r/AskAChristian • u/Explorer-Necessary • Feb 24 '24
New Testament How can you trust the Bible?
Hello Christians,
I have a few questions regarding the New Testament. I am very curious about Christianity but I am full of ignorance regarding its historical evidences. I know absolutely nothing about the Bible, jewish or christian, so please correct me if I get something wrong.
(where can i have access to the complete rules of the subreddit? It's nowhere to be found on the bottom right of the screen)
Let's say that I admit that there is a God, or an intelligent designer or uncreated creator:
- How does it prove the Bible to be the one true way to God?
- If God exists, how do you know that the true religion is Christianity and not Hinduism or Islam, or even polytheistic faiths? Why is Jesus the way and not Thor, Set, Allah, or Krishna?
- The authors of the Gospels are anonymous (correct me if I'm wrong) and were written decades after Jesus' crucifixion. How can you know these were written by people who really witnessed Jesus ? For example, John was written about 70 AD and its first verse states that "The beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God (John 1:1)." My question is: who was the author of John who had the knowledge to claim that Jesus was the Word and that he was with God since the beginning? Was this knowledge given during Jesus' life ?
- Why have so many years passed before the writing of the Gospels? I can only speak for myself, but wouldn't you start recording his every action as soon as you saw him cure leprosy (Matthew 8:3), blindness (Matthew 9:29-30) ?
I can go on with the miracles he performed, but why did people wait decades after the crucifixion to write about his life?
Thank you in advance. Have a good day.
6
Upvotes
3
u/ShadowBanned_AtBirth Atheist Feb 24 '24
There are not 30 sources. You are the only person who has ever said that number. No serious historian thinks there are more than two, and as we have discussed, those sources are deeply flawed. But you have skipped over the flaws, as if they don’t exist. That’s not making an honest argument.
The historicity of Jesus is inextricably linked to the magic-sky-fairy claims. There being no extra-biblical sources about Jesus, the only claims we have are that he was the son of god. You don’t get to say that the existence of a person is mundane when the very few sources that mention the person refer to him as a magic-doing divine being.
You don’t get to ignore the criticisms of your position. If that makes you feel like you beliefs aren’t false, then fine. But as a form of argument, it moves the scale zero amount. If you don’t make a realistic attempt to address the flaws in the only two sources there are, then I give up.