The Historical Reliability of the New Testament

[Randy Carson]

I guess my follow-up question is this:

Do you agree that some books of the bible have multiple authors? If so, what goes into your Manuscript "M" - just the first author's work, or the additions, or just some of them, or what? And who's to say?

Jenny-

Thanks for the link...I'll take a look.

Yes, some books have multiple authors, and yes, some of the authors are less certain than others. As for "who's to say", why, only one, infallible Church had that authority, of course!

But forgive me if I ask that we defer this discussion until later. As you probably know, I will be "swarmed" by AF regulars eager to take their best shots at the new guy, so I want to try to keep the discussion focused very tightly in this thread. 

---

Oh boy... is this what convinces you? This is what makes your bible special? REALLY?

It has nothing to do with the validity of the largely or rather entirely unsupported supernatural claims made and nothing to do with forming a good argument for god's existence.

Didja notice the outline numbering? I.A.0....I.A.1., etc?

We're just getting started. 

---

The purpose of these first posts is to establish one fact: we are working with an accurate text.

Accurate of what exactly?

We have a fairy tale, complete with the walking dead and splatter elements at the end.

So I could write a string of swear words and it would be an accurate text. Does it prove something? No. Same goes for the new testament.

Either the text that you can read today is an accurate translation of what the original author wrote or it isn't.

So, yes or no? 

Oh, and some "why" would be nice if you have anything.