Gospel of Luke

Pervo’s Pitfall: Acts Is Independent from Paul’s Letters

by

Did Luke really travel with Paul as Christians have always believed? Richard Pervo, a New Testament scholar, has a different idea. Pervo thinks the Book of Acts, which tells us about Paul’s adventures, was made up much later, in the second century. Pervo believes they took parts of Paul’s letters to create the book. Several scholars and skeptics online have latched onto his thesis in their quest to discredit the reliability of the Book of Acts. But is there any proof to support what he’s saying? Let’s dive into this topic and see if Pervo’s arguments really make sense. So, if we entertain the idea that both Paul’s letters and Acts are based on real … Read more

Defending Luke-Acts: Exposing and Answering More Than 24 Objections to its Historical Credibility

by

In an online group that I’m part of, an insightful skeptic, whose identity I’ll respect by keeping nameless, challenges the prevailing belief held by Christian apologists that Luke, the author of the third Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles, deserves to be hailed as a skilled historian. This skeptic takes it a step further, boldly claiming that Luke is nothing short of “terrible.” While presenting an extensive list of objections that may initially appear overwhelming, a closer examination uncovers their inherent weaknesses. In this blog post, I analyze the arguments put forth by this particular critic, one by one. The skeptic shotguns out 8 different arguments, with bullet points to back up his assertions.  … Read more

Are the Accounts of Jesus’s Ascension Contradictory?

by

Bart Ehrman says that the author of Luke can’t seem to get the story of the Ascension of Jesus right. In his Gospel, Luke says that Jesus ascended into heaven the day of his resurrection. In The Acts of the Apostles, Jesus hung around for 40 days before leaving his disciples. Dr. Ehrman writes in his blog:  “In Luke 24 (you can read it for yourself and see) Jesus rises from the dead, on that day meets with his disciples, and then, again that day, he ascends to heaven from the town of Bethany. But when you read Acts 1, written by the same author, you find that Jesus did not ascend on that day … Read more

Is Bart Ehrman Right When He Says That Acts Contradicts Paul’s Letters?

by

Agnostic New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman says, “the book of Acts in the New Testament contains historically unreliable information about the life and teachings of Paul.” In his book, Jesus, Interrupted Dr. Ehrman provides five examples of contradictions that exist between Paul’s letters and Acts.  Ehrman writes, “These are just a few of the discrepancies that one can find when one reads Acts horizontally against Paul’s letters. Many more can be discovered. What they show is that Acts cannot be relied upon for completely accurate detail when it describes the mission of the early apostles such as Paul.” Since these contradictions are the five he handpicked for his book, he must feel like they’re some of the … Read more

Are There Beastly High Priestly Problems Going On in Luke and John?

by
annas and caiaphas

If the Gospels make historical goofs, then it’s hard to call them reliable documents. Skeptics have been quick to point out that the Gospel writers make several factual errors, and an example of that is Luke and John’s confusion regarding the high priesthood.  Tradition tells us that Luke was a traveling companion of Paul and used apostles for sources. Surely he should’ve known better. And John was supposedly a Jew and an eyewitness. A local should’ve probably had a solid idea about how the high priesthood works.   Let’s start with Luke.  Two High Priests?  Luke 3 sets the stage for John the Baptist, and this is where he seems to get confused. Luke 3:2 reads: “during … Read more

Were the Gospel Writers Really Geographically Inept?

by

Skeptics say that Mark and the other Gospel writers knew little about Palestinian geography. They made grave geographical gaffes. Had the Gospel writers knew their stuff, they wouldn’t make such blatant mistakes. Therefore, we can’t trust them as reliable historical documents.  For Matthew’s Gospel, this is especially problematic. A real Judean local like Matthew wouldn’t borrow from someone as geographically incompetent as Mark. Some critics have concluded from this that whoever wrote Matthew, it couldn’t be Matthew the disciple.  I want to look at three times the Gospel writers supposedly flunk at Palestinian geography and see if these objections really carry any weight. Is There a Blunder in Mark 7:31? Here’s the text: “Then he … Read more

Did the author of Luke make a geographical blunder in Luke 4:29?

by

Let’s just say that Jesus’ first sermon in his home city of Nazareth did not go over big. Reading out of Isaiah 61, Jesus announces that he’s the long-awaited Messiah that the prophet predicted. Rather than becoming a hometown hero, this offended the people who watched Jesus grow up to no end. Jesus then irritated them further, pointing to two different scenarios in the Books of Kings where rejected prophets healed and helped Gentile sinners before helping their fellow Israelites. (Luke 4:16-31) Luke tells us that this was the result: “And they rose up and drove him out of the town and brought him to the brow of the hill on which their town was built so … Read more

84 reasons why we know Luke was a traveling companion and eyewitness of the miraculous life of the Apostle Paul

by

Bart Ehrman claims that Luke wasn’t really a traveling companion of Paul. In his book Forged, Ehrman writes: “(The author of Acts) is simply claiming to be a traveling companion of Paul’s and therefore unusually well suited to give a “true” account of Paul’s message and mission. But he almost certainly was not a companion of Paul’s. On the one hand, he was writing long after Paul and his companions were dead. Scholars usually date Acts to around 85 CE or so, over two decades after Paul’s death. On the other hand, he seems to be far too poorly informed about Paul’s theology and missionary activities to have been someone with firsthand knowledge.”  (Forged: Writing in … Read more

A hopeless Bible contradiction? Why do Matthew and Luke give us two different genealogies for Jesus?

by

Early in their respective Gospels, Matthew and Luke both present to us Jesus’ genealogy. But there’s a rather glaring problem between the two records. They are irreconcilably different. Popular skeptical blogger Bob Seidensticker calls this one of the most damning Bible contradictions, a discrepancy that strikes at the foundation of Christian claims. To help me state the objection in more detail, I’ll let Bob do the talking: “The Messiah had to be of the line of David (Jeremiah 33:15–17; Isaiah 9:7), so two gospels provide genealogies of Jesus to validate this requirement. The problem is that we only need to go back one generation, to Joseph’s father, to find a problem. Jacob [was] the father … Read more

Is Jesus Alive?