Dr. Craig responds to an op-ed piece in The Washington Post by Reza Aslan titled “Five Myths about Jesus: Challenging Everything You Think You Know.”
December 17, 2013
Dr. Craig responds to “Five Myths about Jesus” op-ed
Posted by Jason Dulle under Apologetics, Historical Jesus[5] Comments
Thinking to Believe 
December 17, 2013 at 12:12 pm
Craig’s response to Aslan’s Five myths about Jesus seem to be reasoned arguments except for the BETHLEHEM birth. But Craig is really grasping at straws by suggesting that Luke travelled around with Paul and that Luke may even have interviewed the mother of Jesus, Mary because Luke’s account of the birth is from Mary’s perspective. I don’t get this argument at all.
That Pilate was strong-armed by the Jews to take down the Images around the city and was manipulated by the Jews because they said “if you do not crucify Jesus you are no friend of Caesar’s” is likewise a weak argument to refute a PILATE TRIAL.
That Jesus was an ONLY CHILD is surely only Catholic Dogma.
Using the Mel Gibson’s movie scene of a TOMB BURIAL that included the disciples is hardly evidence to support a tomb burial but should rather be supported by accounts of Joseph of Arimathea’s being a disciple of Jesus secretly, who prepared and placed the body in a tomb that Joseph had hewn out of stone for two years beforehand and Nicodemus who brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pounds and the women who followed and watched where he was laid.
ONLY 12 DISCIPLES must surely be another Catholic Dogma.
LikeLike
December 17, 2013 at 1:36 pm
I Jason, I concur with your observations concerning Dr. Craig’s response to the five myths piece for the most part.
However, I think that on the point of Luke having interviewed Mary comes from the details included in Luke’s gospel version that includes statements about what Mary pondered in her heart etc., the assumption is that only Mary could have told Luke what she was pondering in her heart.
While I don’t think this is sufficient evidence to make the bold claim of a private interview, since God could have just as easily revealed to Luke what was in Mary’s heart at the time, I do see how he and others who make that claim get there.
But Dr. Graig is not among my favorite Christian teachers. I have several of his debates and I have been disappointed by how “defended” the Christian position.
I appreciate your keeping us informed on these matters though.
I also apologize for missing your calls and playing phone tag with you.
Perhaps you can email me with a time we can talk and I will call you.
Till then, I pray that you and your family will have a blessed and safe holiday and New Year.
LikeLike
December 18, 2013 at 10:17 am
Reblogged this on clapham common tree and commented:
great example of the kind of arguments CS Lewis referred to in “fir-seeds and elephants”
LikeLike
December 18, 2013 at 4:37 pm
Son of Man,
Craig is hardly grasping at straws in the claim that the author of Luke’s Gospel travelled with Paul. That is made clear by the shift of pronouns to first person plural in Acts 16. That’s when the author began to travel with Paul. This is not a very contentious issue.
As for the claim that Luke may have interviewed Mary, that is based on the fact that Luke says he interviewed people in the know. Clearly the authors of the gospels were not there to witness all of the events they write about. They had to get their information from eyewitnesses. In some cases, it had to be a single eyewitness, such as the conversations between Mary and the angel. So such reports had to come from the eyewitnesses. Craig is claiming that there are clues that Luke’s information for Jesus’ birth narrative came in part from Mary’s testimony. Whether Luke spoke directly to her, or got his information from someone who spoke directly to her cannot be proven, but the fact that the gospel authors used eyewitness testimony is a credible and demonstrable claim.
Craig was not refuting a Pilate trial, but the Biblical portrayal of Pilate. People say that it was not within his character to give in to the Jews. Craig is pointing out that it was, at times. There is even more back story to this historically that explains why Pilate was so willing to crucify an innocent man.
Craig didn’t use Gibson’s portrayal as evidence of a tomb burial! He used it as evidence of what invented stories would look like. Whereas the Bible does not mention Mary’s involvement with Jesus’ burial, Gibson portrays her as involved.
No, “only 12 disciples” is not a Catholic dogma. Everyone acknowledges that Jesus only had 12 apostles – the inner circle of disciples – but the Bible reports of other disciples.
Jason
LikeLike
December 18, 2013 at 4:41 pm
Dan,
Concerning Mary, precisely. As I told SonofMan, we can’t prove that it was a direct interview, but at least some of the information had to have come from her. I don’t think divine revelation was the means of Luke’s knowledge. By Luke’s own confession his account was based on testimony. While at times inspiration may involve supernatural knowledge, that does not appear to be the way that most of the Bible was written, specifically Luke. In the case of Luke, I think divine inspiration involved directing Luke rather than revelation.
Don’t be dissing on my man Craig!!!
Jason
LikeLike