He did not walk around saying, “I am God”, however. This chapter is an excellent example of how knowing the Old Testament background can allow for a fuller understanding the New Testament.Ĭhapter 9 argues that, even in the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus is depicted as divine. When Jesus alludes to these prophecies he is indicating he is their fulfillment. Daniel 2 and 7 also depict a heavenly messiah ruling a heavenly kingdom. These prophecies speak of a kingdom of God, a Son of Man, and provide a time frame when the expected messiah should arrive. This chapter touches on two main issues (the destruction of the temple and the ending of Acts) related to dating but may be too short to be convincing to those with informed opposing viewpoints.Ĭhapter 8 examines the messianic prophecies found in Daniel 2, 7, and 9. If Luke used Matthew and Mark as sources then the Synoptic Gospels are likely to date to the 60s or earlier. His main arguments are that the gospels do not mention destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in 70 and that Acts ends while Paul is still alive. But Pitre argues that the gospels may have been written decades earlier than is commonly thought. We must keep in mind that the disciples would have rehearsed the gospel throughout the intervening years and so would not be retrieving long dormant memories when they wrote the gospels. Even if the gospels were all written after 70 that would still be within living memory of the disciples. Of particular note is that we should not expect the gospels to be verbatim transcripts.Ĭhapter 7 examines the dating of the gospels. These chapters provide a solid, if brief, overview of why mainstream scholarship is too quick to proclaim the gospels to be anonymous.Ĭhapter 6 quickly covers why most scholars consider the gospels to be ancient biographies. If the canonical gospels were suspect we would expect the church fathers to have no problem condemning them as well. Chapter 5 briefly looks at apocryphal gospels and how the church fathers had no problem condemning them as spurious. The external evidence, which includes church fathers, heretics, and enemies of the church, is unanimous in accepting the traditional authorship of the gospels. Christian communities would need titles on the manuscripts to tell different gospels apart and so it is inherently likely that they would contain identifying information. This contrasts with Hebrews, a truly anonymous book, where we see differences of name in the title of manuscripts and debates over authorship among the church fathers. No anonymous copies of Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John have ever been found and the manuscripts never disagree over which name goes with which gospel. Chapters 2-4 argue that the canonical gospels were not anonymous, as is so often claimed, but were truly written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. The task begins by addressing the nature of the canonical gospels, the primary sources for the life of Jesus. It’s primary focus is on whether Jesus claimed to be/is God. The Case for Jesus: The Biblical and Historical Evidence for Christ by Brant Pitre is an excellent introductory-intermediate text for budding apologists.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |