Skeptics Answered: More on the Bible

Check out the original “Call to Skeptics” that birthed this objection.

I received another challenge on the Bible that went like so:

The bible is a manuscript from the 5th century AD – Most, if not all, of the pages in the bible originally were written around 5th century AD.  That means there were 500 years between the existence of Jesus and the book. So it is obvious that bible cannot be taken as a evidence for his existence. We will never know if the bible contains even a single sentence from the mouth of Jesus, even if he existed.

First, I have answered the challenge of the existence of Jesus in my post on the “Copycat Myth” theory.  Go take a gander at it.

I don’t know why the fella says most of the pages in the Bible were written 500 years after Jesus’ existence on earth (or johnrylandspapyriin the 5th century, which would be 400 years later).  That sounds more like the Koran, but not the New Testament.

The facts are these:  there exists manuscript copies well before the 5th/6th century.  The Chester Beatty Papyri, containing most of the New Testament, dates from around 250 A.D.  The Bodmer Papyri II collection, containing most of the Gospel of John, dates from A.D 200 or earlier.  The John Rylands Papyri, a fragment of John 18, dates from A.D 117-138 or earlier.

What’s more, this fragment was discovered in Egypt, quite a far distance away from the place of original writing.   Such a wide circulation takes time.  This suggests the date the Gospel of John was written was much earlier than the window given for the origin of the Papyri.

There is more evidence in the writings of the church fathers, who were leaders in the Christian church after the first apostles passed.  Irenaeus, writing around A.D 180, names the four Gospels specifically.

Clement, writing about A.D 95-100, made allusions to many of Paul’s letters.  Polycarp, writing soon after, makes 100 allusions to the New Testament documents.  Papias, yet another church father, defends Mark’s gospel from criticisms of innacuracy.

All this shows that the gentleman is quite out to lunch in his challenge.

Greg Koukl and Mark Roberts have more detail.  (ID for Koukl–Pugnacious.  Password–Irishman).

Check out the following related posts:

What About Other Gospels?

Hitchens-Turek Debate Analysis

Hitchens-Craig Debate Analysis

_______________________________________________________________________________________

If you liked what you read, please consider subscribing to my RSS feed (RSS button can be found at the top right in the sidebar) and/or stumble this post (S.U button below).

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

About these ads

One response to “Skeptics Answered: More on the Bible

  1. My dear friend, Jesus read the old testimant when He was twelve years old in the temple.And correct me if im mistaken but is’nt the old testament in the bible? And if Jesus never lived then why does the history channel constantly have shows about Him and how He lived? And you mentioned the koran, but even the birth of Jesus is in the koran. Why write about a man that you dont believe in? And in defence of the gospels, everyone tells the same story differently.It’s like the game telephone, once it gets back around the original measage will be a little twisted. Study for yourself because as the bible says “people suffer for the lack of knowledge.” If you desire to continue this convo feel free to email me at millenniumdisciple@gmail.com

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s