Scholarly Evidence For the Truth of the Bible & Christ's Intentions Post-Ascension

[Kenaz]

Hello all,

I am someone who is agnostic, but seeking answers of Christianity. I am not here to challenge or win an argument. What I am looking for, and I would be most gracious for your time and shared sources, is:

(a) What are some good books, articles, videos/documentaries, podcasts, and so forth that corroborate through history/scholarly evidence that confirms the literal happenings written of in the books of the Bible (Old & New Testament)?

(b) What are your individual thoughts on the proper Path that Jesus Christ and his Twelve Apostles foretold for future Christians or seekers (that's us!) in terms of Jesus Christ, The Father, and the Holy Spirit/Ghost's intention for the Church. What is the Church? Is there a direct lineage that is proper and others not proper? Can anyone simply read the Scripture? Catholics say they are The Church, Protestants claim another thing, and Mormons claim that there was apostacy and that they are the Reformed Church of Christ on earth.

Please back up (b) with scholarly or in-depth explanations or proof of these claims, please.

(EDIT - To clarify, I am talking about the sources or readings/resources that you digested that were integral to your final conclusion or perspective on this. In this way, I can 'walk in your shoes' and understand where you are coming from and how you arrived to that conclusion/perspective).

Thank you!

 

[David1967]

YouTube anything with Ravi Zechariah. He is one of the best Christian apologists.

 

[Brickjectivity]

(a) What are some good books, articles, videos/documentaries, podcasts, and so forth that corroborate through history/scholarly evidence that confirms the literal happenings written of in the books of the Bible (Old & New Testament)?

Books.... Sometimes really good books do go out of print, and for fundamentalist apologetics you really should be looking at the 19th and early 20th century out of print works. That was when people began exploding with new systems of thought. Reading popular books may not help you much. I cannot guarantee your reading pleasure or claim to have read these, but here are some of the acclaimed fundamentalist ones that are more recent and obtainable. The one I do not recommend at all is McDowell's, so maybe that is where you should start. Its three volumes, but no one actually reads it. Instead they read McDowell's More Than a Carpenter. I have read that one, and its really horrible. Maybe you will like it though. To me its unfortunately a dishonest intellectual insult, but you may find otherwise. I have heard JJ Blunt's book is fairly convincing but have not read it, so I recommend that one.

• Harmony of the Gospels
• Undesigned Scriptural Coincidences -- JJ Blunt
• Evidence That Demands a Verdict -- Josh McDowell

There are few if any popular Christian books defending only the literal historicity of the OT books in isolation from NT books. Best of luck.

(b) What are your individual thoughts on the proper Path that Jesus Christ and his Twelve Apostles foretold for future Christians or seekers (that's us!) in terms of Jesus Christ, The Father, and the Holy Spirit/Ghost's intention for the Church. What is the Church? Is there a direct lineage that is proper and others not proper? Can anyone simply read the Scripture? Catholics say they are The Church, Protestants claim another thing, and Mormons claim that there was apostacy and that they are the Reformed Church of Christ on earth.

Sorry but that is reserved for people with higher post counts who have proven that they aren't asking things they already have answers to.

 

[McBell]

Please back up (b) with scholarly or in-depth explanations or proof of these claims, please.

This sounds rather like you are looking for someone to do your homework...
Just saying.
I mean, the list in (b) could actually be broken into multiple threads and have countless hours of reading and posting in each.

 

[Kenaz]

There are few if any popular Christian books defending only the literal historicity of the OT books in isolation from NT books. Best of luck.

This may have been a miscommunication. I am looking for a scholarly approach that shows historicity and evidence of the truth of the contents of the Bible (both Old & New Testament), not one in isolation from the other.

 

[Brickjectivity]

This may have been a miscommunication. I am looking for a scholarly approach that shows historicity and evidence of the truth of the contents of the Bible (both Old & New Testament), not one in isolation from the other.

Then what I am saying is you will find Christian works that defend both together but not separately -- probably. Perhaps the 7th Day Adventists would have something strictly defending the fundamentalist OT. I don't know, but usually no Christian group does. Very often the main component of a defense of the authenticity of the Bible assumes that the NT is necessary to complete any proof.

 

[Kenaz]

Sorry but that is reserved for people with higher post counts who have proven that they aren't asking things they already have answers to.

You do not have to respond, although I would appreciate it. I am not sure how my post count has anything to do with my honest inquiry in this matter.

This sounds rather like you are looking for someone to do your homework...
Just saying.
I mean, the list in (b) could actually be broken into multiple threads and have countless hours of reading and posting in each.

I just meant to say that I am interested in opinions or conclusions/perspectives, but I am also curious to see the sources and background reading that led them to those conclusions so I can also meet them 'where they are' and how they came to those conclusions & perspectives.

 

[Kenaz]

Then what I am saying is you will find Christian works that defend both together but not separately -- probably.

That is what I am looking for, precisely. Are the recommendations above in line with that? If not, I'd love to check out anything you think would be helpful in line with that.

 

[Brickjectivity]

That is what I am looking for, precisely. Are the recommendations above in line with that? If not, I'd love to check out anything you think would be helpful in line with that.

Yes. Another one is CS Lewis. CS Lewis wrote Mere Christianity, although it is more of a defence of Christianity than of scripture.

The late Josh McDowell is an evangelical apologist. I only mention him because he is acclaimed, even though I think his work is an atrocity and that nobody ever really checks its assumptions. The late JJ Blunt is not evangelical but somewhat mainstream and he is also respected in both mainstream and 'Cult' circles.

Roman Catholic sources are unknown to me, but the Anglicans (historically) complain about how the RC keeps changing things and denying past teachings. I think that to really hear what are the RC arguments you first need to show complete dedication to the church which seems very protective of its sources. I think until then you are going to hear different things from different people and wade through many books. In the previous centuries the church discourages individual Bible study and has only recently begun to encourage it at all. The protestants make a great fuss about it and use it to accuse the RC of various evils, but in fact this one one of the areas in which the RC is being honest. Literally reading the Bible is indeed problematic, and I think that the RC is going to be sorry for changing its policy.

If you are looking for better materials about fundamentalist proofs for scripture veracity, you will find some stronger arguments (more believable) by some of the cult groups. They are not water-tight but they are better than evangelical ones. Beware that some of these disagree with mainstream ideas and also with each other. You will not find a 'Harmony of the church groups'. Look at online writings by: the Mennonites, Brethren, Church of Christ, Christadelphians, 7th Day Adventists, Jehova's W., LDS and any group thought of as a 'Cult' by the mainstream. Smaller groups sometimes put out separate resources on this subject of confirming the scriptures. Since they are isolated from the mainstream they have to make their own resources! What you will find are that there is redundancy among groups, each of which are re-deriving doctrines directly from scriptures but also variation among the groups and that all of the groups can be classified by their interpretation of the last book: Revelation. It, the last book, seems to somehow define who believes what both in mainstream, cult and traditional churches. All the various resources contain nuggets of interest. Even so, generally speaking all groups of a protestant variety start with the assumption that scriptures are true. A pure from scratch test of scripture will be rare, and you can not join them while believing that only part of the canon is correct or that part of the canon is questionable. You probably won't find a culture that spends a lot of time wondering about the correctness of scripture, but you will find some that enjoy digging into it and a few that allow questioning it upon rare occasions.

 

[Kenaz]

You probably won't find a culture that spends a lot of time wondering about the correctness of scripture, but you will find some that enjoy digging into it and a few that allow questioning it upon rare occasions.

Thank you. For me, the rest of the arguments must lie on this foundation, however. So, for me, I must pursue this question prior to.