One Christian Scholar’s Dilemma with Christian “Logic”
The following quote is from Professor Dale C. Allison Jr.’s, “The Theological Christ and the Historical Jesus” (Kindle Version). It pretty much sums up the Islamic problem with the New Testament. His articulation of this Christian scriptural issue is so well put, I just had to share it:
Ephesians and the Pastorials are after all probably pseudepigraphical, and why would anyone refuse to preach on a word dubiously ascribed to Jesus yet preach on a word dubiously ascribed to Paul? What, moreover, should those of us who cannot decide whether Paul wrote Colossians do when a passage from that epistle shows up in the lectionary? Should we expound the text or not? Above all, what happens to the Bible as a whole if history and authorship become a criteria for determining theological authority? What, for instance, should we do with the so-called “historical books” of the Old Testament, which contain so much that is not history? And what should we do with the paragraphs and chapters that come to us under the name of Isaiah or some other prophet but which, according to critical scholarship, were instead produced by persons forever unknown?
What should we do? That’s a question each and every Christian should ask. Professor Dale clearly demonstrates that Christians as a whole, need to reconsider the rationale, the logic, the theological concepts they construct to develop their faith, in light of all the historical evidences which clearly contradict the New and Old Testament’s many scriptural, authorship and historical problems.
Would any Christian like to respond to the Professor? Comments are open for all……
and Allaah knows best.