Question

If the critics of the Bible dismiss the New Testament as reliable information, then they must also dismiss the reliability of the writings of Plato, Aristotle, Caesar, Homer, and the other authors mentioned in the chart at the beginning of the paper. On the other hand, if the critics acknowledge the historicity and writings of those other individuals, then they must also retain the historicity and writings of the New Testament authors; after all, the evidence for the New Testament’s reliability is far greater than the others. The Christian has substantially superior criteria for affirming the New Testament documents than he does for any other ancient writing. It is good evidence on which to base the trust in the reliability of the New Testament.

______________________

Answer 1

Step-by-step explanation:

The argument suggests that if critics dismiss the New Testament's reliability, they should also reject the reliability of other ancient authors. Conversely, if they accept the historicity of other authors, they should acknowledge the New Testament's historicity, given its greater evidence. However, this argument assumes critics dismiss the New Testament solely based on historical reliability, which is not always the case. Additionally, claiming superior criteria for affirming the New Testament's reliability is subjective and lacks support. Evaluating historical texts requires objective analysis, considering factors like manuscript evidence and corroboration. Therefore, the argument fails to establish that critics must dismiss the New Testament if they accept other ancient writings. Each document should be evaluated individually, based on its own merits and evidence. Overall, conclusions about reliability should be drawn carefully, avoiding broad generalizations and considering the specific strengths and weaknesses of each text.