the Church, don't bother. Unless you also frequent Mormon blogs to lament their already lost battles.
Do I go on Orthodox blogs to follow your battles? I do. Do I post there how "the battle is already lost" because of Qatar and Ukraine? Or the pro-LGBT stuff coming from inside the ranks (most American converts to Orthodoxy strongly influenced by Kallistos Ware)? The fact that a majority of Orthodox support "a woman's right to choose" despite the emphasis of the Incarnation over the Atonement in EO theology? Women's ordination advocacy, etc, etc? No sir, I do not. I pray the faithful will prevail there and everywhere they are fighting the good fight.
God's peace to you, brother.
Your wrath...God's peace?
You may not believe it, but I feel no wrath or anger. I'm honestly just annoyed by the patronizing. And let it go the first 3-4 times I saw you make those sorts of comments. I suppose I should have let it go again. I could see how you could imagine someone wrathfully writing those things. I didn't. What I said is true, and I harbor no ill will towards you. I respect the path you chose, and I understand it.
Once again, I say God's peace to you, brother.
Post a Comment