Session 4: The Documentary Evidence
Review: How can we determine whether or not the evangelists are trustworthy witnesses? Do their testimonies stand up to scrutiny?
Opening Question: Did you ever copy somebody else’s work? Why? What were you most concerned about when copying it?
Hear Ye! Hear Ye! The 1st Vatra Court of Grass Lake is now called to session.
Prosecution: Your honors, yesterday we heard very persuasive arguments as to the trustworthiness of the evangelists. The defense suggests we could call them to the witness stand and that their testimony would be reliable. But the truth is they are now all dead, and all we have is the gospels, which have been copied over and over by other, unknown groups and individuals for hundreds of years. All of whom had their own biases and agendas as well. Therefore we hold that the gospels cannot be accepted by this court as equal to a legally acceptable deposition of a witness, but only as corrupted and altered legend.
Defense: Your honors, the defense will agree with the prosecution that the gospels have been copied for centuries and that this is how we have them today. In fact, they have been copied so many times and in so many languages that we actually have more evidence of the original gospels than of any other texts from the ancient world.
Questions for thought:
Here are some standards for determining the trustworthiness of an ancient document:
Compare the Gospel with other Ancient
Documents:
There are many books from ancient times that scholars consider reliable and
do not doubt as authentic to the originals, even though our current forms
are based on copied manuscripts.
For example:
The New Testament: Unlike any other text in the history of texts!
Not only do we have thousands of manuscripts and fragments of Greek manuscripts
But also thousands in many different languages
Having this many resources is it very easy for scholars to track where and when and how changes might have occurred in copying. These manuscripts serve to check each other and show the slight variations that have occurred.
What is quite astonishing is that scholars can say that with confidence that the New Testament in the form we have received is 99.5% pure to its original. The 0.5% in variations is so minor that it does not affect any major doctrines of faith.
The determination of the NT Canon came about quite naturally in the life of the Church. There were basically four criteria:
Several books and epistles of the NT were not accepted immediately by the whole Church but eventually were accepted by these criteria, such as Hebrews and Revelation. The books called “gospels” that have surfaced in later years are often of a much different character and foreign to the writings of the apostles. They have tell tale signs that they were written by and for specific groups at later dates, such as the Gnostics. Many of them were rejected outright as heretical. When the Church established the canon of the NT in the councils of the 4th century, they were really acknowledging something that was already complete, not deciding it anew.
In Closing, if the gospels are not trustworthy documents, then we must apply the same standard to all ancient documents. We hope to show the court that if this is true then we can today know just about nothing about anything that happened before the printing press made it possible to create relatively uniform copies. Rather, the gospels stand up to this criticism above and beyond any other ancient document. They are “marvelously correct” in comparison to any other known document from antiquity.
Deliberations:
|
Department
of Youth, Young Adult, and Campus Ministry |
|