Reliability of the Bible

The Weird Reason Bart Ehrman Thinks 2 Thessalonians Is Forged

by

For almost 1800 years, there was solid consensus on the authorship of 2 Thessalonians. It made its way into Marcion’s canon around AD 140 and secured a place in the Muratorian Canon between 180 and 200. Esteemed figures like Polycarp, Ignatius, Justin Martyr alluded to it, and even Irenaeus directly referred to it. But, in today’s scholarly arena, doubts surface. Some scholars, like Bart Ehrman, vehemently contest Paul’s authorship, presenting a multitude of rather peculiar reasons. Ehrman writes: “What seems relatively certain is that someone after the time of Paul decided that he had to intervene in a situation where people were so eagerly anticipating the end, so eagerly, he suggests, that they were neglecting … Read more

The Case for Paul: Investigating Ephesians and Colossians’ True Authorship

by

In the world of Paul’s New Testament letters, most modern scholars only accept 7 out of the 13 attributed to him. This leaves a tough choice for believers: either discard six letters from the Bible or grapple with the notion of possible deceit within the New Testament. The writers of these disputed letters posed as Paul, urging honesty while deceiving others. (Eph. 4:25) But if modern scholarship’s arguments falter and evidence confirms Paul as the true author of all these letters, it’s their credibility that suffers, not the New Testament’s. Let’s now examine Ephesians and Colossians, often bundled together due to their resemblances, and explore their authorship. Different writing styles? In his book “Forged: Writing … Read more

The Early Church Would’ve Never Received Anonymous Gospels

by

Some skeptics claim that before Irenaeus wrote his book Against Heresies in 185 AD, many different Gospels were used in early churches. Irenaeus supported only the four Gospels we have today in the Bible, saying they were special. He linked them to important figures like Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John to make them more authoritative. So crudely put, our current Gospels got their names from a cranky 2nd-century bishop. However, Tertullian, writing about 20 years later from Carthage, throws a monkey wrench into this whole idea by suggesting that the early church would not have accepted anonymous Gospels. Tertullian, initially a lawyer, later became a theologian and used his legal mind to challenge the legitimacy … Read more

Evidence For The Early Existence of Gospel Titles Independent of Irenaeus

by

Skeptics highlight that the Gospels are formally anonymous; they don’t mention their authors. Irenaeus, around 185 AD, was the first to name the traditional authors, but doubts arise because he might have relied on Papias, considered unreliable for spreading false stories about Jesus and Judas. This reliance, his bias and a supposed lack of early proof lead to questioning the true Gospel authors. However, other sources and texts support the traditional authors, challenging these doubts. Although I value Papias and Irenaeus as supporting traditional authorship, their witness isn’t essential to our case. Let’s explore the evidence. In what follows, I’m mostly relying on Simon Gathercole’s paper “The Alleged Anonymity of the Canonical Gospels.” First, let’s … Read more

Authorship Questions in 2 Peter: Debunking the Forgery Claim

by

The authenticity of the second letter of Peter has sparked debates since ancient times. While the early church embraced it as genuine, most modern scholars firmly label it as a forgery. On this point, New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman is quite emphatic: “There is less debate among scholars of the New Testament about the authorship of 2 Peter than for any of the other books sometimes considered forgeries. Whoever wrote 2 Peter, it was not Simon Peter.” (Forged: Writing in the Name of God, pg.80) The issues stem from several reasons: first, it lacks significant references from early church fathers, unlike many other books. Second, its writing style differs notably from Peter’s first epistle and … Read more

Is Inspiration a Distorting Perception? A Response To Dan McClellan

by

Recently in a video biblical scholar Dan McClellan said the doctrine of the inspiration of Scripture is a serious and harmful distortion. If you’re not familiar with Dan, he’s known on TikTok for debunking biblical misconceptions. I find him to be pretty hit-and-miss, but he’s clearly well-informed about current biblical scholarship. Dan: “The most distorting assumption that’s imposed on the Bible is inspiration….The classic biblical proof text for the doctrine of inspiration is 2 Timothy 3:16, which says, “All scripture is theopneustos,” which literally means “God-breathed.” Now, there are three issues with the use of this passage as a proof text for inspiration. The first issue is that it was not written by Paul. It … Read more

Mark’s Gospel: The Case for a Peter-Driven Memoir

by

The Gospels’ authors are a topic of debate for those questioning the New Testament. Mark’s Gospel, early and rich in Jesus’ life story, lacks an eyewitness tag. How did Mark learn about Jesus? The church fathers largely agree that Mark served as a scribe or interpreter for Peter while he preached in Rome. In this post I’ll explore this evidence and see if it matches up with some internal clues. A couple of weak arguments against Petrine influence Before we move forward, let’s address a couple of common objections. Some people say that because Mark never explicitly says he got his information from Peter, it means he probably didn’t. After all, that’s a pretty big … Read more

MythVision’s Misguided Quest to Debunk Undesigned Coincidences Is Getting Weird

by

So I watched a recent episode of MythVision, in which they took another swing against the argument from undesigned coincidences. This time Derek was hosting Dr. Joseph AP Wilson, an adjunct professor at Sacred Heart University. Dr. Wilson has a lot of impressive credentials, holding a Ph.D. in Anthropology from the University of Florida, an MS in Archaeology from Michigan Technological University, an MA in Religious Studies from the University of London, School of Oriental and African Studies, and a BS in Anthropology from Kent State University. After the previous Dr. Jef Tripp fiasco that happened on MythVision, I was hopeful that some lessons would have been learned. Um….yeah. Lessons were most certainly not learned; … Read more

Some Undesigned Coincidences in the Thessalonian Correspondence

by

In his well-known work, Horae Paulinae, William Paley presents a compelling case for the reliability of the book of Acts through a concept he termed “undesigned coincidences.” In this blog post I’ll look at several notable examples of undesigned coincidences between Acts and Paul’s first letter to the Thessalonians. Just to remind you, an undesigned coincidence is “a notable connection between two or more accounts or texts that doesn’t seem to have been planned by the person or people giving the accounts. Despite their apparent independence, the items fit together like pieces of a puzzle.” (McGrew, Hidden in Plain View, pg. 18) So you might be reading a passage and it raises a question, but then … Read more

Analyzing Resurrection Discrepancies: Post-Conversation Musings with Hartke

by

During my recent friendly and enjoyable conversation with skeptic Matthew Hartke, I mentioned that I might have some “shower thoughts” after our discussion. We were talking about contradictions in the resurrection stories, and while I think I did an okay job defending my points, I got a bit stuck at one spot. We were discussing a chapter in Lydia McGrew’s book Testimonies to the Truth called “Unexpected Harmonies,” which explores the concept of reconcilable variations. In the 19th century, the apologist T.R. Birks (there I go quoting another long-deceased apologist) defined a reconcilable variation as follows: “The entire sameness of the narrative, in two or three distinct works, would weaken, and almost destroy the authority … Read more

Is Jesus Alive?