"The church chose only the earliest sources, which were closet to Jesus and the original disciples, to include in the New Testament and left out the later, secondary accounts like the forged apocryphal gospels, which everyone knew were fakes. So from the very nature of the case, the best historical sources were included in the New Testament. People who insist on evidence taken only from writings
outside the New Testament don't understand what they're asking us to do. They're demanding that we ignore the earliest, primary sources about Jesus in favor of sources that are later, secondary and less reliable, which is just crazy as historical methodology."
1Courage and Godspeed,
ChadFootnote:
1. William Lane Craig, On Guard, [Kindle].Related Posts
Video: Is Christianity Credible? by William Lane Craig
Bible Scholar Edwin Yamauchi on the Non-Christian Sources for the Historical Jesus
William Lane Craig on Jesus' Personal Claims
Comments