Video: The Gospels Were Written Before 70 AD

Most scholars say that the Gospel of Mark dates from AD 66–70, Matthew and Luke around 85–90, and John 90–100. Skeptics like Bart Ehrman imply that they’re too late to be reliable, as a decades-long time-gap leaves plenty of room for myths and legends to creep in.   When it comes to history, chronological closeness matters. But where exactly are critics coming up with these later dates? In this video, I look at one bad reason that scholars often date the Gospels late. And we’ll discover there are several good reasons to think they were written while Peter and Paul were still alive. Erik ManningErik is a Reasonable Faith Chapter Director located in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. He’s … Read more

Video: No, Christian Apologists Aren’t Committing the Spider-Man Fallacy

Ah, the Spider-Man fallacy. It’s a card that skeptics love to play. While I can define it, you’ll recognize it better if I give you an example:  Christian apologist: “Critics of the New Testament have repeatedly been proven wrong by archaeology. Some skeptics have said that Nazareth wasn’t a real city, or that there couldn’t have been a synagogue in 1st-century Capernaum. But archaeologists have proven them wrong.” Internet atheist guy: “Bro, you’re committing the Spider-Man fallacy. 2,000 years from now archaeologists could dig up the ruins of Columbia University or the Empire State Building. Does that prove that Spider-Man exists? LOL.” Or to give another example:  Christian apologist: “Jesus’ crucifixion is historically certain. Even if any of … Read more

Video: The Gospel Authors Knew Local Geography

Skeptics argue that the Gospels were written far after the events they report, in distant lands like Rome, Egypt, Turkey, or Greece. They’re not a product of eyewitness testimony but a collection of stories passed on for decades. The original story of Jesus got mixed up over time, like a long game of telephone. But is that really what happened? As it turns out, the Gospel writers don’t just know 1st-Century Palestinian geography when compared with other sources, they are actually valuable sources themselves, proving the skeptics wrong. The video is just under 6 minutes long. Erik ManningErik is a Reasonable Faith Chapter Director located in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. He’s a former freelance baseball writer … Read more

Video: 5 Times Archaeology Debunked Gospel Skeptics

Skeptical critics love to try to poke holes in the Gospel narratives, claiming they’re full of historical blunders. But in recent times, many of these so-called holes have been filled by the shovel of archaeology. In this video, I run through the top 5 examples of critics looking bad in the light of new archaeological discoveries. Erik ManningErik is a Reasonable Faith Chapter Director located in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. He’s a former freelance baseball writer and the co-owner of a vintage and handmade decor business with his wife, Dawn. He is passionate about the intersection of apologetics and evangelism.

Video: Yes, Josephus Mentions the Historical Jesus

Skeptics often ask why contemporary historians fail to mention Jesus. The typical Christian reply is we have several who describe Jesus, notably including the first-century Jewish historian Josephus. Here’s where hardcore skeptics will say: “Fake news! Josephus never really mentions Jesus. Of the two passages about Jesus found in Josephus, one is fake, and the other isn’t referring to Jesus at all.” I have to say that I find this reply to be a bit odd. Even rabid critics of Christianity like Bart Ehrman and John Dominic Crossan believe that Josephus refers to Jesus. Where are these Jesus mythicists getting this stuff? In this video, I look at 5 common mythicists complaints against the genuineness … Read more

6 Bad Reasons to Reject the Traditional Authorship of John’s Gospel

Nearly every shred of evidence that we have from the early church fathers tells us that the Apostle John wrote the fourth Gospel. And in a previous video, we saw plenty of internal evidence that points to John being the genuine author. Despite all this, there’s a lot of pushback offered from the critics. You’ll often hear there’s a vast scholarly consensus against the traditional authorship of John.  But when you dig into the arguments from biblical critics, they often turn out to be pretty weak. In this video, I address some of the more common ones.  Erik ManningErik is a Reasonable Faith Chapter Director located in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. He’s a former freelance baseball … Read more

Video: 6 Reasons Why Peter is the Source of Mark’s Gospel

Many of the early church fathers say that Mark’s Gospel is based on Peter’s preaching. If that’s the case, it’s understandable why an apostle like Matthew or someone like Luke would use Mark as a source. You can’t get much closer to the life of Jesus than through the eyes of Peter.  We’ve looked at what the early church fathers had to say about Mark before. However, skeptics like Bart Ehrman say that this whole idea that Mark based his Gospel on Peter’s preaching stems from Papias, and Papias doesn’t know what he’s talking about.   OK, so now what?  While I don’t think that argument works, what if I said there was a way to … Read more

Video: 3 Bad Reasons to Doubt the Traditional Authorship of Matthew

Skeptics like Bart Ehrman say that we don’t know who wrote Matthew’s Gospel. In Bart’s own words, “Whoever wrote Matthew did not call it “The Gospel according to Matthew.” The persons who gave it that title are telling you who, in their opinion, wrote it…” Now, the early church fathers all agree that Matthew wrote it. And all the ancient manuscripts we have attributed it to Matthew. We’ve looked at this in previous videos. So what are the main reasons Ehrman thinks that someone other than Matthew wrote it? In this video, I look at three bad reasons why many biblical critics reject the traditional authorship of Matthew and why they fail. Erik ManningErik is … Read more

Video: There’s No Excuse for Abortion Unless You’re Certain the Unborn isn’t a Person

In Roe vs. Wade, Associate Justice Harry Blackmun, speaking for the majority, said the Court was unable to determine when life begins. He wrote: ‘‘When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus…the judiciary, at this point in the development of man’s knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer.” So since we’re skeptical about when life begins, it should be the mother’s decision right? Well, no. Philosopher Peter Kreeft argues that “abortion agnosticism” is actually a reason why we should be pro-life, not the other way around. In this video, I take a ten-minute snippet of Kreeft’s trilemma and set … Read more

James was Jesus’ Brother. Deal With It, Mythcists.

James the brother of Jesus

It’s a pretty amazing historical fact that Jesus’ brother — who probably wore the Savior’s hand-me-downs — later in life converted to Christianity. What would it take to convince you that your brother was the Messiah? Suffice to say that would take some pretty miraculous evidence, right? The Gospel writers tell us that Jesus’ own family thought he was crazy and doubted his claims. (Mark 3:21, John 7:5) But after believing he saw the risen Jesus, James had quite the change of mind. (1 Corinthians 15:7) He became an apostle, led the Jerusalem church, and was even martyred for the faith. This is pretty compelling evidence for Christianity. Here is where Jesus-mythers try and burst our … Read more

Is Jesus Alive?