This coming Sunday (8.30.09) I will be wrapping up the Mythbuster series with probably the most important myth to talk about...the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Here is an excellent video clip from NT Wright to "prime the pump" in preparation for Sunday. If you want to dig a little deeper and actually read something, here is an excellent summary essay written by Mark Moore, Professor of New Testament at Ozark Christian College - "Did Jesus Really Raise From The Dead?"
Friday, August 28, 2009
Thursday, August 20, 2009
How Can We Trust The Bible?
Great video by William Lane Craig regarding the reliability of the Bible.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Follow Up Questions from Message: Mythbuster - The Bible Is Not Reliable
I was not able to get to all the text questions from the message on Sunday. If you missed the message, Mythbusters: The Bible Is Not Reliable, you can listen to it here. For the rest of you, here are the questions from Sunday that were not answered.
"How can we be sure, (about the Bible) since there are so many manuscripts, that things didn't get lost in translation?"
The biggest reason that we can know that things were not lost in translation is the fact that the manuscripts agree in a majority of the text. Even more encouraging is that the text agree completely in the fundamental truths regarding Christ: his birth, death, burial, resurrection and ascension. Also, the areas that don't always line up are marked and footnoted to make the reader aware. Take John 7:53-8:11 for example.
"There are books that didn't make the Bible, is it Judas, so which books didn't make the Bible and who decided this?"
To answer this question, let me connect you with something written by a Bible College Proffessor of mine, Chuck McCoy. You can check out some more information he has at his website here. This is a portion of an article that he wrote about the book & movie, The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown.
"While there were more than the canonical four gospels written (Luke notes that “many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us” - Luke 1:1), the number of known alternative versions comes closer to 35 than Brown’s claim of “80” and none but those four were given serious consideration by the various churches prior to 325 A.D. The four canonical gospels were not settled on because Constantine ordered it, but were well-researched and widely accepted as the most authentic original sources of information on Christ’s life long before Constantine was on the stage of history. Their credibility was rooted in their authenticity because they were traceable to the time and close associates of Jesus and in harmony with Christian beliefs from the beginning. Acceptance of the canonical Gospels was widespread and consistent amongst the churches prior to Constantine and the Nicean Council (325 A.D.). Even so, the records of the Nicean Council give no evidence of any attempt to “officially” confirm a canon or listing of 27 New Testament writings, as was done in the later Council of Hippo (393 AD) and Council of Carthage (397 AD). Various credible Christian leaders were citing and listing accepted New Testament writings in their own writings from the later first century A.D. and thus it becomes obvious that the Canon of 27 New Testament books was gradually arrived at by the various churches (and sound investigation) over several centuries and was NOT something foisted or forced upon the church by any single leader, Council, or Church hierarchy![4]" ~ Charles McCoy
The bottom line is that the councils were set up not to decide what was going to comprise the Bible. The councils were set up to keep the "junk out."
"So did God create dinosaurs to live at the same time as people? And is so what happened to them?"
Yes and they died out...all except Nessie that is;)
"You compared the New Testament to The Iliad, but how does the Old Testament compare?"
I touched on this a little bit, but there are not nearly as many manuscripts for the OT. That is why the discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls (1947) was such an important find. The Dead Sea scrolls are thought to be from about 100 B.C. When those manuscripts were put up against the later manuscripts, they found that the manuscripts were nearly identical.
"Why does Isaiah 53 write about the crucifixion in the past tense?"
This is a great question. I read Isaiah 53 at the end of the message to show the unity of the Old and New Testaments and how they both point to Jesus. What I didn't know was how controversial this section of Scripture is, but if you think about it of course it would be controversial if it suggests that Jesus is the Messiah. Anyway, here is what I have come up with so far. The earliest rabbis understood this section of Scripture to be a future description of messiah. They didn't view it as a passed event, but a future event. Interestingly enough rabbis after Jesus changed their interpretation to reflect the actual people of Israel as being the suffering servant, but again it was looking forward.
So while a don't have a great answer regarding the past tense, almost all people who try to interpret Isaiah 53 saw it as a future event and not a passed one. I'm sure if I was a better student of the Hebrew text and the Prophets I could give a better answer.
Probably the biggest clue in regards to interpreting Isaiah 53 comes from what the authors of the NT said. Remember, these were good Jewish men (except for Luke, however he interviewed good Jewish men) and they knew the Isaiah 53 well. Here are a number of NT passages that point to Jesus being the "suffering servant" of Isaiah 53. Luke 24:27,46; Matthew 26:67; John 1:29; 1 Peter 1:11; 2:25; Romans 4:25.
Here is a very good read written by a Messianic Jew on Isaiah 53. I think you will find it to be very helpful.
"How can we be sure, (about the Bible) since there are so many manuscripts, that things didn't get lost in translation?"
The biggest reason that we can know that things were not lost in translation is the fact that the manuscripts agree in a majority of the text. Even more encouraging is that the text agree completely in the fundamental truths regarding Christ: his birth, death, burial, resurrection and ascension. Also, the areas that don't always line up are marked and footnoted to make the reader aware. Take John 7:53-8:11 for example.
"There are books that didn't make the Bible, is it Judas, so which books didn't make the Bible and who decided this?"
To answer this question, let me connect you with something written by a Bible College Proffessor of mine, Chuck McCoy. You can check out some more information he has at his website here. This is a portion of an article that he wrote about the book & movie, The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown.
"While there were more than the canonical four gospels written (Luke notes that “many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us” - Luke 1:1), the number of known alternative versions comes closer to 35 than Brown’s claim of “80” and none but those four were given serious consideration by the various churches prior to 325 A.D. The four canonical gospels were not settled on because Constantine ordered it, but were well-researched and widely accepted as the most authentic original sources of information on Christ’s life long before Constantine was on the stage of history. Their credibility was rooted in their authenticity because they were traceable to the time and close associates of Jesus and in harmony with Christian beliefs from the beginning. Acceptance of the canonical Gospels was widespread and consistent amongst the churches prior to Constantine and the Nicean Council (325 A.D.). Even so, the records of the Nicean Council give no evidence of any attempt to “officially” confirm a canon or listing of 27 New Testament writings, as was done in the later Council of Hippo (393 AD) and Council of Carthage (397 AD). Various credible Christian leaders were citing and listing accepted New Testament writings in their own writings from the later first century A.D. and thus it becomes obvious that the Canon of 27 New Testament books was gradually arrived at by the various churches (and sound investigation) over several centuries and was NOT something foisted or forced upon the church by any single leader, Council, or Church hierarchy![4]" ~ Charles McCoy
The bottom line is that the councils were set up not to decide what was going to comprise the Bible. The councils were set up to keep the "junk out."
"So did God create dinosaurs to live at the same time as people? And is so what happened to them?"
Yes and they died out...all except Nessie that is;)
"You compared the New Testament to The Iliad, but how does the Old Testament compare?"
I touched on this a little bit, but there are not nearly as many manuscripts for the OT. That is why the discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls (1947) was such an important find. The Dead Sea scrolls are thought to be from about 100 B.C. When those manuscripts were put up against the later manuscripts, they found that the manuscripts were nearly identical.
"Why does Isaiah 53 write about the crucifixion in the past tense?"
This is a great question. I read Isaiah 53 at the end of the message to show the unity of the Old and New Testaments and how they both point to Jesus. What I didn't know was how controversial this section of Scripture is, but if you think about it of course it would be controversial if it suggests that Jesus is the Messiah. Anyway, here is what I have come up with so far. The earliest rabbis understood this section of Scripture to be a future description of messiah. They didn't view it as a passed event, but a future event. Interestingly enough rabbis after Jesus changed their interpretation to reflect the actual people of Israel as being the suffering servant, but again it was looking forward.
So while a don't have a great answer regarding the past tense, almost all people who try to interpret Isaiah 53 saw it as a future event and not a passed one. I'm sure if I was a better student of the Hebrew text and the Prophets I could give a better answer.
Probably the biggest clue in regards to interpreting Isaiah 53 comes from what the authors of the NT said. Remember, these were good Jewish men (except for Luke, however he interviewed good Jewish men) and they knew the Isaiah 53 well. Here are a number of NT passages that point to Jesus being the "suffering servant" of Isaiah 53. Luke 24:27,46; Matthew 26:67; John 1:29; 1 Peter 1:11; 2:25; Romans 4:25.
Here is a very good read written by a Messianic Jew on Isaiah 53. I think you will find it to be very helpful.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)