Is the New Testament reliable?

Jesus.doc

Are the New Testament accounts of Jesus the true story of his life, miracles, death, and resurrection? Christians are quick to defend them as the eyewitness reports of the apostles. Skeptics are just as quick to attack them as forgeries. But what is the truth? Is it possible, 2,000 years after the fact, to really know? Like in any cold case, we need to examine the evidence. But first, let’s hear from some who are skeptical.

In July 2000 ABC News anchor Peter Jennings was in Israel broadcasting a television special on Jesus Christ. His program, "The Search for Jesus," explored the question of whether the Jesus of the New Testament was historically accurate. Jennings featured opinions on the Gospel accounts from DePaul professor John Dominic Crossan, three of Crossan's colleagues from the Jesus Seminar, and two other Bible scholars. (The Jesus Seminar is a group of scholars who debate Jesus' recorded words and actions and then use red, pink, gray, or black beads to cast votes indicating how trustworthy they believe statements in the Gospels are.)¹

Some of the comments were stunning. There on national TV Dr. Crossan not only cast doubt on more than 80 percent of Jesus' sayings but also denied Jesus' claims to divinity, his miracles, and his resurrection. Jennings clearly was intrigued by the image of Jesus presented by Crossan.

Searching for true Bible history is always news, which is why every year Time and Newsweek go on a cover story quest for Mary, Jesus, Moses, or Abraham. Or-who knows?-maybe this year it will be "Bob: The Untold Story of the Missing 13th Disciple."

This is entertainment, and so the investigation will never end nor yield answers, as that would eliminate future programming. Instead, those with radically different views are thrown together like an episode of Survivor, hopelessly convoluting the issue rather than bringing clarity.

But Jennings's report did focus on one issue that ought to be given some serious thought. Crossan implied that the original accounts of Jesus were embellished by oral tradition and were not written down until after the apostles were dead. Thus they are largely unreliable and fail to give us an accurate picture of the real Jesus. How are we to know if this is really true?

A serious investigation of the issues related to the historical Jesus cannot be conducted through sound-bite analysis. In this magazine we have tried to go beyond the sound bites and examine the evidence. But we're prepared to admit that a magazine article can only summarize scholars' conclusions. Yet, these summaries are sufficient to show that sound bites about Jesus frequently do more to distort historical truth than enlighten. There actually is considerable scholarly consensus regarding the Jesus of the New Testament.

> NEXT : Lost in Translation
< BACK : Is the New Testament reliable?


This is an excerpt from Y-Jesus Magazine. Click here to see Y-Jesus Magazine.