markdroberts: guest bloggers

What is the Q 'Gospel'? The Gospel According to 'St Q'?

In this article and the previous two, we explore what was happening between Jesus' ministry and the written Gospels. Here we turn our attention mainly toward so-called Q. This article is a Q & A on Q. The question is – is Q OK?

Here is Part Seven on the historical reliability of the Gospels.

Reliable Gospel Transmissions

As noted in the previous article, we are talking about this gap:

Jesus’ ministry |               | Written Gospels

Those two vertical bars are not meant to be firm barriers, as if the disciples did not learn or observe anything during Jesus' ministry and carried it forward past the first bar. But the question still remains: How were the teachings and deeds of Jesus handed on during the gap? Reliably or not?

This is Part Six on the historical reliability of the Gospels.

The Gospel Traditions

With this article we turn a corner away from archaeology and non-Christian written references to Gospel persons (the last three articles). Now we discuss the preservation of Jesus' ministry -- his words and activity -- after his crucifixion (and resurrection) and up to the time when the Gospels were written.

The disciples were keeping careful track of what Jesus was saying and doing during his ministry, but for simplicity, here is the gap that the next three articles will cover:

Jesus' ministry |                 | Written Gospels

What was preserved between that timeframe, in the gap? How was it preserved? Accurately and reliably or otherwise?

Part Five in a long series on the historical reliability of the Gospels . . .

Did Jesus Even Exist?

In the last article, Archaeology and John’s Gospel, I asked whether skepticism chic is passé. Maybe I should have used the term hyper-skepticism. Is it waning? No.

Did Jesus even live? Personally, I have no doubt that he did. But we should take a moment to provide resources that counter hyper-skepticism.

Part Four in a long series on the historical reliability of the Gospels

Archaeology and John's Gospel

For many decades John's Gospel has been ignored or slighted in its historical details. Is this fair? Is there any evidence that shows that the historical assumptions within the Gospel correspond to or cohere with the historical facts outside of the Gospel?

This is Part Three in a long series on the historical reliability of the Gospels.

Archaeology and the Synoptic Gospels

There is a "rock" solid correspondence and coherence between the historical assumptions within the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke and the historical facts outside of those three Gospels, in archaeology. This article has ten representative examples of this coherence.

Part Two in a series on the historical reliability of the Gospels . . .