I love Internet Scholars

The thing about the internet is that it gives everyone a voice. That is great! This blog gives me a platform to discuss many issues (quite often among myself, might I add.) However, the anonymous nature of the internet grants everyone the platform to present themselves as highly educated scholars. This in itself isn't problematic to those who I know of who read this blog; but there are those who simply have no knowledge in the field of New Testament studies.

With this in mind, I believe it is a great time to have a look at some of the arguments and polemics which have headed my way over the past few weeks.

1. Scholarship now believes Jesus did not exist?
   
   Original quote:
   
   "The theory of Jesus' nonexistence is now effectively dead as a scholarly question." Robert E. Van Voorst, 'Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence' p. 14
   
   Response:
   
   "In the decade since this quote was written, and even before that, serious scholars such as Price and Wells have presented strong cases for a purely mythical Jesus."
   
   
2. Marcion wrote Luke and the Pauline epistles in the Second Century; then soon after Irenaeus changed them all to include Old Testament citations.
   
   
3. This Muslim Apologetic that there is reliable early evidence that Jesus was not crucified by appealing to late texts which, essentially, deny the possibility of Jesus 'physically' being able to be crucified. Something in stark contrast to the "truth of Islam" he is using these sources to assert.
   
   
4. Khalid Yasin arguing the unreliability of the New Testament because the modern titles read "According to..." and that is in the third person. Oh, and because they don't have last names. You see, a bank won't cash a cheque without a full name; therefore the New Testament cannot be trusted. Oh, and Paul wrote "all the books from Acts on." Seriously, this is gold.
   
   
   "I don't understand why people don't just read history." - Khalid Yasin.