Tovia Singer asserts that the gospels were originally written and circulated anonymously and that nowhere in the text do they identify themselves. Moreover, Singer asserts that “These are church traditions — and in fact they are late church traditions, meaning these ascriptions are assigned about a century after the gospels are written” by Irenaeus of Lyons.
Given that Jesus was alleged, from the beginning, to have been raised on the Sunday following Passover, during the feast of firstfruits, this suggests that the choice of the Sunday as the day of the resurrection resulted from rational deliberation, or conscious design, whether on the part of human schemers or divine agency. It seems to militate fairly heavily against the hypothesis that the original apostles were honestly mistaken about Christ’s resurrection.
In a video published this week, provocatively titled “Why Would Paul Willingly Die for His Belief? Another Church Lie!”, Rabbi Singer makes a number of bizarre claims. One such statement is that “the notion that Paul was beheaded by Rome is complete nonsense. It’s an invention of the church, and it’s mentioned nowhere in the Christian Bible.”
Contrary to Rabbi Singer’s assertions, Mark does not affirm an adoptionist Christology (and in fact affirms Christ’s deity). Though there are undoubtedly more statements of Jesus’ deity in John, it is simply untrue that these claims are absent from the synoptic gospels. Singer’s development arguments regarding the resurrection and anti-Semitism also collapse upon further inspection.
Though the alleged discrepancies offered by Rabbi Singer require some investigation to untangle, closer inspection — and more careful reading of the relevant texts — reveals the arguments to be unfounded. The solutions that I have offered to these challenges are not strained or forced harmonizations, but rather are suggested from within the texts themselves.
This week, a two part series of essays was published by atheist physicist Dr. Brian Blais. These essays challenged some of my key contentions from the debate, particularly my employment of Bayesian epistemology. In this essay, I reply to Dr. Blais’ remarks.
Since the resurrection is intended, in Christian theology, to function as an authenticating sign, it is highly predicted that Jesus’ resurrection will deviate from the normal course of nature. That the resurrection does, in fact, deviate from the normal course of nature should not be taken as a cause for concern.
In this article I will consider incidental allusions in the gospels that are indirectly and undesignedly confirmed by extrabiblical secular sources.
Even aside from the issues and problems discussed in this essay, it is clear that the absolute strongest conclusion one can conceivably draw from these sources is that they attest to ministry of Jesus in broad outline.
John Walvoord (1910-2002) was a past president of Dallas Theological Seminary (1952-1986) and a prolific author. He was probably best known for his advocacy of dispensational theology and of pre-tribulation ‘rapture’ theology with respect to eschatology. In his book, Jesus Christ Our Lord, Walvoord offers a systematic presentation of the person and work of Jesus Christ.