Lydia McGrew

Countering The Amateur Exegete’s Green Grass Coincidence Critique

by

In Lydia McGrew’s book Hidden in Plain View, she presents a compelling argument for the trustworthiness of the Gospels, featuring numerous undesigned coincidences as supporting evidence that the Gospels and Acts were authored by individuals closely connected to the original witnesses of Jesus’ ministry. One of these coincidences centers on the mention of green grass in Mark’s Gospel, which corresponds with an account of it being Passover time in the Gospel of John. (If you’re unfamiliar, I discuss this coincidence in more detail here.) However, a well-read and bright blogger who goes by “The Amateur Exegete,” whose actual name is Ben, raises questions about this apparent coincidence, challenging its evidential value. For a full understanding … Read more

Evidence Supporting Reliability: The Unified Personalities of Mary and Martha

by

The Gospels provide an interesting glimpse into the lives of supporting characters, and what’s truly remarkable is how their personalities shine through in subtle, casual and undesigned ways across multiple stories. These character traits, which emerge incidentally in the narratives, are challenging to fabricate. Even in modern forms of storytelling like serialized TV shows, it’s a complex task to maintain such consistent character traits. I know this isn’t an apples for apples comparison here, but take for instance the transformation of Andy Dwyer in “Parks and Recreation,” for instance. He quickly changed from being a bumbling, lazy, and incredibly selfish boyfriend (poor Ann Perkins) to becoming remarkably a kind, selfless, and romantic husband to April. … Read more

Dr. Jef Tripp’s Tripping Over Undesigned Coincidences On the MythVision Podcast

by

In case you missed it, recently on the MythVision Podcast, Dr. Jef Tripp took the stage to give his negative verdict on Lydia McGrew’s work, Hidden in Plain View. I’m thankful Dr. Tripp actually took the time to read it. Many reviewers haven’t even bothered to do so. (I’m looking at you, Richard Carrier!) During the course of his lecture Dr. Tripp made several noticeable slip-ups in his critique, but in this post, let’s zoom in on one particular point. For a more comprehensive response to his arguments, stay tuned for an upcoming livestream on my friend Than Christopoulos’ channel Exploring Reality. Refresher: What are undesigned coincidences? Just to jog your memory, an undesigned coincidence … Read more

Yes, You Can “Prove” the Resurrection, Actually (A Reply to The Non-Alchemist)

by

So The Non-Alchemist apparently didn’t like my take on Reverend Brandan Robertson’s challenge to Christians to stop claiming they can prove the resurrection. Instead of engaging in a back-and-forth of responses that could go on indefinitely and potentially lose our audience’s interest, I’ve decided to share my thoughts on the matter in a blog post. The Non-Alchemist can choose to have the final word in any format he prefers or simply ignore this. It’s entirely his decision. My original video is here. His response is here. Here’s how he starts off: Here’s critically acclaimed Bible scholar Erik Manning getting upset at a pastor on TikTok: Brandan Robertson: Christians, stop claiming that you can prove the resurrection. … Read more

The Historical Paul vs. The Legendary Paul?

by
ornate bas relief in vault representing saint disciples

Skeptical critics argue that Luke wasn’t a traveling companion of Paul’s. Why do they say this? Let’s discuss one reason. NT scholar Uta Ranke-Heinemann asserts that in: “Acts and the epistles there are two Pauls. The historical Paul of the authentic epistles and the legendary Paul of Acts.” 1 In other words, don’t confuse the colorful Paul of Acts with the actual Paul we read about in his letters. This indicates that Luke didn’t have firsthand knowledge of Paul. He must have lied about being his traveling companion and embellished a bunch of stories. But is the Paul of Acts that different from the Paul we read about in his letters? I’d say no. Not … Read more

Is John’s Jesus Different Than The Synoptics?

by
window church crucifixion church window

New Testament scholars often treat the Gospel of John like a red-headed stepchild. We’re often told that John presents a Jesus who is fundamentally different from the Synoptics. For example, here is the well-known NT critic Bart Ehrman:  …if Matthew and John were both written by earthly disciples of Jesus, why are they so very different, on all sorts of levels? … Why do they have such fundamentally different views of who Jesus was?… (interview with NPR 12/14/05) Ehrman certainly isn’t alone in his opinion here. Even Craig Evans, an evangelical New Testament scholar, concedes this point to Bart. He says: I suspect we (Ehrman and I) don’t have too much difference on John. My … Read more

Artless Similarities: More Evidence for Gospel Reliability

by

While reading the gospels, you’ll notice similarities between the characters portrayed across the different stories. Parallels between the gospels concerning character depictions are unlikely to be the result of mere chance. And these correspondences seem so casual and subtle that it’s unlikely they were designed that way. Philosopher Tim McGrew calls these ‘artless similarities.’ In an earlier video, we saw this kind of unity of character with Jesus between John and the Synoptics. But let me give another example with two somewhat lesser-known characters in the gospels — Mary and Martha. We find their stories in both Luke and John. For this evidence, I’m drawing from Peter J. Williams’ excellent book Can We Trust the … Read more

Learn to Make a Maximal Case for the Resurrection

by

I used to love sharing the minimal facts with unbelievers.  It’s easy to present in a few minutes and sounds rhetorically powerful. When I tell my friends that the facts I’m sharing are universally acknowledged by scholars, even those who are skeptical, it seems like I am not coming at them with something that only conservative evangelicals believe. And on the surface, taking an end-run around the Gospels seemed helpful because unbelievers tend to view them as dubious sources.  However, I ran into a couple of issues. One was practical. Let’s say I got the skeptic to hear me out. Does it really make sense to say: “OK, I granted for the sake of argument … Read more

How Not to Argue for the Resurrection of Jesus

by

Here’s a pitfall I’ve seen quite a few Christian apologists fall into when arguing for the resurrection of Jesus. The argument goes something like this: Paul probably believed that Jesus’ resurrection was physical. This is evident from his letters. In 1 Corinthians 15:4, Paul says Jesus was buried and then raised. What goes down in burial must come up in resurrection. In Romans 8:11 and Philippians 3:21, Paul also refers to resurrection as something physical. Paul thought what happened to Jesus’ body will someday happen to ours.  According to Paul, Peter, James, and John approved of his Gospel in his letter to the Galatians. He was preaching what they were preaching. Therefore, the other apostles … Read more

Does Paul’s Conversion Prove Christianity?

by

Does Paul’s conversion prove Christianity? Some apologists have argued that it does. We all know Paul’s story: He was a zealous Pharisee bent on wiping out Christianity before it could get too far off the ground. While on his way to Damascus, Paul saw what he believed to be the risen Jesus. He did a complete 180 and started preaching the faith he was once determined to destroy. This is a big deal because Jesus’ followers were preaching bodily resurrection from day one. Paul considered himself to be charged directly by Jesus to preach the same message. When he later met with the apostles, they gave his Gospel their stamp of approval.  There’s no sense … Read more

Is Jesus Alive?