Karma reasons for concrete message

Message

theFLEW



    Posts: 93
  • Darwins +1/-1

I have never read Bart Ehrman, do you have a specific book of his that would shed light on Luke as a historian?

Your Wikipedia article on the "Historical reliability of the Gospels" does nothing to prove or negate any question of Luke as a historian.  The article on Quirinius has two paragraph on Luke near the bottom:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census_of_Quirinius#Historicity_of_Luke.27s_details

Neither of which rule out Luke being correct or incorrect on the matter, and neither of which addressing any of the texts I mentioned in the earlier post.

The article on the reliability of Acts brings up a handful of smaller contradictions of "disputed accuracy"; none of which expound on themselves, none of which give give a good, academic approach to both sides of the argument, and ultimately, none of which leading one to doubt Luke as a good historian.  If Luke would have said that Nero was emperor when Jesus was born, there would be issues.
Changed Change Reason Date
Lorax propps for admitting when you don't know something February 18, 2012, 08:29:03 AM