Frank Turek Cherry Picks History
Today we are going to take a look at Frank Turek being wrong about biblical reliability. First, I have to start off agreeing with Frank on when the Bible was composed. It was not composed in the 4th century but was most likely bundled together in the second century. Frank Turek goes on to claim a number of things that are clearly inaccurate. He claims that the New Testament was primarily written by Eyewitnesses. He also misrepresents the Pauline Creed to suit his needs. All around he’s either very uninformed or is willfully being dishonest about the evidence.
Eyewitnesses wrote the Bible
He goes on to claim that the eyewitnesses wrote the new testament or at least most of them were. The Gospels certainly weren’t eyewitnesses and Paul wasn’t an eyewitness. So, Frank is wrong there.
The earliest evidence that we have comes from Paul. He had a revelation of Jesus and read the scriptures a lot. That is the only way he recieved this evidence. Paul was not an eyewitness at all.
For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man’s gospel. For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.
He doesn’t only do this once either. Paul constantly discusses where he got his information.
For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread,
Here, Paul confirms that he got his information directly from Jesus. In the Pauline Creed, which we will discuss in a moment, Paul claims scriptures as his source of information. These scriptures would have been confirmed directly by Jesus.
Verdic for Paul
So the earliest evidence for Jesus even existing doesn’t help the historical case for the Bible. Paul had hallucinations brought on for whatever reason and he read the scriptures to discern information about the Messiah of Judaism. That is what the evidence actually shows.
Gospels Aren’t Eyewitness Accounts
Now we have the Gospels, which also weren’t eyewitness accounts. Frank Turek claims that eyewitnesses wrote them as well as most of the New Testament but this is false. The Gospels were written by anonymous authors and even the Gospels themselves don’t name the authors. Later church fathers like Papias gave the Gospels names.Papias is a very unreliable source as he seemed to believe everything he was told no matter how wild it was.
We know that the Gospel of Mark had to of been written after 70 AD due to the foreshadowing of the fall of the Jewish temple. That makes the next earliest piece of evidence not only not an eyewitness but coming right around the time when any witnesses would be dying off. This means nobody was around to fact check these things.
He then goes on to misrepresent the Pauline Creed as definite proof of the Bible’s reliability. If anything the Pauline creed proves the exact opposite.
Paul directly says that his information comes strictly from the scriptures.
For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
The Bible can’t be reliable if the primary source for its information is the Old Testament scriptures. That is not reliable history, that is theology. Apologists like Frank Turek dress up his theology to make it look like it’s history. They do this dishonestly in order to prove their celestial messiah actually existed on earth and really did rise from the dead.