1
|
- Lecture 2 – Historical Veracity
|
2
|
- Bible vs. NT or OT Documents
- Biblos is Greek word meaning inner part of a papyrus plant – paper
sheet or scroll of writing
- Bible to us is collection of historical works
- No one can complain if you have a collection of historical documents
on your desk
- No one can complain if you teach historical documents
|
3
|
- άγαπάν agape: love of the gods (rarely
used of men): NAS – love, love feasts; KJV – charity, love
- έρως eros: romantic love (not erotic): NAS;KJV–N/A
- πόθος pathos: passion; fate: NAS - passion,
passions; KJV – affection, lust, inordinate affection
- φιλαω philao: brotherly love, befriend, tender
love, affection, to kiss: KJV–kiss, love; NAS-kiss; love
- έπίθίμία epithumia: strong
desire, desire, craving, longing, lust: KJV - desire, lust; NAS -
coveting, desire, earnestly, impulses, long, lust, lustful
- στέργηθρον sterguthron:
parental love, old/assured love: NAS; KJV – N/A
|
4
|
- Pick a person in history the popular world knows really existed
- How do we know?
- What is the proof?
- Pick someone in antiquity, the popular world knows really existed
|
5
|
- Scientific Method?
- Can only be used to test repeatable events
- Legal-Historical (evidence/witness) Method
- Oral
- Written
- Exhibits
- Examples
|
6
|
- Three criteria used to judge accuracy of written historical evidence
- Bibliographical
- Internal
- External
- If a work passes all three tests, source is considered indisputable
unless contradicted by a source of greater degree or merit
|
7
|
- Merit refers to how well the work passes three evidentiary tests
- Degree
- Primary – first hand
- Secondary – second hand
- Tertiary – non-witness
- None – opinion
|
8
|
- Examination of how the document was transmitted to us in time
- Number of manuscripts
- Time between the original and the earliest manuscript we have
- No originals from any work in antiquity exist
- Manuscripts are all copied by hand
|
9
|
- A work with more existing manuscripts is judged to be more accurate
- More manuscripts = more accurate
|
10
|
|
11
|
|
12
|
- Iliad (next best to the New Testament)
- Almost certain we have the complete text of the Iliad as written by
Homer
- 38 times (almost 2 magnitudes) more certain have complete text of NT
books
- 10 times more certain than Josephus have complete text of Acts
- 60 times more certain than Herodotus
|
13
|
- The less the time interval between when the original and the earliest
existing manuscript the more accurate the work is considered
- Less time between original and earliest = greater accuracy
|
14
|
|
15
|
|
16
|
|
17
|
- Pliny the Younger’s History
- 800 compared to 80 (NT)
- 800 compared to 150 (Acts)
- Based on Bibliographical Test you can be 10x more certain of NT as a
collection of historical documents than of any other work in antiquity
- Historians know this
|
18
|
- Only defines how well work reflects
original
- Does not define veracity (historicity) of the original text
- Internal and External tests are used to establish veracity (historical
validity) of text
|
19
|
- Lack of internal contradictions
- Cohesiveness and comprehensibility
- Degree of witness
- Primary, secondary, tertiary
- Geographically
- Chronologically
- Historical claims
- History, Myth, Fiction, Opinion
|
20
|
- Lack of internal contradictions
- Many other works in antiquity have serious problems
- NT works display no evident internal contradictions
- Acts displays no evident internal contradictions
|
21
|
- Cohesiveness and comprehensibility
- Many other works in antiquity are neither cohesive or comprehensible
- NT documents are both cohesive and comprehensible
- Acts is both cohesive and comprehensible
|
22
|
- Degree of witness
- Primary, secondary, tertiary
- Geographically
- Chronologically
- Acts 1:1-3 1 In my former book, Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus
began to do and to teach.
- Luke 1:1-4 1 Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things
that have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as they were handed down to us
by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word.
3 Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from
the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for
you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of
the things you have been taught.
|
23
|
|
24
|
- Degree of the witness
- Primary, secondary, tertiary
- Geographically
- Chronologically
- NT documents and Acts are:
- Primary or secondary sources
- Geographically placed
- Chronologically present
|
25
|
- Compared to other works in antiquity
- NT and Acts documents fulfill all the internal qualifications at least
as well if not better than any other work
- Based on the Bibliographical and Internal Tests a work is always
historically given the benefit of doubt
- All historians also know this
|
26
|
- Based on Bibliographical and Internal Tests
- The historical claims of NT and Acts documents must be assumed to be
true
|
27
|
- F. F. Bruce wrote
- “And it was not friendly eyewitnesses that the early preachers had to
reckon with: there were others less well disposed who were also
conversant with the main facts of the ministry and death of Jesus. The disciples could not afford to
risk inaccuracies (not to speak of willful manipulation of the facts),
which would at once be exposed by those who would be only too glad to
so. On the contrary, one of the
strong points of the original apostolic preaching is the confident
appeal to the knowledge of the hearers; they not only said, ‘We are
witnesses of these things,’ but also, ‘As you yourselves know’ (Acts
2:22). Had there been any
tendency to depart from the facts in any material respect, the possible
pressure of hostile witnesses in the audience would have served as a
further corrective.”
- Luke reports in Acts 26:25-26
- “I am not mad, Your Excellency,’ said Paul; ‘what I am saying is sober
truth. The king is well versed
in these matters, to him I can speak freely. I do not believe that he can be
unaware of any of these facts, for this has been no hole-and-corner
business.”
|
28
|
- Compares other works
- Same region
- Same time period
- Archeology
|
29
|
- Could compare the works of NT to each other
- Meets external test in every respect
- Don’t have to
|
30
|
- Other histories, not as completely reliable as NT, substantiate events
- External authenticity attested by:
- Eusebius
- Papias
- Justin Martyr
- Irenaeus
- Polycarp
- Josephus (a Jewish historian)… many more
|
31
|
- Josephus wrote:
- “Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man if it be lawful to
call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, — a teacher of
such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the
Jews and many of the Gentiles.
He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the
principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that
loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them
alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these
and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe
of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.”
- Jewish Talmuds acknowledge life, birth of Christ (Jeshua ben Pandira),
discount deity
- While attempting to disparage the person of Jesus, these accounts
acknowledge situations and facts from the life of Christ and supply
greater proof
|
32
|
- Archeological
- Archeological evidence all support the works of NT
- Nothing in archeology alters or refutes our knowledge of the life of
Christ or any other person described in NT documents
|
33
|
- External comparison of NT works generally show no disagreement
- Matthew and Luke apparently at odds in a few events
- Both pass bibliographical, internal, external
- Luke is a secondary source
- Genealogy of Christ
- Sermon on the mount/plain
- Based on tests considered irrefutable
|
34
|
- Genealogy of Christ
- “Mattityahu [Matthew] gives the genealogy of Yosef [Joseph], who,
though not Yeshua’s [Jesus’] physical father was regarded as his father
by people generally while Luke gives the genealogy of Yeshua through
his mother Miryam [Mary], the daughter of Eli. If so Yeshua is “of Eli” in the sense
of being his grandson; while Yeshua’s relationship with Yosef is
portrayed in the words, ‘son, as supposed’ — implying not actually...”
- Sermon on the Mount/plain
- Luke and Matthew describe different presentations of similar sermons
|
35
|
- Matthew and Luke results of literary plagiarism where unknown authors
fused undiscovered “Q” gospel and unknown sayings gospel (or Mark)
- This is a method to resolve the obvious parallels between Matthew,
Mark, and Luke
- No “Q” has ever been found
- Obvious rejection of legal-historical concept
- Missing point of Greek logos to tellos
|
36
|
- Greek historical documents
- Accidental religious documents
- Unique in history
- Most religious documents claim inspiration
- Only claim of NT documents is observation
- Authors never intended documents to do anything other than record what
they observed in history
- Greek rationalism driving force
|
37
|
- Based on the legal-historical tests can conclude written words of books
of the NT are historical fact—in most cases, primary source historical
fact
- There is no reason to doubt Acts historical accuracy or veracity
- No belief required to accept historical accuracy or veracity
|
38
|
- Logos and tellos of Acts
- What is it?
- Who wrote it?
- Author’s purpose?
- How do we know?
|