Article - The Reliability of the Gospels by Karlo Broussard

 


"The historical reliability of the Gospels is essential to Christianity. If the historical records of Jesus’ life are not trustworthy as accounts of things that actually happened, there would be little reason to believe that Christianity is true. Sure, there would be the testimony of oral tradition. But skeptics aren’t privy to such testimony. So, promotion of the Christian faith in our secular world rises or falls with its historical validity."1

Broussard goes on to concisely argue as follows:

1. If it can be shown that the Gospel writers were capable of writing reliable history, intended to do so, and actually did so, then the Gospels are reliable.

2. It can be shown that the Gospel writers were capable of writing reliable history, intended to do so, and did so.

3. Therefore, the Gospels are reliable.

I have been investigating the best way to argue for the reliability of the Gospels and to date, this is the most powerful and accessible way I have discovered. 

You can check it out here.

What do you think of this approach?  How would you argue for the reliability of the Gospels?

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad


Footnote:
1. Karlo Broussard, The Reliability of the Gospels: How to Answer Critics Who Say the Gospels Don't Qualify as Historical, 9/20/21.

Related Posts

Book Preview: Trustworthy - Thirteen Arguments for the Reliability of the New Testament by Benjamin Shaw

Series: Who Wrote the Gospels?, Pt. 1 - The Theory of the Anonymous Gospels

John Wesley's Argument for the Inspiration of the Bible

Comments