#8 - Add Impact

New Testament Historical Reliability

  1. Are we in the Matrix?
    1. The Matrix
      1. Neo (Keanu Reeves) learns that his life was a computer simulation in the Matrix
      2. His fundamental beliefs about his life were false
      3. The foundation for his worldviews were erroneous
      4. He had to leave the Matrix to enter the objective universe, where he could trust what was before him
      5. Then he could construct a stable and accurate philosophy, and approach to life
    2. Are we outside the Matrix?
      1. Am I in the religious Matrix? Or outside?
      2. For me, this means examing NT historical reliability
      3. If NT is unreliable, then Christianity has serious foundational problem.
      4. If reliable then my beliefs are connected to reality
      5. NT example
        1. Primary details are correct
        2. Jesus' teachings and actions
        3. Early church formation
      6. Secondary details are accurate
        1. Romans took censuses
  2. What I mean by Historical Reliability
    1. Explain NT Reliability
      1. Spend next 6 minutes explaining why I think NT is reliable
      2. Same process shows OT – Jewish Tanakh – is reliable too
    2. I assess historical reliability
      1. Internal
      2. External
      3. Bibliographic
  3. Internal Evidence: Authors claim reliability
    1. Authors claim reliability and to be eyewitnesses
      1. John 19:35 (eyewitness) – "And he who has seen has borne witness, and his witness is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth."
    2. Implicit reliability claim in the text
    3. Recap: authors explictly and implicitly claim reliability
  4. External Evidence: Other sources support it
    1. Other authors, historians, and archaeological findings agree with & support the NT
    2. Archaeology
      1. Luke is a very accurate historian (2 examples)
        1. Archaeological discoveries (including census form 104 AD) show the Romans had a regular enrollment of taxpayers, and held censuses every 14 years and corroborate the birth narrative (Luke 2:1)
        2. Luke agreement Þ other gospels are accurate
    3. Other writings
      1. Sympathetic writers
        1. Church Leaders
        2. Mark was Peter's disciple
      2. Unsympathetic writers (more interesting)
        1. Josephus (Jewish historian for Romans, 100 AD)
          1. Jesus was called the Christ
          2. Jesus was considered wise
          3. Did remarkable things and was a teacher
          4. Accused by Pilate and condemned to be crucified
    4. Recap
      1. Archeology
      2. Sympathetic writers
      3. Unsympathetic writers
  5. Bibiliographic: We have what was originally written
    1. Immense manuscript evidence for NT
      1. No original manuscripts
      2. >25000 whole and partial manuscripts
      3. Most manuscripts within one or two generations of original
      4. Best and most important dated around 350 AD
    2. Manuscript evidence far outweighs any other ancient document
      1. Iliad
        1. Next best attested text
        2. Written ~800 BC
        3. 643 Greek manuscripts
        4. Earliest copies from 2nd & 3rd centuries AD (500 yrs late)
      2. Most ancient documents have 6-12 manuscripts 500-1000 yrs newer than original
    3. Recap
      1. Massive manuscript evidence
      2. Authorship is within lifetimes of eyewitnesses
  6. Summary
    1. The NT is historically accurate
    2. Doesn't mean my beliefs are true
    3. Does mean they are they are connected to reality
    4. It provides an important stepping stone for evaluating the rest of my beliefs