The bible..
Out of context: Reply #427
- Started
- Last post
- 571 Responses
- flagellum0
The science of studying ancient literature and its accuracy of transmission to is called historicity. It's all about eye-witness accounts and oral tradition which is ultimately written down. The eye-witness accounts of the resurrection were recorded by secular historians at the time too (see: Josephus). Manuscripts which contain eyewitness accounts are the best historical evidence there is. If you say otherwise, you need to get familiar with Textual Criticism. Even all newspaper reporters are taught to interview eyewitnesses in order to corroborate their stories. We don't consider them as unnecessary in these instances, but important support.
And it was not only friendly eyewitnesses; there were others less well disposed who were also conversant with the main facts of the ministry and death of Jesus. The disciples could not afford to risk inaccuracies (not to speak of willful manipulation of the facts), which would at once be exposed by those who would be only too glad to do so.
The life and resurrection of Christ stands out as the most well documented and supported events of ancient times. No other facet of ancient history has as many manuscripts, from so many different areas, in such a short time from the instance of occurrence. There is no good historical reason to deny the events took place.