Michael Kruger on Apocryphal Gospels and the Mainstream Media | Canon Fodder

An excerpt from Michael Kruger’s post:

When it comes to these sorts of questions, I like to remind my students of a very simple (but often overlooked) fact:  of all the gospels in early Christianity, only Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are dated to the first century.   Sure, there are minority attempts to put books like the Gospel of Thomas in the first century–but such attempts have not been well received by biblical scholars.  Thus,  if we really want to know what Jesus was like, our best bet is to rely on books that were at least written during the time period when eyewitnesses were still alive.   And there are only four gospels that meet that standard.  [underlining added]

via Apocryphal Gospels and the Mainstream Media | Canon Fodder.

Q: What evidence would show you that the New Testament texts are unreliable as historical documents?

Q:  What evidence would show you that the New Testament texts are unreliable as historical documents?

A: Proof that they are not what they appear and claim to be – that is, they appear to be, and claim to be, documents internal to the first-century movement of people (primarily Jews) who claimed Jesus of Nazareth to have been Israel’s Messiah, raised from the dead.  There would have to be evidence sufficient to change that view.

(First occurring as )

Believing Germ Theory Versus Believing the Truth About Christ

We’re taught germ theory in middle school, if not before at home, and thereafter we wash our hands before eating meals.  We also avoid germs wherever we know they might reside – even though we cannot see a single germ.

If we thus live our lives aware of realities that we cannot see, what is so strange about living our lives according to the truths described to us in the Bible?  Most specifically, what is so strange about living our lives in the light of Jesus Christ who cleanses us from all spiritual “germs”?