Why I Doubt Christianity and Joined Debunking Christianity
Having been invited to become a contributing poster to Debunking Christianity I gladly accepted. However who has time to post often? I read far more than I write these days, and have plenty of other things that fill up my time. However, if anyone would like to catch up on some of my past web-icles that explain in detail why I doubt Christianity, below is a short list.
Let me preface the list with a statement found in a work edited by Bruce Metzger, a textual scholar held in high esteem by many of his fellow Evangelical Christians. Note that Metzger was one of the main editors in the reference work I cite which admits that none of the four canonical Gospels originally contained the names of their authors. They were originally anonymous works and only many decades later did Christians advocate that each Gospel be "named."
Let me preface the list with a statement found in a work edited by Bruce Metzger, a textual scholar held in high esteem by many of his fellow Evangelical Christians. Note that Metzger was one of the main editors in the reference work I cite which admits that none of the four canonical Gospels originally contained the names of their authors. They were originally anonymous works and only many decades later did Christians advocate that each Gospel be "named."
That goes for the Gospel of Luke, a Gospel that does not name "Luke" as its author, and only names the person for whom the Gospel was allegedly written, i.e., "Theophilus." Likewise the Gospel of John is anonymous and says in chapter 20 simply that "we" wrote it, while chapter 21 says it was the "beloved disciple" who wrote it. But that disciple is not named, and chapters 20 and 21 feature not one, but two different endings for the Gospel, which means that chapter 21 was probably added later as an attempt to add individual apostolic authority to a Gospel whose first ending in chapter 20 simply claims an unnamed "we" wrote it. At any rate, note the "perhapses," below. We certainly are not speaking of inerrant claims as to who wrote the Gospels. In truth, nobody knows. That alone should make one wary of attempting to squeeze unquestionable dogmas out of them:
“Not only did Jesus himself write nothing, but the attribution of the gospels to his disciples did not occur until the late first century at the earliest. . .
‘Matthew: Written by an unknown Jewish Christian of the second generation, probably a resident of Antioch in Syria.
‘Mark: [There is] confusion in the traditional identification of the author . . .
‘Luke: Possibly written by a resident of Antioch and an occasional companion of the apostle Paul.
‘John: Composed and edited in stages by unknown followers of the apostle John, probably residents of Ephesus.’
--Kingsbury, J.D., “Matthew, The Gospel According to,” in Metzger and Coogan, eds., The Oxford Companion to the Bible [Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1993], pp. 502-506
To learn more about my reasons for leaving the fold, especially reasons for doubting "the resurrection" stories, I include a list of links below. I also consider the many dubious "prophecies" in the New Testament another good reason to doubt the veracity of the Bible.
Letter On The Resurrection Written to Apologist Dr. Gary Habermas of Liberty University (An Evangelical friend agreed I had raised some "knotty problems," while Habermas asked an Evangelical publisher about possibly publishing a dialogue between us--though the publisher's response was 'No.')
Letter I Received From Producer of Lee Stroble's "Faith Under Fire" And My Response Concerning Historical Criticism of the Bible
Scholars Comment on N.T. Wright's Resurrection Arguments
Additional Reviews of N.T. Wright's Resurrection Book by Scholars
The Resurrection Appearances of Jesus [article by Dr. Robert M. Price]
Literary Criticism and Historical Accuracy of the Gospels, Including a Discussion of the Alleged Words Spoken by the Resurrected Jesus That Grew In Number With Each New Gospel, Or That Were Simply Added As in Mark's Three Additional Late Endings
C.S. Lewis’ “Modern Theology and Biblical Criticism”
The "Born Again" Dialogue In the Gospel of John [a point made by Bart Ehrman]
Newsweek Defends Resurrection as History in Newsweek's Easter issue, March 28th, 2005
Agnosticism: Reasons to Leave Christianity
What Happened to the Resurrected Saints?Raising doubts not saints.
More About the Resurrected Saints
The Christian Think Tank's Response to Questions Concerning "The Many Resurrected Saints"
The Lowdown on God's Showdown
The Fabulous Prophecies of the Messiah [not by me, though I suggested some books the author employed in his research and for which he thanked me]
Not One, But Mutiple Views Of Biblical Writers On The Afterlife
The Former Popularity among Christians of The Abominable Fancy, or, A Heaven that only "Snuff Film" Aficionados Could Love
Is the Book of Revelation a Literary Patchwork Quilt? (Including a Discussion of the First Book of Enoch)
Or read Dr. Price's Beyond Born Again (a sort of warm up book to be read before the rest of Price's writings, written while he was still a liberal Christian)
Ed
“Not only did Jesus himself write nothing, but the attribution of the gospels to his disciples did not occur until the late first century at the earliest. . .
‘Matthew: Written by an unknown Jewish Christian of the second generation, probably a resident of Antioch in Syria.
‘Mark: [There is] confusion in the traditional identification of the author . . .
‘Luke: Possibly written by a resident of Antioch and an occasional companion of the apostle Paul.
‘John: Composed and edited in stages by unknown followers of the apostle John, probably residents of Ephesus.’
--Kingsbury, J.D., “Matthew, The Gospel According to,” in Metzger and Coogan, eds., The Oxford Companion to the Bible [Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1993], pp. 502-506
To learn more about my reasons for leaving the fold, especially reasons for doubting "the resurrection" stories, I include a list of links below. I also consider the many dubious "prophecies" in the New Testament another good reason to doubt the veracity of the Bible.
Letter On The Resurrection Written to Apologist Dr. Gary Habermas of Liberty University (An Evangelical friend agreed I had raised some "knotty problems," while Habermas asked an Evangelical publisher about possibly publishing a dialogue between us--though the publisher's response was 'No.')
Letter I Received From Producer of Lee Stroble's "Faith Under Fire" And My Response Concerning Historical Criticism of the Bible
Scholars Comment on N.T. Wright's Resurrection Arguments
Additional Reviews of N.T. Wright's Resurrection Book by Scholars
The Resurrection Appearances of Jesus [article by Dr. Robert M. Price]
Literary Criticism and Historical Accuracy of the Gospels, Including a Discussion of the Alleged Words Spoken by the Resurrected Jesus That Grew In Number With Each New Gospel, Or That Were Simply Added As in Mark's Three Additional Late Endings
C.S. Lewis’ “Modern Theology and Biblical Criticism”
The "Born Again" Dialogue In the Gospel of John [a point made by Bart Ehrman]
Newsweek Defends Resurrection as History in Newsweek's Easter issue, March 28th, 2005
Agnosticism: Reasons to Leave Christianity
What Happened to the Resurrected Saints?Raising doubts not saints.
More About the Resurrected Saints
The Christian Think Tank's Response to Questions Concerning "The Many Resurrected Saints"
The Lowdown on God's Showdown
The Fabulous Prophecies of the Messiah [not by me, though I suggested some books the author employed in his research and for which he thanked me]
Not One, But Mutiple Views Of Biblical Writers On The Afterlife
The Former Popularity among Christians of The Abominable Fancy, or, A Heaven that only "Snuff Film" Aficionados Could Love
Is the Book of Revelation a Literary Patchwork Quilt? (Including a Discussion of the First Book of Enoch)
Or read Dr. Price's Beyond Born Again (a sort of warm up book to be read before the rest of Price's writings, written while he was still a liberal Christian)
Ed