Gregory Koukl's Blog, page 141

Links Mentioned on the Show

The following are links that were either mentioned on this week's show or inspired by it, as posted live on the @STRtweets Twitter feed:

Never Read a Bible Verse: Proverbs 23:7 – Video of Greg's radio commentary


The "Murder" of a Fetus by Greg Koukl

Listen to today's show or download any  show for free.

The Gospels Are Reliable, Even with Many Redactions

During my plenary session at the Apologetics Canada Conference I made a case for the reliability of the Gospels in spite of the presence of scribal variants throughout the text. Remember that criminal courts do not require eyewitnesses to be inerrant to be considered reliable. In order to illustrate the trustworthiness of the text, I offered the following hypothetical. First, allow the skeptic to identify all the textual variants in the Gospels based on a comparison of all available manuscripts. Next, to make the point more dramatically, allow the skeptic to remove not only the variant word or phrase, but the entire verse in which the variant appears. This would require the removal of hundreds of verses, resulting in a manuscript that is much smaller than the text we have today. Finally, for the sake of argument, allow the skeptic to randomly remove additional verses until 50% of the text we have today have been redacted. Skeptics often claim that the presence of minor variants that account for approximately ½% of the text justify their skepticism in much more of the text. To dramatize the ineffectiveness of this claim, I am willing to allow them to remove 50% of the text to illustrate an important point: Even with this much of the text removed (far more than even the most liberal scholar would likely eliminate), the Gospels are reliable and still communicate the essential truths about Jesus’ life, ministry, death and resurrection:

The Remaining Text Supports the Truth
Even with 50% of the text removed, the remaining text would still be sufficient to understand what each gospel writer claimed about Jesus. To be sure, there would be many confusing and incomplete passages, but with 50% of the text still intact, there would be more than enough to understand the rough outline of Jesus’ life and ministry.

The Remaining Gospels Buttress the Claims
In addition to the surviving text, the repetition of events reiterated in the other Gospels would still assist us in understanding the life, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus. If we arbitrarily redact 50% of any particular Gospel, we will most certainly find a parallel account in another Gospel covering much of the same material, and the secondary account will very likely include the material missing from the first account. Many variant passages (Bart Ehrman is fond of citing Luke 22:20, Luke 24:12 and Luke 24:51) would likely still remain in other gospels (just as the information from Luke is found in uncontested passages in Matthew 26:28, Mark 14:24, John 20:3-7, and Acts 1:9-11).

The Remaining Students Answer the Doubts
But more importantly, we can test the content of the Gospels by simply examining the writings of the students of the Gospel authors. The students of John and Paul (Ignatius, Polycarp and Clement) for example, either quote or allude to many New Testament documents, including all four Gospels, Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians,  Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 1 Peter, and 1 John. They clearly and succinctly reiterate the teaching of the Gospel authors. Related to the life of Jesus, Ignatius, Polycarp and Clement describe Jesus in the following way:

He was conceived by the Holy Spirit
He was born of the virgin Mary
A star announced His birth
He was baptized by John the Baptist
He taught and had a “ministry” on earth
He was humble and unassuming
He was sinless and spoke the words of God
He taught the Sermon on the Mount
Ointment was poured on Jesus’ head
He was unjustly treated and condemned by men
He was whipped, suffered and was crucified
He died on the cross
This all took place under the government of Pontius Pilate and Herod the Tetrarch was king

Concerning the resurrection of Jesus, Ignatius, Polycarp and Clement confirm the following details:

Jesus was resurrected
He had a physical resurrection body
He appeared to Peter and the others after the resurrection
He encouraged the disciples to touch Him after the resurrection
He ate with the disciples after the resurrection
The disciples were convinced by the resurrection appearances
The disciples were fearless after seeing the risen Christ

And concerning the deity of Jesus, Ignatius, Polycarp and Clement corroborate the following claims:

Jesus returned to God the Father
He is our only Master and the Son of God
All things are subject to Jesus and all creation belongs to Him
He is the “Door,” the “Bread of Life,” and the “Eternal Word”
Jesus is our “Savior”, “Lord” and “God”
Faith in Christ’s work on the cross saves us
This salvation and forgiveness are gifts of grace from God
Jesus will judge the living and the dead

Even after redacting 50% of the text, the remaining manuscripts (supported by the parallel accounts in the other gospels and confirmed by the writings of the students of the New Testament authors) leave us with a clear picture of Jesus as a miracle worker who claimed to be God, died on the cross for our sins and demonstrated his Deity by rising from the dead. That’s’ the version of Jesus that most skeptics want to deny, but it’s the steady, dependable, indestructible version that emerges from the reliable eyewitness accounts.

The Gospels Are Reliable Even With Many Redactions

During my plenary session at the Apologetics Canada Conference I made a case for the reliability of the Gospels in spite of the presence of scribal variants throughout the text. Remember that criminal courts do not require eyewitnesses to be inerrant to be considered reliable. In order to illustrate the trustworthiness of the text, I offered the following hypothetical. First, allow the skeptic to identify all the textual variants in the Gospels based on a comparison of all available manuscripts. Next, to make the point more dramatically, allow the skeptic to remove not only the variant word or phrase, but the entire verse in which the variant appears. This would require the removal of hundreds of verses, resulting in a manuscript that is much smaller than the text we have today. Finally, for the sake of argument, allow the skeptic to randomly remove additional verses until 50% of the text we have today have been redacted. Skeptics often claim that the presence of minor variants that account for approximately ½% of the text justify their skepticism in much more of the text. To dramatize the ineffectiveness of this claim, I am willing to allow them to remove 50% of the text to illustrate an important point: Even with this much of the text removed (far more than even the most liberal scholar would likely eliminate), the Gospels are reliable and still communicate the essential truths about Jesus’ life, ministry, death and resurrection:

The Remaining Text Supports the Truth
Even with 50% of the text removed, the remaining text would still be sufficient to understand what each gospel writer claimed about Jesus. To be sure, there would be many confusing and incomplete passages, but with 50% of the text still intact, there would be more than enough to understand the rough outline of Jesus’ life and ministry.

The Remaining Gospels Buttress the Claims
In addition to the surviving text, the repetition of events reiterated in the other Gospels would still assist us in understanding the life, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus. If we arbitrarily redact 50% of any particular Gospel, we will most certainly find a parallel account in another Gospel covering much of the same material, and the secondary account will very likely include the material missing from the first account. Many variant passages (Bart Ehrman is fond of citing Luke 22:20, Luke 24:12 and Luke 24:51) would likely still remain in other gospels (just as the information from Luke is found in uncontested passages in Matthew 26:28, Mark 14:24, John 20:3-7, and Acts 1:9-11).

The Remaining Students Answer the Doubts
But more importantly, we can test the content of the Gospels by simply examining the writings of the students of the Gospel authors. The students of John and Paul (Ignatius, Polycarp and Clement) for example, either quote or allude to many New Testament documents, including all four Gospels, Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians,  Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 1 Peter, and 1 John. They clearly and succinctly reiterate the teaching of the Gospel authors. Related to the life of Jesus, Ignatius, Polycarp and Clement describe Jesus in the following way:

He was conceived by the Holy Spirit
He was born of the virgin Mary
A star announced His birth
He was baptized by John the Baptist
He taught and had a “ministry” on earth
He was humble and unassuming
He was sinless and spoke the words of God
He taught the Sermon on the Mount
Ointment was poured on Jesus’ head
He was unjustly treated and condemned by men
He was whipped, suffered and was crucified
He died on the cross
This all took place under the government of Pontius Pilate and Herod the Tetrarch was king

Concerning the resurrection of Jesus, Ignatius, Polycarp and Clement confirm the following details:

Jesus was resurrected
He had a physical resurrection body
He appeared to Peter and the others after the resurrection
He encouraged the disciples to touch Him after the resurrection
He ate with the disciples after the resurrection
The disciples were convinced by the resurrection appearances
The disciples were fearless after seeing the risen Christ

And concerning the deity of Jesus, Ignatius, Polycarp and Clement corroborate the following claims:

Jesus returned to God the Father
He is our only Master and the Son of God
All things are subject to Jesus and all creation belongs to Him
He is the “Door,” the “Bread of Life,” and the “Eternal Word”
Jesus is our “Savior”, “Lord” and “God”
Faith in Christ’s work on the cross saves us
This salvation and forgiveness are gifts of grace from God
Jesus will judge the living and the dead

Even after redacting 50% of the text, the remaining manuscripts (supported by the parallel accounts in the other gospels and confirmed by the writings of the students of the New Testament authors) leave us with a clear picture of Jesus as a miracle worker who claimed to be God, died on the cross for our sins and demonstrated his Deity by rising from the dead. That’s’ the version of Jesus that most skeptics want to deny, but it’s the steady, dependable, indestructible version that emerges from the reliable eyewitness accounts.

Embracing the Absurd

About a year ago, the Journal of Medical Ethics published an
article
arguing that “what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a
newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including
cases where the newborn is not disabled.”

Instead of reasoning, “A) It’s wrong to kill a newborn, B) there
are no significant differences between a newborn and a preborn, C) therefore
it’s wrong to kill a preborn,” they followed the logic in the opposite
direction: “A) It isn’t wrong to kill a preborn, B) there are no significant
differences between a newborn and a preborn, C) therefore it isn’t wrong to
kill a newborn.”

When their view that it’s okay to kill a preborn child
forced them into the absurd (the nicest word I can put to it) conclusion that
it’s okay to kill a newborn, instead of recognizing the mistake that led them
there, they merely embraced the absurdity in order to consistently maintain
their first premise.

Now I’m seeing this kind of opposite-direction logic play
out in the area of same-sex marriage. I’ve often used the fact that our society
has separate bathrooms for men and women to illustrate the idea that it’s
appropriate to discriminate on the basis of sex when sex is relevant to the
situation.

But now it seems
that may not be a useful illustration for long:

British Council Rules Toilets
Gender Neutral

LONDON: The council in
Brighton, England, is scrapping male and female public toilets in favour of
"gender neutral" facilities so as not to "alienate the
transgender community".

Facilities are to be built that are
designed to be shared by adults and children and that do not feature the words
"Men" or "Ladies" but instead will show symbols indicating
they can be used by people of any sex or age….

Brighton and Hove city council
disclosed in emails that it wished to promote the term "gender
neutral" and build facilities that were open to all, regardless of sex. It
believes such facilities will be more accessible for those who do not identify
with the "male-female binary".

And there are other recent stories of gender-neutral bathrooms
from the University
of Central Florida, from Massachusetts,
and from Colorado
where the parents of a six-year-old boy (who feels he is a girl) are suing the
school for discrimination because he’s being denied the use of the girls’
bathroom:

"For many transgender people,
discrimination is a daily part of life. Unfortunately for Coy, it has started
very early," lawyer Michael Silverman said.

"The world is going to be
looking at the school [to] send a message to the world and teach tolerance,
fair play and equal rights."

In other words, in order to be non-discriminatory, we should
no longer separate people into bathrooms according to sex. Instead, our choice
of bathroom ought to depend on what we feel—or better yet, we should move to
gender-neutral bathrooms altogether.

As in the case of “after-birth abortions,” people are
following the logic of the arguments in the wrong direction. Instead of saying,
“A) It’s okay to discriminate on the basis of sex when sex is relevant to the
situation (as is the case with bathrooms), no matter what a person feels, B) sex
is relevant to marriage, C) therefore it’s okay to discriminate on the basis of
sex when it comes to marriage,” they follow the logic this way: “A) It’s wrong
to discriminate on the basis of sex, including in the case of marriage B) sex-specific
bathrooms discriminate against people—excluding and including them—on the basis
of sex, C) therefore it’s wrong to have sex-specific bathrooms.

Both lines of reasoning follow logical paths to internally consistent
positions. Unfortunately, a growing number of people can no longer recognize
which of these paths leads to an absurd conclusion.

The Value of Developing a Detective’s Perspective

I’ve been a detective for over 20 years, and there are times when I wish my career was more of a secret. When people find out you conduct investigations for a living, they assume you have extraordinary powers of observation and deduction. Sometimes that can be a liability. I can’t tell you how many times, after searching for some item in the kitchen cupboard, I’ve asked for some help only to hear someone in my family respond, “You’re the detective, figure it out for yourself!” Everyone assumes detectives can figure anything out. No need to tell Jim how to get there, he’ll figure it out, he’s a detective! No need to help Jim solve that problem, he’ll solve it, he’s a detective! See my dilemma?

Why do people assume that detectives can figure things out when other people can’t? Is it that we possess techniques and skills that others don’t? That might be part of it, but I think it might be a little simpler. Detectives certainly aren’t smarter than everyone else, (this was clear to me once again last weekend as I had lunch with William Lane Craig in the green room at the Apologetics Canada Conference); I know lots of people who are much smarter I am! I think the difference is simply a matter of practice. I’ve had the great blessing of solving mysteries every day for a living; puzzling and un-puzzling evidence on a daily basis, trying to understand what really happened. Detectives dig and poke and question and probe over and over again until we’re finally satisfied that we’ve arrived at the most reasonable inference from the evidence. After a few years, you start to develop a detective’s perspective toward almost every aspect of your life. Sometimes that’s good and sometimes that’s bad. By the time I was 35 years old and beginning to examine the claims of the gospels, I was deeply entrenched in a “detective state of mind” and my cynical investigative attitude was valuable as I investigated Christianity:

Detectives Are Steady
Homicide detectives are mystery solvers. We’re focused and goal oriented. We’re hunting for killers and we know we can’t get distracted along the way. We know the importance of making the plain things the main things, and we recognize the danger of allowing minor issues to become major distractions. I still carry this attitude into my theological and philosophical studies. I am less interested in secondary or tertiary issues than many of my Christian friends, and I suspect this is largely because I view the reliability of the gospels as the critical focus of my investigation.

Detectives Are Skeptical
Healthy cynicism is of great value to police officers. Detectives can’t believe every claim offered by a suspect or witness. The longer you do this job, the more likely you are to have been fooled or duped by someone trying to get out of trouble or lay the blame on someone else. I’ve developed a “prove it to me” attitude over the years, and I brought this attitude into my investigation of the gospels. I seldom accept a claim as reliable until I have good reason to do so, and this attitude has propelled me toward a deep study of the historicity of the gospel accounts.

Detectives Are Systematic
Good investigations are methodical and thoughtful. You have to be incredibly organized if you hope to keep track of multiple lines of evidence over the course of a long investigation. Good detectives develop good study habits and are methodically rigorous. I took the same approach when reading the gospels for the first time. I can remember compiling notebook after notebook filled with “case files” and notes related to my discoveries. It was years before I finally pulled these files off my shelves to make room for other books. The more systematic you are in your approach to an investigation, the more likely you are to ground your inferences on a reliable collection of evidence.

Detectives Are Stubborn
Persistence is an investigative virtue. Sometimes the detective who’s going to solve the case is simply the detective who refuses to give up. I want to be the most determined and persistent person in the courtroom by the time we eventually go to trial and I certainly want a prosecutor who feels the same way. Determined investigators of the gospels are far less likely to give up when they hit an apparent contradiction or theological quandary. Good detectives learn to work through the rough spots, no matter how much is required along the way.

As I speak around the country, only part of my time is spent presenting what I’ve learned about the reliability of the gospels. Much more of my energy is expended trying to help people understand the importance of developing a detective’s perspective as they examine what they believe. If the Church was filled with committed, skeptical, methodical and persistent investigators, I think we would be ready to answer objections and influence our culture persuasively. That’s what happens when you develop the perspective of a detective.

Kindle Deals and an Opportunity to Honor C.S. Lewis

Mere Christianity
was the first apologetics book I ever read—I didn’t even know such things
existed. I’ll never forget the wonder I felt at seeing not only how
Christianity matches up with reality, but also its depth and beauty more
clearly than I ever had before.

So I encourage you to get a digital
copy of Mere Christianity while
it’s on sale for $1.99 (you never know how long these deals will last). You
don’t need a special device to read it, you only need to download the free
Kindle app for your computer or smart phone.

This year marks the 50th anniversary of C.S.
Lewis’s death, and Michael Ward (author of Planet
Narnia) has started a campaign to raise the funds for a memorial to
Lewis in Westminster Abbey’s Poets’ Corner in London,
where many past authors such as Chaucer, Shakespeare, and the Brontës are buried or
memorialized (some thoughts on this by Alister McGrath here).
If C.S. Lewis has made a difference in your life through his literary works,
this is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to express your appreciation by making a donation (via PayPal or check) towards
this memorial.

Also on sale today is the Kindle version of William Lane Craig’s On Guard for $3.74. If you’re
looking for an introductory overview of apologetics to use in a Sunday school
class, or you’re interested in getting some friends together to talk about apologetics, or
you'd like to send a copy to your friendly neighborhood skeptic, this would be
a great book to use. Again, don’t wait, because these deals don’t usually last
very long.

The Bible on The History Channel

I watched the first episode of this miniseries last night with cautious optimism.  The producers wanted to take the Bible as history seriously and involved some good Christian scholars.  The Biblical events are portrayed as history, which I'm glad for, but my overall impressions was, "Meh."  It lacked the overarching theme of what God is up to.  It seemed more like a Sunday School movie than real life.  Still, I think it's worth watching.

It's a quality movie.  The special effects are good.  I acknowledge that it's a gargantuan task to select from the massive amount of material in the Bible to include in a miniseries.  Some of the scenes are quite dramatic to see come to life – like Abraham's sacrifice of Isaac.  But it just seems to miss the Big Picture that pulls the events together in one narrative.

The major event that kicks off the story is the call of Abraham, which is a voice in the wind.  Why would Abraham believe he heard from God rather than imagined it?  They left out the dramatic covenant God made with Abraham appearing as smoking incense and going between the halves of the bull while Abraham watched.  And the purpose of the covenant with Abraham is lost – that through this nation all the nations of the world would be blessed.  It leaves the impression that the goal is to get Abraham some descendants and Israel some land.  If the literal words of the text weren't enough to communicate this, they have a narrator that could accomplish this meta-narrative.

Likewise, when Israel is delivered from Egypt, their songs of praise are left out.  These events should leave us thinking 'How great is this God!"  And unless you know that from the Bible already, I doubt you'd think it from watching.  The Passover was curiously edited.  Moses tells the Israelites to prepare for the angel of death, but doesn't tell them the details to prepare to leave.  They cross the Red Sea and get drenched, but the text says that they crossed on dry land, which magnifies the nature of the miracle. It may be more dramatic that they get splashed, but if you're going to do the text, why change that detail?  It just bugged me. 

I think it was a significant mistake to skip Joseph's story because it tells why Israel ended up in slavery and conveys the Big Picture message that God was in charge protecting His people.  Instead, they did the Sodom and Gomorrah story, which makes it unsuitable for young children and at the same time didn't convey the depth of depravity.  After Isaac's sacrifice, next thing you know the Israelites are slaves in Egypt needing deliverance.

So while I acknowledge that selecting the events to include is difficult, I think they made some choices that undermine the overall effectiveness of the series for those who aren't already familiar with the Bible.

The musical score really bugged me.  It lent an air of overdramatization, which makes it seem less real life.  One of the things I thought was effective in "The Passion of the Christ" was the way the scenes with his family and disciples were very ordinary, real life.  While I think the acting conveyed that these were ordinary people involved with a God doing extraordinary things, the music gave it an unreal sense. It would have been much better with a less dramatic score.

I guess the bottom line is that while I thought it was interesting to see the Biblical events brought to life in good quality, I was left unmoved.  I think the result of such a portrayal should be, "How great is our God!"  And I didn't feel that because I think the film fails to communicate the significance of what God is doing other than doing some pretty awesome miracles.

Still, I think it's worth watching for Christians.  I would caution letting young children watch it.  And perhaps it would be a starting point of discussion with non-Christians.  There are more episodes to go, so maybe the Big Picture will become clearer.  And I hope and expect that it will continue to portray the Bible as history.  In that last point, I think it is successful.  And I appreciate the respect the producers have shown for what the Bible claims to be: a history of God at work.

The Morality of Cloning (Video)

What should Christians think about the morality of cloning?

Links Mentioned on the Show

The following are links that were either mentioned on this week's show or inspired by it, as posted live on the @STRtweets Twitter feed:

Rationality or Laws of Nature? – Video of Greg's commentary


Drifting Towards Darwin by Greg Koukl (PDF)


Did the Word Really Become Flesh? – Conference info


Stand to Reason's 20th Anniversary Conference – May 10-11, 2013


Faith Beyond Belief Conference – March 8-9 in Calgary

Listen to today's show or download any  show for free.

Radio Sunday

Clear-thinking Christianity is live on the air Sunday 2-5 p.m. P.T. Greg is live with commentary and your calls.  Give him a piece of your mind on ethics, values, or religion.

live on the air or stream it on the STR app or online. Follow STRtweets during the program and use #STRtalk to engage other listeners.