Historical Accuracy And Authenticity Of The Gospel Gospel, in Greek Euangelion, meaning “good news”; are the records written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. There has been much debate in the Scholarly community as to whether these records are authentic and historically accurate. Most scholars agree that the Gospels are authentic and accurate records of Jesus life, however there are still those that believe that they were made up to promote a fledgling faith. Consequently, I am going to explain in detail why the Gospel is both authentic and an accurate representation of Jesus life. Before I begin, I must acknowledge that it is true, we do not have the original written texts of the Gospel. However, that leads me into my first point, we have thousands upon thousands of handwritten copies, also called manuscripts of the Gospels. The earliest dated copy has been estimated to have been written anywhere from 50-100 CE, that is only 25 to 50 years after Jesus was said to have died on the cross and when the originals would have been written. Historically speaking that is incredible. Furthermore, another point is the willingness of Jesus’s Apostles to suffer and die at the hands of the …show more content…
Romans, due to the fact that they would not recant their testimony that they saw Jesus alive three days after he died. Of course martyrdom is not a unique act in many religions. We see many religious fanatics “martyred” for what they believe in, although I do not think martyr is the right word for a religious fanatic who dies for his beliefs. The word martyr comes from the Greek word mártys, which means witness. This is why that word perfectly describes Jesus’s apostles. Jesus’s Apostles deaths were unique in that they didn’t die for something they believed in, they died for something they claimed to have seen with their own eyes; that Jesus had risen. Furthermore, the accuracy and authenticity of the Gospel is reinforced by the fact that they are the most well preserved historical texts we have in antiquity. They are also the most numerous texts we have. We have 5600 manuscript copies of the whole new testament written in Greek, that is not including the 19000 copies we have in the Syrian, Latin, Coptic and Aramaic languages, which then bring the total to over 24000. Accordingly, New Testament scholars have also estimated that the time between the writing of the original New Testament, and the manuscripts is less than 100 years. If we were to compare that to another historical text that no one disputes the authenticity of, let us compare it to Homer’s Iliad. We have 643 Greek manuscripts of Homer’s Iliad, scholars also estimate that the time in between the writing of the original Iliad and the manuscripts was 500 years. As I said, no one debates the existence of Homer or the authenticity of his works To conclude, I believe the evidence offered puts forth a strong case for the historical significance of the Gospel.
I believe there is little reason to doubt the historical authenticity and accuracy of the Gospel when examining the evidence. The fact that the manuscripts were written only 50 years after Jesus death, as well as the number of manuscript copies we have currently are all strong factors for considering their accuracy, the fact that we have so many copies means we can also cross examine them and compare them to each other to check the consistency; as it turns out there is a 99.5% consistency rate across all 5600 Greek copies. There is just too much evidence that points to the historic accuracy to factor in when considering whether they are authentic or
not.
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth (Genesis1:1.) God’s perfect wisdom created everything. In Genesis 1 and 2 we can see that God has loving and gentile nature when He created the earth and heavens. God created man in his image and we are the only creation that God breathed in the breath of life for human beings (Genesis 2:7). God did not do this for any of other creations but only for humans. The Bible has many scriptures that tell us how creative God is. Genesis 1;26 states “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” God created all of this for us to have fellowship with him.
The foundation of a Christian worldview is the belief in a personal God, creator and ruler of the universe. The Christian worldview views the world through God’s word, providing the framework for humanity to live by giving meaning and purpose to life. It defines who Jesus is, human nature, and how salvation is achieved. In essence it is the basis of which Christians behave, interact, interpret life and comprehend reality. A Christian worldview imparts confidence, answers to life’s problems, and hope for the future. In this paper I will discuss the essentials of a Christian worldview and an analysis of the influences, benefits, and difficulties sustaining the Christian faith.
The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are the origin of nearly everything the Christian Church teaches about Jesus. The Gospels, in turn, serve as the scale or test of truth and authenticity of everything the church teaches about Jesus. It is said that the Gospels are the link between Jesus of Nazareth and the people of every age throughout history who have claimed to be his followers. Although the Gospels teach us about Jesus’ life they may not provide concrete evidence that what they speak of is true there are several other sources.
But if the Gospels are thoroughly researched in depth, it becomes evident that the two writers were targeting different readers. Matthew writes for a Jewish audience, while John directs his book to all Christ-believers around the world. Another evident difference is the central theme that each Gospel relates to. Matthew’s major theme is Jesus fulfilling the Old Testament prophecy. While John continuously writes about belief in Jesus is required for salvation, making this his central theme. The last difference seen between both Gospels are the perspective of Jesus that is portrayed throughout the book. Matthew presents Jesus as a Messiah but John describes Jesus as the Son of God. With just knowledge from two Gospels on Jesus, they provide one clear message that Jesus is one, true Son of
The Gospel of Thomas is definitely set apart from the Canonical Gospels, which include the Gospel of Matthew, the Gospel of Mark, the Gospel of Luke and the Gospel of John. Although all four are not identical, there is a traditional underlying message found in all. On the contrary, the Gospel of Thomas seems to have an entirely different message.
In fact, understood this way, Christianity even places a distinction between the martyrdom of apostles and the martyrdom of Christians today. “Modern martyrs die for what they sincerely believe to be true, but their knowledge comes secondhand from others.”4 Even those who are killed for their Christianity in current times don 't demonstrate the truth of Christianity, rather the sincerity of their beliefs. The apostles ' martyrdom alone can be used as evidence in support of the resurrection of Jesus, and therefore, the truth of
The Gospel of Matthew is an eyewitness story written for an audience of believers, under great stress, and persecution. Matthew develops a theological plot incorporating genealogy, speeches, parables, inter and intra textual references, common vocabulary, and fulfillment quotations, with a tension that builds as we are invited into the story. The crucifixion and resurrection bring us to a Christological climax that symbolically points beyond its conclusion to God’s Kingdom, bringing atonement, salvation and the ushering in the Eschaton. The extraordinary events surrounding the crucifixion act as commentary, adding important details concerning the death of Jesus.1
...ost confidence that the Gospels that we have today is the same Gospels that were originally written.
One of the main characteristics of the gospel of Mark is it’s length. Mark is much shorter than Matthew and Luke, but what it lacks in quantity, it makes up for in quality. The author of Mark does not slow down the gospel story and makes sure that only important and relevant details are included. When Mark is compared with Matthew and Luke, it becomes obvious to see what Mark has eliminated. The author’s omission of Jesus’ birth, lineage, resurrection, and ascension denote careful planning and purpose in the gospel of Mark.
In the gospels of Mark and John, both showed a vivid portrait of Jesus in their writing. Mark’s gospel describes much more of Jesus' life, miracles, and parables as suffering servant. However, John’s gospel was written to convince people to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God. Nonetheless, both John and Mark present many of the crucial events of Jesus' life, including his trial, crucifixion, and resurrection.
The first of these was apostolicity. As Augustine noted, there is a "distinct boundary" separating the authoritative writings of the Old and New Testaments, from those that were written subsequent to the apostolic times. He even goes as far as to say that if there is an apparent contradiction, then the manuscript is faulty, the translation is wrong, or you yourself are mistaken. However, to say that the author is mistaken is not allowable. This then leads to the second criteria, orthodoxy. For the writings in question could not be found to be inconsistent with the authentic gospel message, as was the case with the so called Gospel of Peter. Furthermore, these writing needed to reflect the quality of inspiration, giving evidence to the "high moral and spiritual values that would reflect the work of the Holy Spirit." And finally, there must have been evidence of ecclesiastical usage in worship, with the text never having been universally rejected as inauthentic by early churches. This then would eliminate the possibility of any new found text being added to the canon, even if one were to consider it to still be open. For if Paul himself were to have written another letter, there would be no evidence of its usage in over 2,000
The contents of the Bible have dealt with controversy in regards to its inerrancy since publication, and will surely continue to. Historians progress to learn more about biblical stories in order to provide evidence for the reliability of information. Many believers today understand that not everything in the Bible has been factually proven. An outstanding topic many scholars pay attention to lies within the four gospels. The three synoptic gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, replay essentially the same story with minor inconsistencies, while John portrays Jesus in an entirely different way. The differences in each gospel are due to how each gospel entertains different portrayals of the life and understanding of Jesus himself, in order to persuade
The word 'gospel' means good news. There are four gospel accounts in the New Testament:
and that whoever wrote this gospel his main purpose was to influence people not writing evidences and to diminish
The historical reliability of the Bible is the first matter that needs to be discussed. There are three criteria that the military historian C. Sanders lists as principles for documentary historical proof: the bibliographical test, internal evidence test, and the external evidence test (McDowell 43). The bibliographical test is the examination of text from the documents that have reached us. The reliability of the copies of the New Testament is tested by the number of manuscripts (MSS) and the time intervals between the time in which the piece of literature was written and our earliest copy. There are more than 5,300 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament and 10,000 Latin vulgate manuscripts, not to mention the other various translations.