Guest
Many people say that the New Testament cannot be true because we don’t know exactly what the authors originally wrote, or because there are contradictions in it, or because some of the books were not written by their alleged authors, or because there are historical mistakes. But even if these things are true, does that mean the New Testament cannot be true – on some level? Bart and Megan discuss: Why is the question of the “truth“ of the New Testament important? If it is “true,“ in what sense? Is truth in fiction the same as truth in nonfiction? Does the fact that we don’t know who wrote the gospels impact their “truth“? If a book of the bible is a forgery, does that make it necessarily untrue? The question of authorship versus veracity is complicated. If one part of a writing is verifiably true, does mean it’s all true? What kind of questions do historians try to verify? What criteria do historians use to determine genre (what is history, what is poetry, etc.)? The Gospels are biographies, but are not trying to tell an objective, chronological story. Ancient writers were interested in getting at the essence of a person, rather than the particular historical details of his life. If people read the Gospels as history rather than as they were intended, they miss the message of the writer. The Book of Revelation is a particular genre, not meant as prophetic literature. Paul’s Epistles ARE meant to be read as factual. Some people read the bible like a ouija board; some cherry-pick it like a jigsaw puzzle. Is the response of the modern reader a kind of truth? Can it lead to bad interpretations? Listeners Questions: If a scribe changes a text, is that divinely inspired? When did Christians start believing the scriptures were inerrant? Does Paul think men & women are equal when he says “in Christ, there is no male or female...“? First Corinthians 15:29 talks about baptizing the dead. Did Paul intend people to do this?
