I have come across a YouTube four-part series of videos where Lee Strobel's convictions are challenged. I want to present multiple viewpoints on this blog. Mr. Strobel is a busy guy and he can't answer each and every crackpot challenge. So I'll take this one.
The author of the videos made the mistake of trying to explain Lee Strobel's conversion away as He only started seriously studying the Bible as a believer looking for proof. This is false. By his own testimony, that I have read with my own eyes and heard in person with my own ears, he began to study the Bible to disprove it! He was an atheist. The creator of this serious must not know Strobel well at all.
What else is wrong? The author attempts to knock down Lee Strobel's remark that archaeology supports the Bible by pointing out examples showing where the Bible conflicts with arc
haeology. He offers 3 major points1. Daniel says that Belshazzar was Nebuchadnezzar's son, but he really was Nebuchadnezzar's grandson.
The author is ignorant of the oriental culture of the Babylonians and the Persians and the Jews. Grandsons and even Great Grandsons are often attributed to important fathers no matter how far the generations are apart. They also seem to skip details that some of us in modern western culture would have thought was important..ie the fact that Belshazzar was a co-regent with his father and that there had been 3 kings who reigned shortly after Nebuchadnezzar was not deemed important to include. No where in Daniel does it say that Belshazzar immediately followed Nebuchadnezzar. To imply or assume that is going beyond what the Bible does say.
2. Daniel says the Darius the Mede conquered Babylon when it really was Cyrus the Great.
Then Medes and Persians were one empire! Darius and Cyrus conquered Babylon together and Darius being about 62 at the time ruled for a brief time (about 2 yrs) and Cyrus took over the whole thing. source
3. The Bible say that Ninevah was so large that it took 3 days to cross the city but excavations show that the city is only 5 km across.
Look at the text in question - Jonah 3: 3
Jonah obeyed the word of the LORD and went to Nineveh. Now Nineveh was a very important city—a visit required three days.
Obviously the author of the video is using the KJV, but looking at the NIV is much clearer. It could be taken that it took 3 days to reach the city from where the fish dropped Jonah off. Ninevah is along way from the sea.
If the author was wrong about these three Biblical contradictions, what else could he be wrong about? As for the author's point that there is no evidence where there should be, I think it's only a matter of time. It took centuries to find the archaeological artifacts that we do have. I'm sure there is a lot more to find.
Then the author tries to knock down the thought that the Gospels that correlate. The problem he points out that:
1. Different number of women going to the tomb.
No Gospel disagrees with the other by saying so-and-so was not at the tomb when one of them says she was. None of the Gospels give the total number of women who went to the tomb therefore if it were more 5, then it perfectly concievable that different subsets were named.
2. Different number of angels
It's the same thing with number of angels. If one author offers more detail than another, why would you assume contradiction?
3. Location of the stone
None of the Gospels say that the women witnessed the stone being rolled away. There is no contradiction
4. Who did Jesus appear to first
Considering that Mary Magdalene saw Jesus in the same garden as the tomb just after dawn, I think it's safe to say that she saw him first. To charge contradiction with the two disciples on the way to Emmaus, you would have to say that the episode happened before Mary Magdalene and the other women went to the tomb and judging by the fact that people usually did not travel long distances in the dark of night, I'm certain Mary's encounter happened first.
5. Which disciples went to the tomb.
Does it really make sense to conclude that because Matthew did not record any disciples going to the tomb that there is contradiction with saying Peter went and saying Peter and John went. a contradiction would be to say no one went, Peter did not go, and John did not go. Neither Gospel says that. Where is the contradiction?
When the author talks about Jesus' end times prophecy alleges that Jesus failed to come back in the life time of the people who heard Him. The author has a problem. Jesus could not have been telling people that they would be alive when He comes back. Jesus said that no one knows the day or the hour of his return. He even said he did not know. He told parables illustrating that we have to live like He could come back at any second but not know when. Therefore to understand that Jesus has to return in the lifetime of the hearers means that there is a lack of understanding.
The alleged charge against Matthew saying the Jesus was riding 2 donkeys at the same time is either a lie or a misunderstanding. Jesus was riding a cold...the colt's mother was walking in front of Jesus and the colt. This is how they trained donkey that had never been ridden before.
As for the other alleged contradictions there are answers for them too if you bother to just look at the Bible in its context. For example the obligatory contradiction concerning Jesus' geneology in Matthew and Luke. to the Jewish culture, you don't list everyone in a geneology just the important ones (this is what Matthew did).
I have Doherty's book "Challenging the Verdict" against Strobel's "The Case for Christ". I agree read both. I think that the author of the video is wrong about the time line for the gospels. Not everyone agrees.
These videos do not represent truth and grossly misrepresent history and common sense. An example is the thought that Christianity is just like any other religion without interacting with all of Strobel's reasons for being convinced that it's not. Neither Islam nor Hinduism are based on a body of scripture that can be dated within 30 years of the events themselves. Not just the Gospels but the epistles as well.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=4248195e-ada4-473c-87cc-5e4938bf77d9)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=99536a3f-72ee-4b54-a79c-b5c0566f9da3)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=e97e4953-d300-466c-a6c7-2855617856fa)