(July 9, 2015 at 9:24 pm)Luckie Wrote:(July 9, 2015 at 9:03 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Because a historically reliable NT tells me that Jesus existed, that he was crucified and that he was raised from the dead. This suggests that his claim to be God was legit. If so, then EVERYTHING he said becomes extremely important, and one of the things he talked about was the final exam.
Hi there, I was just perusing and saw this post. I'd be interested in knowing what you consider to be proof that the New Testament is historically accurate? Elementary question, I know. But if it's the entire basis of your belief, then it's quite crucial.
Welcome to AF by the way!
Thanks!
I have two threads which cover this material:
1. The Historical Reliability of the New Testament
2. Proving the Resurrection by the Minimal Facts Approach
Thread 1 was my first real attempt at engaging atheists. The thread got bogged down in side issues, and I learned that I would have to take a different approach to interacting with the gang here.
Thread 2 is based upon the idea that it is NOT necessary to rely upon the NT in order to conclude that the resurrection is the most plausible explanation of the facts that are generally accepted by ALL scholars - skeptics and theists alike.
And btw, I have not claimed that the reliability of the NT is the "entire basis" for my faith. But, you have plans...so proceed.