Rediscovering the Historical Jesus: The Evidence for Jesus - William Lane Craig

Jag har läst en artikel som behandlar bevis för Jesus existens av William Lane Craig.

Här kommer ett axplock från artikeln och om du vill läsa hela artikeln klickar du på länken längst ned på sidan.

Burden of Proof

Here we confront the very crucial question of the burden of proof. Should we assume that the gospels are reliable unless they are proven to be unreliable? Or should we assume the gospels are unreliable unless they are proven to be reliable? Are they innocent until proven guilty or guilty until proven innocent? Sceptical scholars almost always assume that the gospels are guilty until proven innocent, that is, they assume that the gospels are unreliable unless and until they are proven to be correct concerning some particular fact. I’m not exaggerating here: this really is the procedure of sceptical critics.

Craig listar sedan 5 punkter som enligt honom visar på att Bibeln är pålitlig.

1. There was insufficient time for legendary influences to expunge the historical facts. The interval of time between the events themselves and recording of them in the gospels is too short to have allowed the memory of what had or had not actually happened to be erased.

2. The gospels are not analogous to folk tales or contemporary "urban legends." Tales like those of Paul Bunyan and Pecos Bill or contemporary urban legends like the "vanishing hitchhiker" rarely concern actual historical individuals and are thus not analogous to the gospel narratives.

3. The Jewish transmission of sacred traditions was highly developed and reliable. In an oral culture like that of first century Palestine the ability to memorize and retain large tracts of oral tradition was a highly prized and highly developed skill. From the earliest age children in the home, elementary school, and the synagogue were taught to memorize faithfully sacred tradition. The disciples would have exercised similar care with the teachings of Jesus.

4. There were significant restraints on the embellishment of traditions about Jesus, such as the presence of eyewitnesses and the apostles’ supervision. Since those who had seen and heard Jesus continued to live and the tradition about Jesus remained under the supervision of the apostles, these factors would act as a natural check on tendencies to elaborate the facts in a direction contrary to that preserved by those who had known Jesus.

5. The Gospel writers have a proven track record of historical reliability.

 

Craig går sedan igenom punkt 1 och fem lite utförligare.

 

Vidare går Craig in på några aspekter i Jesu liv och och nämner deras historiska trovärdighet

 

1. Jesus’s Radical Self-Concept as the Divine Son of God.

2. Jesus’s Miracles.

 

3. Jesus’s Trial and Crucifixion.

 

4. The resurrection of Jesus.

 

Till slut skriver Craig i sin slutsats så här:

 

In summary, the gospels are not only trustworthy documents in general, but as we look at some of the most important aspects of Jesus in the gospels, like his radical personal claims, his miracles, his trial and crucifixion, and his resurrection, their historical veracity shines through. God has acted in history, and we can know it.

  Den historiske Jesus - bevis för hans existens