Yet, even without a magical stopping
point, it is clear that the further removed we are from the life of Jesus, the
less valuable the sources are, at least in strictly historical times. (Gary R.
Habermas, On the Resurrection, 4 vols. [Brentwood, Tenn.: B&H
Academic, 2024], 1:911)
In
the footnote for the above, we read:
As a crucial note that I have
mentioned in several other publications and lectures, it is exceedingly strange
and even prejudiced that critical scholars can be extremely strict and
narrow in their treatment of ancient Christian sources, such as referring to
Mark as being late at just forty years after the crucifixion. However, it is
frequently the case that the historical gaps between non-Christian religious
founders and their earliest texts or between secular figures and their
historical accounts are viewed very liberally by these same scholars. For a
couple of examples on the religious side, when talking about Buddha, comments
are made regularly such as “The Buddha taught . . .” without the slightest
reference to the fact that the cited Buddhist teachings may come from documents
dating from half a millennium after Buddha’s time! See Conze, Buddhist
Scriptures, esp. 11-12, 34, comparing Christian with Buddhist sources (see
chap. 4, n. 54). In another example, we are told that the four Gospels are
“secondhand accounts” of Jesus’s teachings even at a maximum of sixty-five
years later. Yet in the very same text, the recording of Buddha’s teachings is
dated at a minimum of three centuries after Buddha’s death. Then we are
told on the same page that “Buddha taught . . .”; see David Levinson, Religion:
A Cross-Cultural Encyclopedia (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), comparing
38 and 28. Another instance on the secular side is provided by prominent
scholar E. P. Sanders, who states, “The source for Jesus are better . . . than
those that deal with Alexander.” This is because the texts on Alexander come
from “much later” writers. See Sanders, Historical Figure of Jesus, 3
(see chap. 1, n. 44). Also on Alexander, see Roman historian Grant, Jesus,
200; cf. 247 (see chap. 1, n. 24). Why do we so seldom hear these things? Do we
not notice the sometimes blatant double standard here? Christian sources have
long been held to a much stricter code than those for any other religions. (911
n. 8)
