Comment on How can we be sure the New Testament hasn't been heavily tampered with? by j.k.harwood2

Parent Post: How can we be sure the New Testament hasn't been heavily tampered with? · In Reply To

j.k.harwood2 · 3/19/2025, 5:27:07 PM · permalink

1\. The Resurrection as a Historical Event

Claim: The Gospels were written with bias and theological motives.

✅ Response:

All historical writings have some bias, but bias does not automatically mean falsehood. The key historical question is whether an event happened, not whether the authors had motives.

Example: If a journalist today reports on a major event they strongly believe in, their bias doesn't mean the event didn’t happen.

The Gospels were written within the lifetimes of eyewitnesses (including opponents) who could have challenged falsehoods.

If Jesus' resurrection was fabricated, why didn’t Jewish or Roman authorities simply produce the body? The burden is on skeptics to explain why early Christians died for something they knew was false.

Claim: The resurrection narrative was influenced by myths like Osiris, Dionysus, and Mithras.

✅ Response:

The "dying and rising god" theory is outdated and debunked by serious historians.

Pagan myths do not match Jesus’ resurrection.

Osiris, Dionysus, and Mithras were not historical figures, but mythological ones. Jesus was a real person, crucified under Roman authority.

Early Christians rejected paganism, so why would they borrow from it?

The resurrection was Jewish in concept (Daniel 12:2, Isaiah 26:19), not Greek mythology.

👉 Alternative Explanation: The resurrection accounts arose because Jesus actually rose from the dead—a claim supported by historical evidence, transformed followers, and the explosion of Christianity despite persecution.

2\. Prophecy Fulfillment

Claim: The Gospel writers shaped events to "fit" Old Testament prophecies.

✅ Response:

This assumes that they had control over events that they did not.

Example: Jesus did not choose where he was born (Micah 5:2) or how he died (Isaiah 53).

Eyewitnesses (including hostile ones) would have called out deliberate fabrications.

The Jews expected a military Messiah, yet Jesus fulfilled suffering servant prophecies that many overlooked. If they were inventing a Messiah, they would have made him a warrior-king, not a crucified savior.

Claim: Isaiah 53 promotes suffering as a virtue, leading to oppression.

✅ Response:

This misunderstands Christian theology.

Isaiah 53 shows Jesus suffering willingly for others’ sins—not glorifying suffering itself.

Christianity abolished slavery, oppression, and injustice over time, precisely because of Jesus’ teachings on love and human dignity.

👉 Alternative Explanation: The prophecies fit Jesus because they were meant to. The fulfillment of dozens of precise details (not vague statements) is best explained by divine orchestration, not human invention.

3\. Internal Coherence and Moral Critiques

Claim: The Old Testament's morality is barbaric.

✅ Response:

This argument is ahistorical—judging an ancient culture by modern standards.

Genocide? The context of divine judgment matters—Canaanite cultures practiced child sacrifice, ritual abuse, and extreme brutality.

Slavery? The Old Testament regulated an existing system but pushed morality forward toward abolition. The New Testament condemned slavery’s abuses (1 Timothy 1:10).

Women as property? This is an oversimplification. The Mosaic Law protected women far better than surrounding nations.

👉 Alternative Explanation: The Old Testament laws reflected a progression toward moral truth, culminating in Jesus’ teachings on love, dignity, and justice.

Claim: Hell was a later invention for fear-mongering.

✅ Response:

This is a half-truth.

The Old Testament describes Sheol as a place of the dead, but the concept of divine justice and eternal destiny was present.

Jesus spoke more about hell than anyone else in the Bible.

Hell is not a control tactic—it is the consequence of rejecting God.

👉 Alternative Explanation: Hell is real, not for scaring people, but because free will demands consequences. If God is real and just, then evil must be dealt with.

Conclusion: Is the Bible Just a Human Document?

No. If it were purely human-made, it would have faded into irrelevance like other ancient texts.

The resurrection has historical weight.

The prophecies align without forced manipulation.

The moral shifts over time reflect divine revelation, not human evolution.

The deeper issue in your question is not just history, but what you demand from God.

You say God would have to cure all babies of leukemia for you to believe.

This assumes God’s existence is dependent on your personal conditions.

The true question is: Would you believe even if He did? Or would you dismiss it as coincidence?

👉 If truth exists, wouldn't you seek it honestly, not demand it conform to personal expectations?

3 bumps

crimsonmvestro · 3/19/2025, 6:11:43 PM · permalink

2 bumps

j.k.harwood2 · 3/20/2025, 2:31:25 AM · permalink

1 bump

Signature