Atheists are forever claiming that the Bible in general and the New Testament in particular is a giant conspiracy, filled to the breaking point with lies, and / or that Jesus was a liar, as were the disciples as was the mysterious writer himself. The New Testament, say atheists, is a colossal fiction.
In response to this, C. S. Lewis says, "Some unknown writer without predecessors or successors, suddenly anticipated the whole techniques of modern novelistic realistic narrative writing."
Why does he say that? It is only in the last 400 years that fiction has come to include details and dialogue and reads like an eyewitness account. In Jesus’ time fiction was almost devoid of detail and only included detail to drive plot or character. The type of detail and realism found in the Gospels was NEVER found in ancient fiction like the Iliad or Beowulf. The only reason the writers of the Gospels would have included the details they did was because their accounts are factual.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Not exactly fiction, nor lies. They are the "best attempts" of the people who wrote them to piece together an now-a-days improbable story they almost certainly believed.
This is simply not accurate. Many ancient texts have narrative writing. Ibe Obvious example include the Odyssey. Or one can look at earlier sections of the Bible. Large parts of Samuel fit the style of realistic narrative. If you are going to make this argument you need to show more specifically how the narrative style and framework is different.
Umm, I think you need to take this up with the scholar, C. S. Lewis.
What? It's too late!
Well, it wouldn't have made any difference anyhow - would it. When it comes to maintaining one's beliefs, if experts in their field must be cast aside, that is not too great a task for antheist.
That's not a valid response. Just because he is dead doesn't make his argument unassailable. If you think Lewis was correct then you can't just say "talk to him" and expect someone to take it seriously. Or are you saying that you can't actually defend it?
"Or are you saying that you can't actually defend it?"
No, I'm saying two things:
a) Mr. Lewis is a dependable scholar, and
b) Compared to Mr. Lewis you're nobody worth listening to.
That doesn't work. You made an argument quoting Lewis. I'm not asking you to rely on my authority as opposed to that of Lewis. Therefore, I pointed out to you actual specific problems with the quoted claim. Simply dismissing me as a nobody doesn't diminish the validity of the problem at all.
(Moreover, if we do want to play the authority game, I can easily cite many Biblical scholars who won't accept this argument so...)
"I can easily cite many Biblical scholars who won't accept this argument so...)"
The arguments and citations as well as the names would be helpful.
Thank you for doing this.
Post a Comment