“Robert Clifton Robinson, Ehrman’s opinion as an atheist has no bearing on the issue. It’s his opinion as a prominent New Testament scholar that matters. And it’s an opinion shared by most modern biblical scholars (who aren’t merely Christian apologists).

“Pam Boyington Holmes If we begin with the idea that God does not exist, then this premise will affect our examination of evidence. We must also begin our examination of the New Testament with the presumption that what is written is true. When an examiner uses the presumption that the subject is lying, the test will always be self-refuting. The presumption that a person is always lying while performing any examination for truth is pointless, since the conclusion is already made before the examination has begun.

The first rule in achieving an unbiased outcome in the forensic examination of historical texts is the assumption that all documents that come from known sources and were used by those who held the documents in their custody for long periods of history—believing them to be true—are entitled to the presumption of truthfulness.

A fundamental basis in determining reliability for all ancient documents that assert eyewitness testimony is that every document should be assumed trustworthy unless it can be shown unreliable through the burden of proof.

Unless we assume a general presumption of truth in every testimony, we will never be capable of determining whether anything is true. The only effective method that allows a professional examiner to determine truthful testimony is the presumption of truth at the onset.

Ehrman has never proven that any part of the New Testament is not true by evidence. I own most of his books. You will find his opinion as a biased atheist, but no scholarly evidence that proves that his opinions as an atheist are true.”

“Robert Clifton Robinson, just a heads up: I have read most of Ehrman’s books and watched his lecture series—along with many other modern biblical scholars.

Let’s examine the serious flaws in your thinking here.

You want to start with the presumption that God exists. Yet there is no evidence for such a presumption. As a matter of fact, there is zero evidence of the existence of a supernatural realm, supernatural entities, or supernatural events. When you approach a subject with a false premise, it will lead you to false conclusions.

You say, “We must also begin our examination of the New Testament with the presumption that what is written is true.” Why on earth “must we do that? Can you think of any other ancient text that we afford such privilege? What I have already pointed out automatically makes all supernatural claims suspect. The Bible does not get special treatment just because it’s your sacred text.

We cannot judge ancient writings by the same standards we apply to modern historical documents. The Gospels, for example, were written with a religious purpose in mind. The Jewish authors were not concerned with recording accurate history but in expressing their religious faith. They did not view themselves as liars. It was later Gentile church leaders who began to view these texts as literal biographies. The Greek worldview that pervaded the culture at the time was very different from the Jewish one.

Then you make this remarkable statement: “The only effective method that allows a professional examiner to determine truthful testimony is the presumption of truth at the outset.” If I wasn’t already retired from teaching, I would save this sentence as a perfect example of circular reasoning. Thank goodness our modern courts aren’t based on such a methodology!

True scholarship is not based on presumptions and credulity. These are the very approaches that result in bias. Ehrman has accepted the burden of proof and provides ample evidence for every conclusion he makes. Moreover, most modern scholars agree with most of his conclusions. He is actually very mainstream in his thinking.”

“You are a good student of Bart Ehrman. He has taught you well to trust him because he is known as a New Testament scholar. You have learned from Ehrman that you don’t need any evidence to impeach the New Testament, all you need is an opinion.

If you read Ehrman’s books he makes many assertions about the unreliability of the New Testament. In a majority of these cases he presents no evidence to prove what he says is true. He expects his readers to trust him simply because he is known as a New Testament scholar.

In the world of New Testament scholarship we must be able to prove that what we assert is provable by evidence. Ehrman cannot prove that Paul did not write Ephesians, he resorts to conjecture and speculation. When we examine his conclusions we find that they are in opposition to what we do know about koine greek documents of history. I gave you this evidence, you ignore it, choosing to trust Ehrman because, like you, he is an atheist and he tells you what you want to hear.

The New Testament is a historical, eyewitness narrative that proves God exists. Jesus claimed to be Yahweh, the God of the Old Testament, on numerous occasions. He performed tens of thousands of miracles, healing “everyone who was brought to Him.” He spoke to the physical laws of the universe and commanded them to obey Him, and they did, on 9 separate occasions.

Ehrman wrote in his books that other than in John’s Gospel, Jesus never claimed to be God, yet the texts that Jesus asserted a proof that He is God, are in all of the Gospels. How is it that a New Testament scholar doesn’t know these things?

I have published numerous impeachments of Ehrmans false assertions in my 37 books and 3,400 essays.

If you choose to believe someone simply because they tell you what you want to hear, rather than proving what he says by evidence, you do so at your own peril.”

“Robert Clifton Robinson, you are the one who provides no evidence. You say we must simply accept the Bible is true because…because why? Because you say so? It isn’t about “trusting” any particular scholar. It’s about examining the evidence and deciding for yourself what conclusions can be drawn from it.

And then, of course, you end with the typical Christian threat: BELIEVE OR ELSE!!
The New Testament is NOT a historical eyewitness narrative. Jesus DOES claim to actually be God only in the Gospel of John. There is absolutely no evidence to support supernatural claims such as “miracles.”

Since I’m never going to read any of your stuff, you need to supply the evidence for your claims here. So far you have offered none.”

“Pam Boyington Holmes It doesn’t appear that you have studied the New Testament.

If we conduct a personal investigation concerning the Canonical Gospels of the New Testament, we quickly discern that we are reading testimony from men who were present when Jesus said and did the things recorded in these texts. These men state repeatedly that they saw and heard Jesus and there is no ambiguity in what they meant:

There are 203 eyewitness statements in the 260 chapters of the New Testament.”

Robert Clifton Robinson, I actually spent a lot of years studying the New Testament (and the Bible as a whole) along with the history of Christianity. It’s a subject that has always fascinated me.

We do not “quickly discern” any of the things you claim in the texts themselves. Paul certainly never knew the historical Jesus. Everything he knew about him was second hand, and his authentic letters are the earliest Christian writings we have. An illiterate fisherman such as Peter certainly never wrote anything—much less in polished Greek, a language he had no knowledge of. And you can’t prove the factuality of the Bible by quoting the Bible. That’s just another circular argument.”

“Pam Boyington Holmes There are 10 citations in the New Testament where Paul is stated as personally seeing Jesus.

Paul cites 18 “mysterion” that he says Jesus personally gave him.

18 Mysteries Revealed To Paul In The New Testament:

1. The kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of God (Mt. 13:11; Mk. 4:11; Lk. 8:10)
2. Israel’s blindness (Rom. 11:25)
3. Salvation in Christ (Rom. 16:25)
4. The wisdom of God (1Cor. 2:7)
5. The doctrines of God (1Cor. 4:1; Col. 2:2; 1Tim. 3:16)
6. The gospel (Eph. 6:19)
7. Gift of knowledge (1Cor. 13:2)
8. Speaking in tongues (1Cor. 14:2)
9. The rapture of the church (1Cor. 15:23,51-58 Jn. 14:1-3 1Th. 4:13-16)
10. God’s will (Eph. 1:9)
11. The church (Eph. 3:1-9; 5:32)
12. Christ in people (Col. 1:26-27)
13. Doctrines of Christ (Col. 4:3)
14. Spirit of lawlessness (2Th. 2:7)
15. Faith of the gospel (1Tim. 3:9)
16. Seven candlesticks (Rev. 1:20)
17. God’s delay in casting out of Satan (Rev. 10:7; 12:7-17)
18. Mystery Babylon (Rev. 17:5,7)

The idea that Paul never knew Jesus is a fabrication of atheist scholars.

Paul said he was a Pharisee and a member of the Sanhedrin where he voted against Jesus. Paul had numerous encounters with Jesus as both were alive during the same period of history.

There is no evidence that Peter was illiterate. This is a fabrication of Ehrman due to his personal opinion of Acts 4. We know that Peter cites 25 Hebrew prophecies of the Messiah in Acts 2-4, and attributes them to fulfillment by Jesus as the Messiah. This demonstrates that Peter was as proficient as any scholar of the first century after Jesus imparted him with the Holy Spirit.

You claim that you have personally studied the NT, yet all of your errors stated in this comment are from Ehrman’s books, not the NT.”

“Robert Clifton Robinson, what I’m telling you isn’t just coming from Ehrman. This is mainstream modern biblical scholarship I’m talking about. Historians say the literacy rate in first century Judea was around 3%. Members of the peasant class such as Jesus and most of his disciples were most certainly illiterate. It explains why Jesus left no writings behind.

Paul never met the historical Jesus by his own admission. As a matter of fact, he doesn’t seem all that interested in the earthly ministry of Jesus. Paul did have visions (hallucinations?) of Jesus, and he even describes an out-of-body experience where he is caught up into the third heaven. He was quite an imaginative guy. And just because he was a Pharisee doesn’t mean he was a member of the Sanhedrin. He never makes such a claim.”

“Pam Boyington Holmes Citing atheist talking points is not forensic evidence that is available in the New Testament texts. If you had studied the NT you would know this. Instead you cite the opinions of atheist and progressive scholars.

Here is what the NT states:

There are eight places in the New Testament where Paul states that he saw Jesus; two additional places where Ananias and Barnabas state that Jesus appeared to Paul:

There is no ambiguity in what Paul recounts; Jesus personally appeared to Paul on the road to Damascus, and Paul saw Him with his own eyes. As Paul recounts this event to King Agrippa, in Acts 26, he quotes the words that Jesus said to him at that time:

Acts 26:16: “Paul told Agrippa, Jesus said the following: “But rise and stand on your feet; for I have appeared to you for this purpose, to appoint you as my servant and witness. Tell people that you have seen me, and tell them what I will show you in the future.”

Jesus called Paul for the express purpose of being an eyewitness, who saw the risen Jesus with his eyes, and a minister to tell people about Jesus. The evidence that Paul personally saw Jesus himself is the extant manuscript evidence, not the opinions of atheist scholars.”

“Robert Clifton Robinson, what “forensic evidence” are you even talking about? Does the text provide DNA and fingerprints? Now you’re being beyond ridiculous.

Every verse you provide here refers to Jesus after his death. PAUL NEVER MET THE HISTORICAL JESUS. Hallucinations after his death don’t count. And the book of Acts was written long after the death of Paul, much of it probably fabricated.”

“Perhaps you are not familiar with the science of literary forensic examination. It is the precise proces that I used to examine the extant manuscript evidence that proves Paul saw the risen Jesus with “his own eyes.”

You have a genuine problem trying to prove that Paul never saw the risen Jesus because the texts of Acts themselves, proves that Paul did see the risen Jesus.

In Acts chapter 26, Paul is brought before King Agrippa to answer for the charges against him before being sent to the Emperor in Rome. Paul is given the opportunity to defend himself and in doing this, he recounts the events of Acts 9 where Jesus personally appeared to Paul. Notice what Paul said to Agrippa in his own words:

Acts 26:12-20 “One day I was on such a mission to Damascus, armed with the authority and commission of the leading priests. 13 About noon, Your Majesty, as I was on the road, a light from heaven brighter than the sun shone down on me and my companions. 14 We all fell down, and I heard a voice saying to me in Aramaic, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me? It is useless for you to fight against my will.’
15 “‘Who are you, lord?’ I asked.
“And the Lord replied, ‘I am Jesus, the one you are persecuting. 16 Now get to your feet! For I have appeared to you to appoint you as my servant and witness. Tell people that you have seen me, and tell them what I will show you in the future. 17 And I will rescue you from both your own people and the Gentiles. Yes, I am sending you to the Gentiles 18 to open their eyes, so they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God. Then they will receive forgiveness for their sins and be given a place among God’s people, who are set apart by faith in me.’

19 “And so, King Agrippa, I obeyed that vision from heaven.

If Paul Did Not See The Risen Jesus, He Could Not Be An Apostle

Paul was accepted as a valid Apostle by the other 11 whom Jesus chose personally. If Paul had not seen the risen Jesus, he could not have been an Apostle, for this was the first and most important qualification of the 12 Apostles:

Acts 1:21-22: “So now we must choose a replacement for Judas from among the men who were with us the entire time we were traveling with the Lord Jesus—from the time he was baptized by John until the day he was taken from us. Whoever is chosen will join us as a witness of Jesus’ resurrection.”

Acts 4:33: “The apostles testified powerfully to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus.”
Jesus also told Paul that He would give him more knowledge in the future and a continuing revelation. Paul knew more about Jesus than any of the other Apostles. There are 18 mysteries Jesus gave to Paul that are described as previously hidden from the foundation of the world.

Paul later wrote that these revelations of God, that were not known before Jesus arrived, came at a great cost to Paul. Along with this tremendous knowledge about Jesus and events of the future, Paul was also given an infirmity in his body to keep him humble.

2 Corinthians 12:1-7: “This boasting will do no good, but I must go on. I will reluctantly tell about revelations from the Lord…That experience is worth boasting about, but I’m not going to do it…even though I have received such wonderful revelations from God. So to keep me from becoming proud, I was given a thorn in my flesh, to keep me from becoming proud.”

Paul’s Abandonment Of His Status As A Respected Pharisee Makes No Sense If He Did Not See The Risen Jesus

Paul was one of the leading Pharisees in Israel during this period, second only to Gamaliel. At the time Paul met Jesus on the road to Damascus (Acts 9), he was carrying letters given to him by the leaders of Israel, granting him authority to arrest Christians who declared that Jesus was the risen Messiah. Before this moment, Paul didn’t believe Jesus had risen or that He was the Messiah.

After Jesus appeared to Paul, everything changed. There was no hesitation by Paul. He immediately began telling people that he had seen Jesus, and he believed Him to be the risen Messiah: “Immediately Paul preached the Christ in the synagogues, that He is the Son of God.” Acts 9:20

If this meeting with Jesus was nothing more than a vision or hallucination, how is it that right after this happened, Paul began to declare that Jesus was alive and He is the true Messiah?
This story makes no sense unless Paul had seen Jesus with his own eyes.