AN UNDESIGNED COINCIDENCE Between Acts and Archaeology

 I recently learned a new undesigned coincidence while watching a documentary. The documentary ("The Last Apostle"--included with Amazon Prime) features a modern-day William Ramsay named Dr. Mark Fairchild. Fairchild is professor of New Testament at Huntington University in Huntington, Indiana. And the documentary follows Fairchild on a two-week trip through Turkey, following the footsteps of Paul. Very interesting and worth the two hours.

Anyways, in Acts 13:4ff, Paul and Barnabas meet the proconsul Sergius Paulus on the island of Cyprus and he becomes a believer. After they leave Cyprus, they sail to Perga and from there make the 3-4 week trek by foot to Pisidian Antioch. Towards the end of the documentary, Fairchild begins to talk about this event as they head towards Pisidian Antioch. And he says (in a rather matter-of-fact way) that after the proconsul Sergio Paulus is converted, he asks Paul and Barnabas to go to Pisidian Antioch to bring the Gospel to his friends and relatives. 

I didn't remember reading that, so I turned to Acts 13 and found that Acts says nothing about such a conversation--not even a hint. So I'm a little confused at this point. (Maybe I missed something Fairchild said, as I was doing something else as I was watching.) At any rate, after Fairchild reaches Pisidian Antioch, he heads to the local museum where they are housing a recently discovered inscription bearing the name Sergius Paulus! So Fairchild concludes rather confidently that Sergius Paulus is from Pisidian Antioch and that the reason that Paul and Barnabas travel to Pisidian Antioch is because Sergius Paulus pleads with them to do so. This makes good sense in light of the recent find of this inscription of Sergius Paulus at Pisidian Antioch--yet Luke does not even hint at it in Acts.

This is an interesting way in which archaeology fills in information that Acts does not give us but which makes perfect sense in light of what Acts does tell us. This does not happen with fiction. This happens with reliable eyewitness accounts. 

Check out this excellent article from Bible Archaeology Report that not only has a photo of the Sergio Paulus inscription featured in Fairchild's documentary but also another found near Pisidian Antioch and others from Cyprus (where Paul met Sergius Paulus in Acts 13).

Also, here is the link to The Last Apostle documentary where I first learned about this.

To learn more about what an "undesigned coincidence" is, why it is such a powerful evidence of reliable eyewitness testimony and to see many more examples....see my article here.

Elymas the sorcerer is struck blind before Sergius Paulus. Painting by Raphael. Public domain.

COULD THE APOSTLES HAVE WRITTEN THE NEW TESTAMENT IF THEY WERE UNEDUCATED?

"When they [members of the Sanhedrin] saw the courage of Peter and John and realized that they were unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished and they took note that these men had been with Jesus." (NIV)

~~*~~

The claim is sometimes made that the apostles could not have written the New Testament because Acts 4:13 says that "they were unschooled, ordinary men."

Is that so?

No. And here is why:

First, the relevant passage at Acts 4:13 only refers to Peter and John at a point soon after the resurrection (33AD). It tells us nothing of the education of the other apostles. For example, Matthew was a tax collector and probably had training similar to an amanuensis (that is, a secretary). Nor does it tell us of any education the apostles received in the intervening decades between the resurrection and the writing of the New Testament. 

Second, it does not make any difference if they used an amanuensis (secretary). It was very common in the ancient world for someone to dictate to an amanuensis/secretary whatever they wanted to be written down in a letter, etc. The amanuensis would take notes and then write it all down for them. 

• This was the case with all of Paul's letters (though he was very highly educated). He only wrote the closing greeting (2 Thessalonians 3:17)  
• And in the case of Peter, Mark was the writer of his Gospel account and he almost certainly used an amanuensis for at least one of his letters. 
• In the case of John, he also almost certainly used an amanuensis for his Gospel (which I strongly believe was John's disciple Papias). 

Finally, this comment by members of the Sanhedrin recorded in Acts 4:13 probably has nothing to do with whether they could read or write, but rather with whether they had received training under one of their approved Rabbis or something beyond the ancient world's equivalent of grade school. "Higher education" in the ancient world was focused on rhetoric. And probably they were amazed that in spite of the fact that they had none of the rhetorical skill that came with that kind of higher education, they were still able to speak very effectively.

On the other hand.....

Pointing to their lack of training in rhetoric only brings up a more serious problem for the skeptic, as pointed out by the quote below....and also in the book Too Good To Be False by Tom Gilson.

THE RELIABILITY OF THE GOSPELS, DISCREPANCIES AND HARMONIZING ACCOUNTS

"Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome." (Suetonius' The Lives of the Twelve Caesars: Claudius 25)

"As for the Jews, who had again increased so greatly that by reason of their multitude it would have been hard without raising a tumult to bar them from the city [Rome], he [Claudius] did not drive them out, but ordered them, while continuing their traditional mode of life, not to hold meetings." (Cassius Dio Roman History 60.6.6-7)

Here we have what seems like a straightforward irreconcilable contradiction: Either Claudius' expelled the Jews or he did not. Yet it is not that simple. I recently read a historian who tried to harmonize the accounts by saying that Cassius Dio was referring to an earlier point in Claudius' reign. So there is at least one possible way to reconcile these accounts. I have not even begun to look into this to see if this harmonization actually works, but my point is that this is the normal way of doing history: considering possible harmonizations.

But more to the point: even if they do actually contradict each other, we don't throw out Suetonius and Cassius Dio and say we can't learn anything from them because they contradict each other. In fact, they are both considered as generally reliable historians.

At the places that they agree, in fact, we have much greater confidence that those are historical facts that we can rely on. This is how history is done. But skeptics refuse to concede these fundamental rules of doing history for the Gospels.

THE NEW TESTAMENT CANON: Human Invention or Divine Gift?

In the fall of 2018 I did a presentation on the New Testament Canon (which was a revision of a presentation I did in March 2014). We were not able to cover in 2 hours all the material that I had prepared at that time, and I have more now. Someday I would like to write a series of articles or perhaps a book on this topic. 

But in the mean time, I am leaving my presentation resources and a list of resources below. Below that you will find my notes to the presentations that I did. The notes are far from complete, but you may find them helpful.

CONTENTS OF THIS PAGE:
I.  Resources from my presentation on the New Testament canon
II. RESOURCES FOR FURTHER STUDY on the New Testament canon
    A. GENERAL RESOURCES on the Formation of the New Testament Canon
    B. PSEUDONYMITY: Are any New Testament books falsely attributed to apostles?
        1. The Gospels
        2. The Pastoral Epistles (1 Timothy, 2 Timothy and Titus)
        3. 1st & 2nd Peter
        4. General Resources on the alleged pseudonymity in the New Testament
    C. REJECTED BOOKS: Why did other "gospels" not make it into the canon?
III. NOTES from my presentation on the New Testament canon (incomplete)



I. RESOURCES from my presentation:
"THE NEW TESTAMENT CANON: Human Invention or Divine Gift?":
(NOTE: These may be printed and distributed in their unaltered form for non-profit use.)

*The outline of my presentation used as handouts
*PowerPoint slides for my presentation
*A Chart on Early Canon Lists to 240 AD
*Flow Chart: "Who Are The Apostolic Fathers & What Did They Recognize as Scripture?"
*Confirmation of New Testament Books


II. RESOURCES FOR FURTHER STUDY:

A. General Resources on the Formation of the New Testament Canon

Video
*Kruger, Michael. "How Did the New Testament Canon Develop?" (3 minutes)
*Kruger, Michael. "Why You Can Rely on The Canon" (9 minutes)

*How Did We Get The Bible by Michael Kruger (53 minutes)
*"James White & Michael Kruger on the Biblical Canon" (60 minutes)
*An excellent series of short videos on the New Testament Canon by top experts like Darrell Bock and Dan Wallace being interviewed on the John Ankerberg Show.
*Blomberg, Craig. "The Formation of the New Testament Canon" (38 minutes)
*Various. "Why We Trust Our Bible." A series of 37 lectures by top experts in their areas: "The uniqueness and authority of the Bible are always under attack. Professors and writers are claiming that Jesus never existed, Jesus never claimed to be God, the early church changed the basic preaching of Jesus, books were left out of the Bible, the copies of the Bible that have come down through the centuries are hopelessly corrupt, and how can you trust your translation where there are so many? This class walks you through the process of how we received our Bible and why we can trust it. Dr. Darrell Bock discusses the life of Jesus in lectures 1-5. Dr. Craig Blomberg discusses the reliability of the Bible in lectures 6-11. Dr. Michael Kruger discusses the process of formation of the New Testament Canon in lectures 12-21. Dr. Dan Wallace discusses issues relating to manuscripts and textual criticism in lectures 22-27. Dr. Bill Mounce discusses the philosophies and process of translation in lectures 28-32. Dr. John Piper discusses the content, cohesiveness, scope and power of the Bible in lectures 33-37."


Online Course
*Kruger, Michael J. "The Origins of the New Testament Canon" (4 sessions)

Blogs

*Kruger, Michael. “Canon Fodder”

Websites

*Davis, Glenn. “The Development of the Canon of the New Testament.” And don't miss his "Links to Other Sites" which provides many resources not in my list.
*Compilation of "Ancient Canon Lists" with dating and texts

 Articles (Online and Free)
*Cooper, Brad. "THE GOSPEL OF MARK IS PETER'S TESTIMONY: 3 Early Church Fathers Confirm"

*Cooper, Brad. "Why 1 Timothy Was Written No Later Than 55 AD & Why That Matters"
*Bruce, F.F. "The Canon of the New Testament" (Chapter 3 of Bruce's classic book, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?)

*Kruger, Michael J. "What is the Earliest Complete List of the Canon of the New Testament?"

*Pratte, David E. "The Authority of the Apostles' Teaching"

*Hill, Charles E. "The New Testament Canon: Destructio Ad Absurdum?"
*Donner, Theo. "Some Thoughts on the History of the New Testament Canon"
*Leasure, Ryan. "Did We Really Not Have a New Testament Canon Till the Fourth Century?"
*Richards, E. Randolph. "The Codex and the Early Collection of Paul's Letters"
*Miller, Glenn. A series of technical articles on Clement of Rome's use of the New Testament. Part 2. Part 3.

*Hurtado, Larry. "Justin Martyr and the Gospels"

*Davis, Glenn. Evidence from Justin Martyr on the early canonicity of the Gospels

*Triablogue. An entire page of links to the various articles on canon written by the authors of Triablogue.

Booklets and Book Chapters

*"The Canon of the New Testament: how and when formed" by  B.B. Warfield (1892), 12 pages. FREE! Also, here.
*McDowell, Josh and Sean McDowell. Evidence That Demands A Verdict (2017 edition). Chapter 2: "How We Got The Bible" is an excellent overview of this issue.

Books

*Arnold, Clinton. How We Got the Bible: A Visual Journey (Zondervan Visual Reference Series). A nicely illustrated and concise introduction to this important issue (96 pages and lots of high resolution full-color photos).

*Kruger, Michael. Canon Revisited. (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books, 2012)
*Kruger, Michael. The Question of Canon (2013)
*Kruger, Michael. The Heresy of Orthodoxy (2010)
*Bruce, F.F. The Canon of Scripture (1988)
*Metzger, Bruce. The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance (1987)
*Geisler, Norman and Shawn Nelson. Evidence of an Early New Testament Canon. (2015)
*Hill, C.E. Who Chose The Gospels?

*Hill, C.E. Who Chose the Books of the New Testament?

*Tregelles, Samuel Prideux. The Historic Evidence of The Authorship and Transmission of the Books of the New Testament. (London: Samuel Bagster & Sons, 1881). Available for FREE at Internet Archive.

*Charteris, Archibald Hamilton. Canonicity: A Collection of Early Testimonies to the Canonical Books of the New Testament. (Edinburgh: William Blackwood and Sons, 1880). Available for FREE!

*Westcott, B.F. A General Survey of the Historicity of the Canon of the New Testament. (London: Macmillan and Company, 1875). Available for FREE!

*Harris, R. Laird. Inspiration and Canonicity of the Scriptures. Older versions of this book can be picked up much cheaper.

*Gamble, Harry A. The New Testament Canon: The Making and Meaning. A concise and helpful overview of the scholarly issues. A somewhat different perspective than mine, but by a top notch scholar in this field.

*McDonald, Lee Martin and James A. Sanders, editors. The Canon Debate. A large volume filled with essays of top notch scholars--though almost all of them are liberals and not conservatives (and none of the more important evangelical scholars who have done so much work in this field), so they are leaning strongly towards showing that the Bible is a human invention rather than a divine gift. So the title is quite misleading, but it is a great resource for a more in depth scholarly look at this subject.

*Gallagher, Edmon L. and John D. Meade. The Biblical Canon Lists from Early Christianity: Texts and Analysis. The authors' conclusions may be different than mine, but this is an excellent resource.
*Harnack, Adolf. The Origin of the New Testament. (1925). A formative thinker in the Liberal movement and driven by a liberal agenda yet a great historian from which many things can be gleaned if one uses discernment. It also gives one an understanding of where much of liberal ideas about the canon came from. Sadly, his agenda causes him to miss certain things in the New Testament and early church history leading him to make serious errors. 
*Alexander, Archibald. The Canon of the Old and New Testaments Ascertained. (1851)
*Souter, Alexander. The Text and Canon of the New Testament. (1913)
*Beckwith, Roger. The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church: and its Background in Early Judaism


B. PSEUDONYMITY: Are any New Testament books falsely attributed to apostles?

1. The Gospels
*McGrew, Timothy. "Who Wrote the Gospels?" (Audio and Video plus resources)
*Pitre, Brant. The Case for Jesus. (Chapters 2-4) This is the most thorough argument for the authenticity of the four canonical Gospels that I have seen--except perhaps that by Martin Hengel below.

*Hengel, Martin. The Four Gospels and the One Gospel of Jesus Christ. A formidable analysis by one of the foremost historians of the New Testament period.
*Tischendorf, Constantine von. Origin of the Four Gospels. (1867) FREE! (287 pages) Tischendorf is the great 19th Century scholar who discovered the Codex Sinaiticus.
*Hill, C.E. Who Chose The Gospels? (308 pages)

2. Pastoral Epistles
*Cooper, Brad. "Who Wrote the Pastoral Epistles?" (An extensive article followed by a load of resources for further investigation)

3. 1st & 2nd Peter
The only real cause of doubt raised by critics concerning the authenticity of the letters of Peter focuses on the difference in language and style. But it should be noted that very early church fathers recorded that Mark was Peter's interpreter. It seems most likely that the explanation for this is that this fisherman from Galilee did not speak fluent Greek but was only fluent in Aramaic. That being the case, it should not be surprising that the two letters bearing his name are so different. They quite apparently were taken down and translated by two very different men.

RESOURCES FOR 1 & 2 PETER:
*Kruger, Michael. "The Authenticity of 2 Peter"
*Warfield, B.B. "The Canonicity of Second Peter"
*Miller, Glenn. "Question...are 1st and 2nd Peter NOT by Peter, but by someone using his name?"
*Zahn, Theodor. "The Genuineness of Jude and The Two Epistles of Peter" (pdf file) excerpted from Introduction to the New Testament (1917, Revised 2nd Edition: "Three Volumes in One"), Volume 2, p..262-293.
*Richards, E. Randolph. "Will the Real Author Please Stand Up?: The Author in Greco-Roman Letter Writing." (Chapter 8, p. 113-136 in Come Let Us Reason: New Essays in Christian Apologetics, edited by Paul Copan and William Lane Craig). An excellent article on the authenticity of the New Testament letters, especially the pastorals and the letters of Peter.

4. Other Resources for Accusations of Pseudonymity
*Taylor, Justin. "Pseudonymity and the NT" (excellent brief article)
*Guthrie, Donald. "The Development of the Idea of Canonical Pseudopigraphy in New Testament Criticism" and "Dilemmas in New Testament Criticism" (excellent articles)
*Brown, Douglas E. "Pseudonymity and The New Testament" (article)
*Wilder, Terry. "Does the Bible Contain Forgeries?" Chapter 7 (Kindle Location 3636) of In Defense of the Bible: A Comprehensive Apologetic for the Authority of Scripture, edited by Steven Cowan and Terry Wilder
*Darrell Bock responds to Bart Ehrman.
*Witherington's series of reviews of Bart Ehrman's book Forged.
*Mike Licona's review of Bart Ehrman's book Forged. (You have to click the link, then it downloads as a pdf.)
*Carson, D. A.; Moo, Douglas J.  An Introduction to the New Testament. (2009) Zondervan. My first go-to reference for these kinds of questions is Carson and Moo's Introduction to the New Testament. I've been using it for about 20 years now and I have never been disappointed. These guys are solid in theology and scholarship.
*Carson, D.A. "Pseudonymity and Pseudepigraphy" in the IVP Dictionary of New Testament Background, p.857-64. Carson is one of the greatest New Testament scholars of the past 40 years.
*Wilder, Terry. Pseudonymity, The New Testament and Deception: An Inquiry into Intention and Reception. (Note: As the one used copy is an astronomical price, you may want to borrow this one from a library.)
*Zahn, Theodor. Introduction to the New Testament (1917, Revised 2nd Edition: "Three Volumes in One"). Zahn was one of the great New Testament scholars of the early 20th Century. FREE!

C. REJECTED BOOKS: Why did other "Gospels" not make it into the New Testament canon?
*Cooper, Brad. "So-Called Lost Gospels" (Brief article & links to tons of resources)

III. MY PRESENTATION NOTES:

INTEGRITY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT CANON: 
2ND ED. (2018)

INTRO: 

1. HYPER-SKEPTICAL VIEW OF THE NEW TESTAMENT CANON
A. The DaVinci Code quote and its origins in The Lost Books of the Bible (SHOW BOOK)....The Forbidden Gospels and Epistles.... the Hancock's "The Suppressed Gospels and Epistles of the original New Testament of Jesus the Christ  (1863)"
....Which is a reprint of William Hone's Apocryphal New Testament (1821) with an introduction by Edward Hancock. Hone utilized translations by William Wake (for the Apostolic Fathers) and Jeremiah Jones (for the New Testament Apocrypha).
....NAG HAMMADI (1945)
B. The Effect of the DaVinci Code....
C. The Other Danger of the DaVinci Code....Makes liberal/mainstream views seem moderate or even conservative by comparison.
D. How many Gospels? 80? How about four....plus 12 pretenders. (MEYER BOOK)
E. Three quick points:
i. The Council of Nicea did not discuss the NT canon
ii. During the "Great Persecution" under Diocletian's reign, the persecution began by razing churches and burning the Christian Scriptures in 303 (22 years before Nicea).
iii. There is much evidence for a general consensus about the canon long before this time....which we will begin to explore in our time tonight.

2. THE MAINSTREAM VIEW & ITS PROBLEM
A. The Mainstream View Is...
B. The Problems:
i. What the letter and councils actually say....confirm and do not decide
ii. Do bishops and church councils actually have the authority to decide what the canon should be?
iii. The Presence of earlier canon lists and other indicators of a New Testament canon: And what about the "disputed books"?
iv. How should the canon be determined? Who actually has the authority to determine the canon? What are we even looking for in a New Testament canon?

3. THE NEW TESTAMENT MODEL FOR CANON
A. Jesus is the mediator of the New Testament (Covenant)
B. Jesus gave his authority to the apostles:
-Qualifications of an apostle
C. Did the apostles know they were writing Scripture?



********************

INTEGRITY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT CANON: 
1ST EDITION (2014):

INTRO:

A. MODERN QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CANON
1. Is the New Testament we have now the books God wanted us to have? 
*If these are the books that we depend on to know who God is and how we can be assured of forgiveness and eternal life, how do we know we have the right books? 
*Are there books missing from our canon?....Are some of the books in our canon forgeries? 
*Are the books we have now simply the result of early church politics? Or even Constantine's sanction? 
In recent years, there have been a large number of skeptics who have been raising these kinds of questions and challenges to the Biblical canon. The leading sources of this skepticism would probably be Bart Ehrman and Dan Brown's book and movie, The Davinci Code.
2. Bart Ehrman: Lost Christianities, Forged, etc.: 
3. The Davinci Code: "More than eighty gospels were considered for the New Testament and yet only a relative few were chosen for inclusion....The Bible, as we know it today, was collated by the pagan Roman emperor Constantine the Great....Constantine commissioned and financed a new Bible, which omitted those gospels that spoke of Christ's human traits and embellished those gospels that made him godlike. The earlier gospels were outlawed, gathered up, and burned....The modern Bible was compiled and edited by men who possessed a political agenda...."
4. The Council of Nicea (325 A.D.)....
*TIMELINE
a. NOT about the Biblical canon. Decided on 20 different matters of "canon law" (that is, church rules), but none of them had to do with what books would be considered Scripture. (Perhaps the term "canon law" is where the confusion about this comes from.)
b. The two major issues decided on at Nicea concerned Arianism and when to celebrate Easter. BTW, if the church prior to this time did not have the political power to solve a minor issue like when to celebrate Easter (which had been an issue for at least 150 years before Constantine's time), then how would they ever enforce something like the canon.
*NOTE: "Scholars disagree about the controversy's details. They do agree that its arguments revolved around whether the primary Christian spring festival should happen on Nisan 14 (the Passover day) or annually on a Sunday."
"The controversy involved three events: the controversy between Polycarp, the bishop of Smyrna, and Anicetus, the bishop of Rome, that occurred around a.d. 155; the more heated controversy between Polycrates, the bishop of Ephesus, and Victor, the bishop of Rome, that broke out around 195; and the decree of Constantine following the Nicene Council in 325."
**FROM the online article "The Passover-Easter-Quartodeciman Controversy" by Ralph Orr at: http://www.gci.org/church/holidays/passover
c. So far as we know, NO ecumenical/universal council of the early church EVER ruled on what books belonged in the Bible. (There were rulings at local councils, but not universal councils. And none of these local councils were held during the time of Constantine.) Rather, the evidence shows that the early Church received and passed on those books that they knew were written by or under the authority of the apostles.

B. THE SPIRIT'S WITNESS, THE SCRIPTURE & GOD'S SOVEREIGNTY
Before getting into the historical evidence for the New Testament canon, let's take a quick look at the way most Christians come to know and trust that the Bible contains the books that God wanted us to have. Most Christians do not even question the New Testament canon:
*They trust the judgment of their church leaders. 
*They sense the witness of the Spirit to their spirits when they read the Scripture that it is indeed the Word of God. 
*They see within the pages of the Bible many things that confirm that it is given by God--among other things: 
a. the fulfillment of so many detailed prophecies, 
b. the amazing unity of 66 books that have been written by over 40 different human authors over the course of about 1400+ years, 
c. its accurate prescriptions for life, and 
d. what J.B. Phillips calls: "the ring of truth"). 
Things that set it apart from all other books. 
And finally, they note within its pages the promises that it will endure as long as heaven and earth; and they trust God's power and sovereignty to fulfill those promises and preserve his Word for the sake of his people. 
1. The Spirit's Witness: "The one who enters by the gate is the shepherd of the sheep. The gatekeeper opens the gate for him, and the sheep listen to his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he goes on ahead of them, and his sheep follow him because they know his voice. But they will never follow a stranger; in fact, they will run away from him because they do not recognize a stranger’s voice." (John 10:2-5; see also 10:1-16, 25-27)
2. The Declarations of Scripture: 
"Your word, O LORD, is eternal; it stands firm in the heavens....Long ago I learned from your statutes that you established them to last forever." (Psalm 119:89, 152)
"For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." (Matthew 5:18)
"Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away." (Luke 21:33)
3. God's Sovereignty: Let me give you a brief outline for a cumulative argument by which we can come to trust the authenticity of the Biblical canon, even apart from the historical evidences. Theistic proofs prove God's existence. Creation--and especially the way we are made--give us good reason to expect that our Creator would desire to communicate with us. As already noted, the Bible is unique among the writings of the world in giving us good reason to believe that it is from our Creator. Messianic prophecies and Christ's death and resurrection (as the first among many other things) prove that Jesus Christ is who he claimed to be: God. Jesus' recognition of the OT and authorization of his apostles further ensures that the Bible is God's Word. And in light of the declarations of Scripture that it is eternal, God's sovereingnty guarantees the canon.
4. What I hope to do today is not so much to prove that our New Testament canon is the correct one. Rather it will be to show that the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of this verdict and that such evidence is consistent with what we believe concerning God's sovereignty and the canon.

C. DID THE APOSTLES KNOW THEY WERE WRITING SCRIPTURE?
1. 2 Peter 3:15-16: Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
a. "as they do the other Scriptures": So the apostle Peter considers Paul's letters to be  Scripture.
b. "in ALL his letters" (collection of Paul's letters)
c. in public circulation: Peter assumes his readers know about "ALL his letters" and     even the ignorant and unstable have access to them
d. According to Paul's own words in 1 Cor. 15:9, Paul is "the least of the apostles", so if Peter calls Paul's letters Scripture, then the writings of the other apostles would certainly have no lesser status.
2. 1 Timothy 5:18: 
a. "the Scripture says"....Q: Where does the Scripture say this? (Deut. 25:4; Lk. 10:7)
b. The Greek of this verse is nearly identical to the Greek in Luke 10:7 (vs. Mt. 10:10)
c. Paul's use of Luke: Compared to Matthew and Mark (John was not yet written), Paul only cites Luke. And he alludes to teaching distinctive to Luke more than to the others--including alluding to Luke 10: 7 in 1 Cor. 9:9, 14.

D. THE PRECEDENCE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT CANON
1. OT Canon established in First Century Judaism 
*Jesus and the apostles were Jews. So the NT Church already had a canon of Scripture, right?...which was what?
*Q: And why do we call it the Old Testament?
*See chapter 16 of In Defense of The Bible by Paul Wegner, et al
2. 2 Corinthians 3:14 & "Ministers of the New Covenant" (3:6)
*2 Cor. 3:14: ".... to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read."
*2 Cor. 3:6: "God  has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant...."
*Also see Hebrews (chapters 7-10)

E. THE APOSTLES & THE FOUNDING OF THE NEW COVENANT
*Eph 2:20: "....built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus as the chief cornerstone" (see also: Galatians 2:9; Revelation 21:14)
*Who are the apostles? (The Twelve and others: 1 Cor. 15:3-9)
1. Eyewitnesses of Jesus' Ministry, Death and Resurrection 
    *When declaring the need to replace Judas Iscariot to restore the full number of the Twelve, Peter said: "Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us, beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.” (Acts 1:21-22; see also Mark 3:13-14; Luke 24:46-48; John 15:27; Acts 1:9; 1 Cor. 9:1; 15:1-8)
2. Sent Out with Jesus' Own Authority
     *"Whoever receives you receives me, and whoever receives me receives him who sent me." (Matthew 10:40; see also Mk. 3:13-15; Mt. 10:14, 20; John 13:20; 14:26; 15:20; 17:18; 20:21)
     *"I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. He will glorify me because it is from me that he will receive what he will make known to you. All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will receive from me what he will make known to you.” (John 16:12-15)
       *The apostles understood the authority that had been given to them:  1 Cor. 7:12; 14:37; 2 Cor. 10:8; 13:20;                           1 Thess. 2:4, 6, 13; 4:2, 8; 2 Thess. 2:15; 3:14; 1 Tim. 5:18; 2 Peter 3:2, 16; Heb. 2:2-3; Rev. 1:1-3; 22:18-19
3. Confirmed Through Miraculous Signs
*2 Cor. 12:12; Matt. 10:1,7-8; Mark 3:13-15; Mark 3:13-15; Heb. 2:3-4
*The apostles' words carry the weight of Jesus' own authority; therefore, their written words     must be Scripture.
[Others who are apostles: 1 Cor. 15:1-9; Acts 14:14; Rom. 16:7?; 1 Cor. 9:5-6]

F. SCRIPTURE READINGS IN PUBLIC WORSHIP
*We can see that the New Testament called the Gospels and the writings of the apostles Scripture. But we can also see that they considered them to be Scripture by the way they used them. We have already seen that they cited (quoted authoritatively) them. But there is another very important evidence that they considered them to be Scripture: they read them in public worship.
*"Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture, to preaching and to teaching." (1 Tim. 4:13)
*The Muratorian Fragment: “But Hermas wrote the Shepherd very recently, in our times, in the city of Rome, while bishop Pius, his brother, was occupying the [episcopal] chair of the church of the city of Rome. And therefore it ought indeed to be read; but it cannot be read publicly to the people in church either among the Prophets, whose number is complete, or among the Apostles, for it is after [their] time.” 

*Luke 4:17-20; Acts 13:15; 1 Tim. 4:13; Col. 4:16; 1 Thess. 5:27; 2 Cor. 10:9; Rev. 1:3

*TIMELINE


G. PROVENANCE: THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS & APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION (handout)
*Okay....So the apostles' writings are Scripture, but how can we be sure that what we have are the apostles' writings? (Again: God's Providence and the witness of the Spirit....but    there is more!).....>>>
*Q: How many of you like to watch Antiques Roadshow or American Pickers....? (Provenance)
*Q: Who are the apostolic fathers?
*Q: And what is apostolic succession?: Tertullian (c.200):
"But if there be any [heresies] which are bold enough to plant themselves in the midst of the apostolic age, that they may thereby seem to have been handed down by the apostles, because they existed in the time of the apostles, we can say: Let them produce the original records of their churches; let them unfold the roll of their bishops, running down in due succession from the beginning, in such a manner that that bishop shall be able to show for his ordainer and predecessor some one of the apostles or of apostolic men,—a man, moreover, who continued stedfast with the apostles. For this is the manner in which the apostolic churches transmit their registers: as the church of Smyrna, which records that Polycarp was placed therein by John; as also the church of Rome, which makes Clement to have been ordained in like manner by Peter. In exactly the same way the other churches likewise exhibit, whom, as having been appointed to their episcopal places by apostles, they regard as transmitters of the apostolic seed." ("The Prescription Against Heresies, chapter 32; Coxe, Cleveland. Ante-Nicene Fathers, 3:258)
As Peter Holmes (the translator of this section of the Ante-Nicene Fathers) remarks in the footnote: "Our author had seen these registers, no doubt."
1. Clement of Rome: (handout)
2. Papias of Hierapolis, Polycarp of Smyrna & Ignatius of Antioch (handout)
3. Didache:  Cites Matthew and says it is contained in a gospel....
"Do not abandon the commandments of the Lord but keep what you have received, neither adding to them or taking away."
Deut. 4:2: "Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you.
6. Frequency of citation: The apostolic fathers cite the New Testament between 5 and 50 times more than the Old Testament....and they almost never cite apocryphal works. (Kruger, Canon Revisited, Kindle location 6198-6214)

*TIMELINE

H. ANCIENT CANON LISTS (handout)

*Tertullian (c.200) remarks that Marcion used a knife instead of a pen

*"Disputed" books, missionary strategy (Wycliffe Translators, Gideon NTs, the Gospel of John), & the snobbery of the underprivileged
*Ireneaus & Polycarp

*TIMELINE

I. MANUSCRIPT EVIDENCE: 100-300 A.D.

*See Chapter 7 of Canon Revisited by Michael Kruger or Kruger's online lecture "The Artifact of Canon"

*Let me give you a couple of highlights to give you some idea what kind of MS evidence we have:

1. We have a MS that dates from c.250 (the Chester Beatty papyrus: P45) which contains Mt-Acts. Going back a little earlier (c. 175-225), we have P75 (Luke & John).... And a little earlier yet (c.175-200), we hae P64 & P67 (Mt) and P4 (Luke) which were probably originally bound together in the same codex (book). What we never have is one of the canonical gospels being bound together into a codex with an apocryphal gospel. (Kruger, Canon Revisited, Kindle location 7118-7158)

*TIMELINE

2. 2nd/3rd Cent. MSS of our NT books outnumber apocryphal books almost 4:1. We have more MSS of the Gospel of John than all apocryphal books put together. (Kruger, Canon Revisited, Kindle location 7088-7090)

*There is much much more, but most of it is very involved.

SUMMARY OF THE EVIDENCE

*TIMELINE


The evidence from the New Testament, the apostolic fathers, the sub-apostolic fathers, ancient canon lists, and early manuscripts all agree in confirming that the New Testament we have is the one that God intended us to have and that the politics of Constantine (or anyone else) were not a force in determining which books are in the New Testament canon that we uphold as God's Word today.

JESUS MYTHICISM: Resources for Study

RELATED PAGES ON MY BLOG
*"Scholars Dismiss the Nonsense That Jesus Was Just a Myth"
*Jesus' Historicity: Links to my own articles on this topic and tons of other resources.
*Alleged Pagan Parallels.

AUDIO
*"Engaging the Flawed Views of Jesus Mythicism": an interview with Nick Peters

ARTICLES

*"Big Think on the Historical Jesus": a response by Nick Peters of Deeper Waters

*"History is a Problem for Those Who Doubt Jesus Was Real" by Lenny Esposito
*"5 Questions to Ask Jesus Mythicists" by Stephen Bedard
*"Are The Gospels Based on Eyewitness Accounts?" My own forthcoming extensive article that surveys the mountain of evidence for the historical reliability of the four Gospels. Just the outline for this article has reached several pages. I will probably instead post it as a series of articles once my work on it is mostly complete (and eventually publish it as a book). I hope to accomplish this by the Spring of 2017 (but I still have a lot to do).

WEBSITES

*A Christian Response to Jesus Mythicism: I anticipate that Albert McIlhenny's budding site will soon be one of the best resources on the internet for this issue (if not already). The site includes videos and links to his series of 16 books on Jesus Mythicism.
*Did Abe Lincoln really exist? A Facebook page for alincolnists. ;)

BOOKS

*Albert McIlhenny's series of 16 books on Jesus mythicism.
*Jesus Is No Myth! by David Marshall. Highly recommended. Here is my review. Here are a couple of blurbs from two top scholars on the historicity of the Gospels: Dr. Craig Blomberg: “Support for the credibility of Christianity can be found here that is available nowhere else. A must read. ” Dr. Timothy McGrew: "Full of fresh insights, penetrating analysis, and dry wit -- the section on the Baal Shem Tov alone is worth the price of the book -- and some of the best material from the rich storehouse of the history of apologetics." This book responds to Bart Ehrman, Richard Carrier and Reza Aslan, and then builds a strong case for the historicity of the Biblical Gospels. 
*Nash, Ronald. The Gospel and the Greeks: Did the New Testament Borrow from Pagan Thought? 
*The Jesus Legend by Paul Rhodes Eddy and Gregory A. Boyd
*Shattering the Christ Myth by James Patrick Holding
*Unmasking the Pagan Christ by Stanley E. Porter and Stephen J. Bedard


Responses to Bart Ehrman
*Of course Bart Ehrman is not strictly speaking a Jesus mythicist and has even debated Richard Carrier on the subject. The reality is, however, that this is more of a smokescreen, as Ehrman believes that Jesus was a very different person than the Gospels tell us--so for all practical purposes, the Jesus of the Gospels is a myth, in Ehrman's view.
*Web Page: The Ehrman Project: Top scholars respond to Bart Ehrman on various issues
*Book: Jesus Is No Myth by David Marshall. This book responds to Bart Ehrman, Richard Carrier and Reza Aslan, and then builds a strong case for the historicity of the Biblical Gospels. (More Details above or at link.) David Marshall's October 2016 speaking tour on the book.
*Book: Truth in a Culture of Doubt by Andreas Kostenberger, Darrell Bock and Joshua Chatraw. Published by B&H Academic in 2014. Responds to the various skeptical arguments that Ehrman has put forward. Currently only $2.99 in Kindle format.
*Book: Truth Matters, also by Kostenberger, Bock and Chatraw. This book covers pretty much the same ground as the book above but is written for a popular audience. Currently only $3.82 in Kindle format.
*5-Part Essay: "An evangelical response to Bart Ehrman's Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet for the New Millennium" by Neil Shenvi

Responses to Richard Carrier
AUDIO/VIDEO
*William Lane Craig debates Richard Carrier: Includes a transcript of the Reasonable Faith podcasts about the debate and links to the audio. Video of the March 2009 debate (101 minutes).
*David Marshall debates Richard Carrier: August 2016 (108 minutes). 
*Justin Bass debates Richard Carrier: March 2016 (3 hours 8 minutes). 
*Mark Goodacre debates Richard Carrier with Justin Brierly on Unbelievable? podcast (80 minutes).

ARTICLES
*"The Jesus Myth? A Response to Richard Carrier" (3-part series) by Adam Tucker
*"Richard Carrier (Mythicist). A Full Rebuttal" by James Bishop
*David Marshall blog articles concerning Richard Carrier

BOOKS
*Jesus Is No Myth by David Marshall. This book responds to Bart Ehrman, Richard Carrier and Reza Aslan, and then builds a strong case for the historicity of the Biblical Gospels. (More Details above or at link.) David Marshall's October 2016 speaking tour on the book.

THE RELIABILITY OF THE BIBLE: Resources for Study

This page is for resources that demonstrate the reliability of the Bible in general terms. For more specific issues related to the Bible's reliability, see "Related Pages on My Blog" below:

RELATED PAGES ON MY BLOG
*Historical Reliability of the Old Testament
*Archaeological Confirmation of the Old Testament
*New Testament Reliability
*Archaeological Confirmation of the New Testament
*Undesigned Coincidences as Evidence for the Historicity of the Bible
*Are the Gospels Based on Eyewitness Accounts?: An Outline of the Evidence & Resources for Study....(This will be a major labor of love....hopefully coming soon)

*Contradictions in the Bible?....Interpreting Scripture

VIDEOS
"Bible on Trial: Beyond a Reasonable Doubt" is a 45-minute video by Vision Video produced in a courtroom setting. There is a 4-part Bible study available to go with it. The film features attorney Craig Parton and scholars Dr. Paul Maier of Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, Mich.; Dr. Randall Price of Liberty University, Lynchburg, Va.; Dr. Jeff Kloha of Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, Mo. and Joel Lampe of The Bible Museum, Goodyear, Ariz. 
Watch it for FREE! here.

ARTICLES (& BOOK CHAPTERS)
*Geisler, Norm and Frank Turek. I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist. Chapter 14: "What Did Jesus Teach About the Bible?" Pages 355-376.
*"Reversals of New Testament Criticism" by Merrill C. Tenney

*"Ten Reasons Why I Believe the Bible Is the Word of God" (1891) by R.A. Torrey


BOOKS
*In Defense of the Bible: A Comprehensive Apologetic for the Authority of Scripture edited by Steven Cowan and Terry L. Wilder. A compilation of essays by expert scholars like Paul W. Barnett, Darrell L. Bock, Daniel B. Wallace, Paul Copan,  Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., Charles L. Quarles, and others. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!
*Evidence That Demands A Verdict (2017 edition) by Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell. PART I: "Evidence for the Bible"; PART II: "Evidence for Jesus"; PART III: "Evidence for the Old Testament"
*The Evidence of Prophecy edited by Robert C. Newman. "One of the most powerful evidences for the truth of biblical Christianity is the fulfillment of predictions made in Scripture. Here, nine authors discuss prophecies made centuries in advance about Israel, her neighbors, and her Messiah. Specific attempts to explain these away as vague, misinterpreted, or written after the event are countered." Currently only $2.99. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!
*Scripture and Truth edited by Carson and Woodbridge. Essays by a host of expert scholars. "From a biblical, historical, or theological perspective each essay examines a challenge to belief in the integrity and reliability of Scripture." HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!
*"Fundamentalism" and the Word of God by J.I. Packer. A classic. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!
*Revelation and the Bible: Contemporary Evangelical Thought. Carl F.H. Henry, editor
Baker Book House. Grand Rapids, Michigan (1958). FREE! 24 essays by leading evangelicals. (401 pages)
*" Evidence for the Reliability of the Bible": Equipped: Vol. 1, No. 4, The Quarterly Journal of the Christian Apologetics Alliance. FREE!
*Is the Bible Reliable? by John Piper: a FREE! 13-page booklet
*Can I Really Trust The Bible? by Martin De Hann II: a FREE! 33-page booklet published by RBC Ministries
*The Fundamentals: A Testimony to the Truth. A classic. This large collection of essays by leading evangelical scholars was originally published in a series of 12 volumes between 1910 and 1915. These volumes cover several topics but many of the essays are focused on defending the Scriptures. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED! Blue Letter Bible has an introduction and a nicely organized collection of all of the essays ready to read for FREE! online. You can also download the 1917 four-volume edition for FREE! as 4 pdf files: Volume 1 Volume 2 Volume 3 Volume 4. And it is only 99 cents on Kindle (click on title link).
*Can We Still Believe the Bible?: An Evangelical Engagement with Contemporary Questions by Craig L. Blomberg

ONLINE COURSES (FREE)

*"Why I Trust My Bible" (3 hours) by Bill Mounce

*"Why We Trust Our Bible" (20 hours) by John Piper, Craig Blomberg and Bill Mounce


BOOKS RELATED TO THE HISTORY OF THE BIBLE'S CRITICS
*The Word of God and the Mind of Man by Ronald Nash. A Nash classic. "The last two centuries of Christian theology are the record of an evolving attack on the role of knowledge in the Christian faith. The purpose of this book is to challenge the major forms of Christian agnosticism and offer an alternative theory that makes human knowledge about God possible. In other words, is there a relationship between the human mind and the divine mind that is sufficient to ground the communication of truth from God to humans?" HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!
*Historical Criticism of the Bible by Eta Linnemann. "In Historical Criticism of the Bible Eta Linnemann tells how modern Bible scholarship has drifted far from the truth, and why its assumptions are nonetheless so influential and thereby inherently dangerous. In part 1 she analyzes the ideas that have shaped Western thought through four centuries, explaining how secular humanism, the Enlightenment, and German idealism have influenced Western universities in general and biblical scholarship in particular. In part 2 she argues that historical criticism constitutes an ideological system rather than the objective scientific method scholars say they observe—exposing the presuppositions and dangers of the historical-critical system." 
*Biblical Errancy by Norman Geisler
*The Bible in Modern Culture: Theology and Historical-Critical Method from Spinoza to Kasemann by Roy A. Harrisville and Walter Sundberg. Not a light read but very helpful.
*Theology in Turmoil by Alan P.F. Sell
*The Rise of Biblical Criticism in America, 1800-1870: The New England Scholars by Jerry Wayne Brown
*Dictionary of Major Biblical Interpreters edited by Donald K. McKim. An indispensable reference volume for researching the history of the Bible's critics and its defenders and faithful exegetes.

STILL LOOKING?.....
*Check out the great resources on the Bible's reliability at bethinking