Bart Ehrman claim of the gospels

[codefro]

Michael Licona reviewed Ehrman’s book on this topic here:

risenjesus.com/review-of-bart-ehrmans-book-forged-writing-in-the-name-of-god

This is a review of “Forged”. I was looking for a rebuttal of his new one, “Jesus Before the Gospels”.

 

[Lucretius]

One bit of evidence is that none of the Church Father before St. Irenaeus ever referred to any of the Gospels as Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. Ergo, he uses that as a defense of his claim that it was only ascribed later by Irenaeus that those were the authors, but Christians before him did not consider them the authors.

This fact could be interpreted as supporting the theory that the Gospels were given these names later (it doesn’t necessarily have to be St. Ireanaus), but it also can be explained by our theories as well: the reason St. Ireanaus is the first is because oral tradition passed on the authors of the Gospels, and St. Ireanaus just happens to be either the first person to write this down, or the first person to write this down and have their works survive the shipwreck of history. Furthermore, St. Ireanaus actually appeals to St. Papias as a source for the authorship of at least GMatthew, and we know that St. Papias traveled and wrote down the stories of many of those who personally knew the Apostles.

In this case, Mr. Ehrman’s information doesn’t conclusively prove that the Gospels where not written by those whom they were traditionally thought to have. If he wants to defend his point, he should provide more evidence he probably has more arguments to support his theory, but he only presented this one due tonl circumstance: nobody can hash out their entire argument inna short debate).

Given the information I’ve provided above, I see the evidence more supporting the traditional accounts, at least somewhat. At the very least, I don’t think the evidence supports the view that the Gospels were written necessarily secondhand and outside the guidance of eyewitnesses.

Christi pax,

Lucretius

 

[Randy_Carson]

This is a review of “Forged”. I was looking for a rebuttal of his new one, “Jesus Before the Gospels”.

If you read the article, you will see that Licona makes the case for why the traditional authorship attributions can be trusted.

Fragments of Papias have been preserved in the writings of other authors, and he was the first to name Matthew. The traditional authorship of Luke was first mentioned by Justin Martyr (Dialogues, c. AD 150).

Ehrman is familiar with these references, but he rejects them. Licona notes that other scholars have provided strong rebuttals to Ehrman’s reasons.

Importantly, both of Papias and Justin Martyr wrote before Irenaeus.

 

[PJM]

was listening to the latest debate on the Protestant podcast show “Unbelievable?” and Ehrman was on there to defend his latest book “Jesus Before the Gospels…”. On the show, he makes the claim (not a new claim) that the believed authors of the Gospels did not write them. One bit of evidence is that none of the Church Father before St. Irenaeus ever referred to any of the Gospels as Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. Ergo, he uses that as a defense of his claim that it was only ascribed later by Irenaeus that those were the authors, but Christians before him did not consider them the authors. It brings up a good question in my head, was it Irenaeus who named those Gospels? If so, did he state his reasoning? Or does he do it in a way that assumes everyone already knows what he is talking about? Any good thoughts on this?

[1] As an Exegesis -expert [bible expert] , he should be able to comprehend that WHO actually authored the Bible is a FAR-DISTANT second to the Bible being the INSPIRED Words of our God.

[2] Secondly: now 2,000 years later this calin is MADE AND somehow substantiated:shrug:

Possible, BUT quite unlikely IMO

Blessings,
Patrick: