User Menu Search
Close

On True Legends, by Tom Gilson

Some say that Jesus was either Lord, liar or lunatic. What if we add 'legend' to the mix?

by Tom Gilson—

There are many challenges to the four gospels' authenticity and historical accuracy. The following article by Tom Gilson addresses these challenges with a unique perspective on the stuff of legend.

(summary abridged)

"'A man claiming to be God', says C.S. Lewis, 'could hardly be good unless he really was God.' If Jesus was not the Lord..." [then what?] This argument is beautiful in its simplicity: It calls for no deep familiarity with New Testament theology or history, only knowledge of the Gospels themselves, and some understanding of human nature. The questions have changed since Lewis wrote that...Today's skepticism runs deeper than that. The skeptics' line now is that...that the whole story of Jesus, or at least significant portions of it, is nothing more than legend.

"Christians have responded with arguments hinging on the correct dates for the composition of the Gospels, the identities of their authors, external corroborating evidence, and the like. All this has been enormously helpful, but one could wish for a more Lewis-like approach to that new l-word, legend—that is, for a way of recognizing the necessary truthfulness of the Gospels from their internal content alone.

"Lewis was always more at home looking at the evidence of the Gospels themselves than at the historical circumstances surrounding them. In one classic essay (variously titled "Fern-Seed and Elephants" or "Modern Theology and Biblical Criticism," depending on where you find it) he delineates the Gospels as true "reportage" rather than fable, and concludes, "The reader who doesn't see this has simply not learned to read."

*This excellent article was originally published in Touchstone Magazine. You can read the complete article by pressing the Read More button. You can read many more of Tom's articles, books and blog posts in his own website, The Thinking Christian: https://www.thinkingchristian.net/.

Luke Got His Facts Straight

The Historical Reliability of the Writings of Luke the Historian

  • 3 June 2016
  • Author: Scott Cherry
  • Number of views: 11475
  • 1 Comments

 

Recently someone told me, "History is history". I think he probably meant that history is just facts, not conjecture. It struck me because there are skeptics of history who think we can know almost nothing about the past. Apparently this person was not one of those. Since it was not the main thread of our discussion I took it at face value. But if this is even a partly true statement, it is as true of Christianity as much as any other subject of history. 

by Scott Cherry


This is an article I wrote originally as the introduction for a series of posts for a Facebook group called "The Bridge". The series is called "The History of Christianity".  Its focus is exclusively on the formative years of Christianity and its small number of primary founders in the 1st century only.  Every history relies on sources, and Christianity is no exception.  My source is the historian Luke. First I will introduce Luke, and next I will introduce a modern historian, Sir William Ramsay, to tell us more about Luke and the credibility of Luke's writings.         

Ethics and Old Testament Servitude

Dealing with slavery in the Old Testament

Have you ever been confronted with a passage from the Old Testament that is difficult to deal with? For example, passages that appear to condone violence or slavery. When discussing issues like morality and history, I find that atheists and Muslims are prepared to offer up certain Old Testament passages to demonstrate that the Bible is a flawed book and Christians are not always equipped to deal with them.
RSS
12

Terms Of UsePrivacy StatementCopyright 2024 by Tao and Tawheed
Back To Top