Updated: January 12, 2013
Technique
C. Sanders, a military historian, in his, “Introduction to
Research in English Literary History,”
there are three tests to be used in determining the historical
reliability of any document. These
are: 1) the bibliographical test, 2) the
internal evidence test, 3) the external evidence test. Since the New Testament is a document, among
other things, then it should receive no special treatment.
The
Bibliographical Test
In order to discover whether or not the New Testament has a
bibliographical foundation, we must examine the following elements in the light
of evidence:
· the amount of existing manuscript copies and their date
of composition;
· the composition date of the original autographs;
· a comparison of the manuscripts of the New Testament
with those of ancient secular history.
Before those, we must define what a “manuscript” is. According to New Testament scholar Bruce
Metzger, Professor Emeritus of New Testament at Princeton Theological Seminary,
there are a total of 4,969 Greek New Testament manuscripts (“Text of the New
Testament”). This, of course, does not
include the 15,000+ copies of various versions such as the Syriac and Latin
Translations of the New Testament (around AD 150), the Coptic versions dating
from the third to the sixth century.
More or less there are more than 20,000 known extant manuscripts of the
New Testament.
Dates of Original Autographs (in chronological order):
· Pauline Epistles (AD 48-64)
· Mark (AD 50-70)
· Luke (AD 70-85)
· Acts (AD 70-85)
· Matthew (AD 80-100)
· John (AD 90-110)
Most scholars believe that Acts and Luke are a part of the
same document. And that the book of Acts
ends abruptly without mentioning that Paul was tried and martyred by Nero in AD
64. So, they conclude that Luke and Acts
were probably written before AD 64.
In the opinion of William F. Albright, late W.W. Spence
Professor of Semitic Languages “..every book of the New Testament was written
by a baptized Jew between the forties and eighties of the first century AD”
(William F. Albright interview in “Christianity Today,” June 18, 1963). Thus, there is very little doubt that the New
Testament is a first century historical work.
|
COMPARISON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT WITH OTHER ANCIENT
TEXTS
|
||||
|
Author
|
Date Written
|
Earliest Copy
|
Time Span
|
Copies
|
|
Caesar
|
100-44 BC
|
900 AD
|
1000 years
|
10
|
|
Plato
|
427-347 BC
|
900 AD
|
1200 years
|
7
|
|
Tacitus (Annals)
|
100 AD
|
1000 AD
|
1000 years
|
10 (-)
|
|
Pliny the Younger (History)
|
61-113 AD
|
850 AD
|
750 years
|
?
|
|
Thucydides (History)
|
460-400 BC
|
900 AD
|
1300 years
|
8
|
|
Heroditus (History)
|
480-425 BC
|
900 AD
|
1300 years
|
8
|
|
Sophocles
|
496-406 BC
|
1000 AD
|
1400 years
|
193
|
|
Aristotle
|
384-322 BC
|
1100 AD
|
1400 years
|
49+
|
|
Demosthenes
|
383-322 BC
|
1100 AD
|
1400 years
|
200
|
|
Homer (Iliad)
|
900 BC
|
400 BC
|
500 years
|
643
|
|
New Testament
|
48-110 AD
|
125 AD
(John Fragment) 200 AD (Bodmer Papyri) |
15-90 years
|
20,000+
|
Metzger writes:
“…the work of many an ancient author has been preserved only
in manuscripts…from the Middle Ages (sometimes the late Middle Ages), far
removed from the time at which he lived and wrote. In the contrary, the time between
compositions of the books of the New Testament and the earliest extant copies
is relatively brief. Instead of the
lapse of a millennium or more, as in the case of not a few classical authors,
several papyrus manuscripts of portions of the New Testament are extant which
were copied within a century or so after the composition of the original
documents.”
The Internal
Evidence Test
“…historical and literary scholarship continues to follow
Aristotle’s dictum that the benefit of the doubt is to be given to the document
itself, not arrogated to the critic to himself” (John Warwick Montgomery, “History and Christianity,” pp.
29-30).
In other words, listen to the claims of the document under
analysis, and don’t assume fraud or error unless the author disqualifies
himself by contradictions or known inaccuracies. Take note that the authors of the entire New
Testament claim time and time again that they are recording eyewitness
testimony of testimony derived from equally reliable sources.
Consider the following New Testament verses:
“Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things
that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those
who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully
investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write
an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus.” (Luke 1:1-3)
“We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told
you of the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ but we were eyewitnesses
of His majesty.” (2 Peter 1:16)
“We proclaim to you that we have seen and heard so that you
may also have fellowship with us. And
our fellowship is with the Father and the Son.”
(1 John 1:3)
“The man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony
is true. He knows that he tells the
truth, and he testifies so that you may also believe.” (John 19:35)
“Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God
to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through Him, as
you yourselves know.” (Acts 2:22)
It is of importance to know that the Gospels of Luke and
John claim to have primary-source value.
F.F. Bruce, former Rylands Professor of Biblical Criticism and Exegesis
at the University of Manchester, concerning the New Testament’s primary-source
value, had this to say:
“The earliest preachers of the gospel knew the value of this
first-hand testimony, and appealed to it time and time again, ‘We are witnesses
of these things,’ was their constant and confident assertion. And it can have been by no means so easy as
some writers seem to think to invent words and deeds of Jesus in those early
years, when so many of His disciples were about, who could remember what had
and had not happened..And it was not only friendly eyewitnesses that the early
church had to reckon with; there were others less well-disposed who were also
conversant with the main facts of the ministry and death of Jesus. Had there been any tendency to depart from
the facts in any material respect, the possible presence of hostile witnesses
in the audience would have served as a further corrective.”
In conclusion, the internal testimony of the New Testament
is that of a document claiming to contain eyewitness testimony in the ministry,
death, and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth.
The External
Evidence Test
In this portion of the analysis, the following question is
asked: “Do other historical materials
confirm or deny the internal testimony provided by the documents
themselves?” The following
extra-biblical writings, which quote passages from the New Testament, support
the evidence already presented.
“The Epistle of Psuedo-Barnabas” (c. AD 70-79) contains
quotations, and makes many allusions to New Testament books. He cites and alludes to passages from
Matthew, and also quotes John 6:51, Romans 4:11, and 2 Peter 3:8. It is extremely difficult to quote from
nonexistent books.
“Corinthians,” by Clement of Rome (c. AD 95-97) cites
passages from Matthew, Mark, Luke, Acts, Titus, 1 Corinthians, Hebrews, 1
Peter, and include a possible allusion to Revelation 22:12. Clement, incidentally, was called by Origen,
in “De Principus” (Book II, Chapter 3), a disciple of the apostles
(eyewitnesses). Interestingly enough,
Clement, who received instruction from the apostles themselves, was thoroughly
orthodox in his theology. Therefore, in
the case of Clement, his supernatural depiction of Jesus can’t be easily
explained away assuming it to be a product of oral tradition or legend.
“The Seven Epistles of Ignatius” (c. AD 110-117) contain
quotations from Matthew, John, Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, Ephesians,
Philippians, Galatians, Colossians, James, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2
Timothy, and 1 Peter. Both Ignatius and
Clement, who were disciples of the apostles (eyewitnesses), validate the
theology contained within the New Testament
as being the theology of the Church.
For example, Ignatius affirms the Deity of Christ, the virgin birth, and
the resurrection of Jesus. Clement
substantiates the apostles’ belief in the resurrection of all believers. Both these men, being personal acquaintances
of the eyewitnesses, successfully demonstrate the primary-source value of the
New Testament.
Papias, bishop of Hierapolis (c. AD 130) wrote the following
information he received from the Presbyter (Apostle John):
“When Mark became the interpreter of Peter, he wrote down
accurately whatever he remembered , though not in order, of the words and deeds
of the Lord...Mark, then, made no mistake, but wrote down as he remembered
them; and he made it his concern to omit nothing that he had heard nor to
falsify anything therein…Matthew, indeed, composed sayings in the Hebrew
language; and each one interpreted them to the best of his ability.”
Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons, wrote:
“Matthew issued among the Hebrews a written Gospel in their
own language, while Peter and Paul were evangelizing in Rome and laying the
foundation of the Church. After their
departure, Mark the disciple and interpreter of Peter, also handed down to us
in writing what had been preached by Peter.
Luke, also the companion of Paul, set down in the book a Gospel preached
by him. Afterwards, John, the disciple
of the Lord who reclined at his bosom, also published a Gospel, while he was
residing in Ephesus in Asia.”
Irenaeus’ testimony is extremely valuable because he had
studied under Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna.
Polycarp who was martyred in AD 156, having been a Christian for 86
years, was a disciple of the Apostle John and “always taught what he learned
from the apostles” (Irenaeus, “Against Heretics,” in “Early Father,” p.
90). In reference to his relationship
with Polycarp, Ireneaus writes:
“I remember the
events of those days better than the ones of recent years…I am able to describe
the very place in which the blessed Polycarp sat and discoursed…and how he
spoke of his familiar conversations with John and with the rest of those who
has seen the Lord, and how he could recall their words to mind. All that he had heard from the concerning the
Lord or about His miracles and about his teachings, having received it from
eyewitnesses of the Word of Life, Polycarp related in harmony with the
Scriptures.”
The external sources of Pseudo-Barnabas, Clement, Ignatius,
Papias, Polycarp, and Ireneaus validate the first century dating, the
primary-source value, and the supernatural Jesus of the New Testament.
External confirmation of the New Testament’s internal
testimony, and the historical existence of Jesus, is supplied by the following
non-Christian sources also.
“Cornelius Tacitus,” a Roman historian, in AD 112, wrote of
the existence of Roman Christians and of the death of Jesus Christ. He also wrote that Jesus was put to death by
Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius (Annals XV.44). In a fragment of his “Histories” (Chron.ii.30.6)
dealing with the AD 70 burning of the Jerusalem temple, Tacitus makes reference
to Christianity in his writing about the fire in Rome in 64 AD:
“But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor,
and the propitiation’s of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the
conflagration was the result of an order.
Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and
inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations,
called Christians by the populace.
Christus, from who the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty
during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius
Pilate, and a deadly superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out
not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but also in the city [Rome],
where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world meet and
become popular.”
Also, the secular record above agrees with the New Testament
perfectly (ie:Christ’s ministry occurred during the reign of Tiberius; Christ
was put to death under a Procurator, Pilate; Christ was killed by crucifixion;
Christ was killed in Judaea; the movement spread from Jerusalem to Rome).
“Lucian of Samosta,” a second century satirist, spoke only
scornful words concerning Jesus and the early Christians. He wrote that the early Christians repudiated
polytheism and worshipped Jesus like a god.
He also states that Jesus was crucified in Palestine (“The Passing of
Peregrinus”).
“Flavius Josephus,” a Jewish historian of the early second
century, makes reference to both Christ and the early Christians, and that
Christ’s disciples believed their Master had risen from the dead. He also wrote that Jesus was crucified under
Pilate, and that His ministry, filled with many wonderful works, both Gentile
and Jewish followers (Antiquities 28.33).
Josephus writes:
“About that time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed
one ought to call him a man. For he was
one who wrought surprising feats and was a teacher of such people as accept the
truth gladly. He won over many Jews and
many of the Greeks. He was the
Messiah. When Pilate, upon hearing him
accused by men of the highest standing among us, had condemned him to be
crucified, those who had in the first place come to love him did not give up
their affection for him. On the third day
he appeared to them restored to life, for the prophets of God had prophesied
these and countless other marvelous things about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called
after him, has still to this day not disappeared.”
“…[Annas] convened the judges of the Sanhedrin and brought
before them a man named James, the brother of Jesus who was called “the
Christ,” and certain others. He accused
them of having transgressed the law and delivered them up to be stoned…”
“Suetonius,” a Roman historian, in AD 120, describes the
expelling of Christians from Rome and Nero’s persecution of the early church
(“Life of the Caesars,” 26.2).
“Thallus,” a Samaritan-born historian, wrote in AD 52 that
the darkness which fell upon the land during Christ’s crucifixion required a
naturalistic explanation (a solar eclipse) and was well-known (from the third
book of his “Histories,” as cited by Julius Africanus, who argues vigorously
against Thallus’ interpretation). It is
important to note that neither Thallus nor Julius Africanus debates that the
event occurred as many critics do today.
There was no question that the sky became dark when Jesus was crucified
as far as Thallus and Julius Africanus were concerned. Rather, they debate how the event occurred.
“Phlegon,” a first century historian, also confirms Thallus’
affirmation about the darkness which fell upon the land. Phlegon places this during the reign of
Tiberius Caesar. Thus, confirming Luke’s
account (Luke 3:1). This is found in
“Chronicles,” as cited by Julius Africanus, who cited Phlegon as evidence
against Thallus. He is also cited in
Origen’s “Contra Celsum,” Book 2, sections 14, 33, 59; and in Philopon’s “De.
Opif. Mund. II 21,” concerning the darkness.
In an AD 73 letter (preserved in the British Museum),
written by a Syrian named Mara Bar-Serapian to his son Serpion, Christ’s death
is mentioned along with the deaths of Socrates and Pythagores.
Justin Martyr, in his “Defense of Christianity” which he
wrote to Emperor Antonius Pius, refers the emperor to Pilate’s report, which
Justin supposed was preserved in the imperial archives. In his “Defense,” he cites the “Acts of
Pontius Pilate” which according to Justin, records a description of the
crucifixion and, in addition, records some of Christ’s miracles (Apology 1.48).
“Pliny the Younger” (c. AD 112) wrote an epistle in which he
stated that he has killed many Christians while he was Governor of Bithynia,
and that Christ was worshipped as a god
by his disciples. He also wrote
that Christians had a habit of meeting once a week in order to sing hymns to
their Lord (Epistles X.96).
In addition, the Jewish Talmud (Sanhedrin 43a, “Eve of
Passover”; and Yeb. IV 3; 49a) acknowledge Christ’s existence, but do not look
favorably upon His ministry. They
attribute His miracles to Satan, His birth to adultery, and acknowledge that he
was crucified on the eve of Passover.
The Jewish scholars, who would have been more than happy to show that
Jesus was a myth, if it were possible, did not believe such an option existed
(See Joseph Klausner, “Jesus of Nazareth” New York: Macmillan, 1925, pp. 23-28. Klausner, a Jewish scholar, document many
citations from the Talmud” that verify Christ’s historicity.).
The above non-Christian sources confirm the following
internal testimony of the New Testament:
· Jesus
was worshipped as God.
· Jesus
performed miracles (though attributed to nontheistic sources)
· The
disciples of Christ believed that He had risen from the dead.
· Jesus
was crucified under Pontius Pilate in Palestine at the time of Passover.
· The
sun was darkened on the day of Christ’s crucifixion.
· The
early Christians repudiated polytheism.
· Roman
rulers, including Nero, persecuted Christians.
· The
Jewish religious establishment accused Christ of sorcery and of being a
bastard.
· Jesus’
ministry occurred under the siege of Tiberius Caesar
· Christ
attracted both Jews and Gentiles.
New
Testament historicity is also confirmed by archaeological findings. Because of the abundance of evidence, we will
deal with only four specific discoveries that confirm the New Testament’s
internal testimony.
“The
Pavement.” According to John 19:13,
Jesus was tried by Pilate at a place known as the Pavement. For centuries there had been no record of
this place. Fortunately, the Pavement
has been recently discovered. Thus,
confirming the accuracy of John (William F. Albright, “The Archaeology of
Palestine,” rev. ed. Harmondsworth, Middlesex:
Pelican Books, 1960, p. 141).
“The
Pool of Bathseda,” which was recorded in no other document except the New
Testament, can now be identified with a fair measure of certainty (F.F. Bruce,
“Archaeological Confirmation of the New Testament,” in “Revelation and the
Bible,” ed. Carl F.H. Henry, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1969, p.329).
“The
Census” as described in Luke 2:1-3, not recorded outside the New Testament was
assumed to never have occurred. In
addition, there was no evidence that Quirinius was governor or that everyone
had to return to his or her ancestral home.
Fortunately, archaeological discoveries show that the Romans held a
census every 14 years. They began with
Augustus in 23-22 BC, or 9-8 BC. The one
to which Luke refers would be the latter.
Evidence has also been unearthed which verifies that Quirinius was
governor of Syria around 7 BC. A
papyrus found in Egypt gives directions
for how the census was to be conducted.
The procedure concurs with the Lucian account of everyone having to
return to their ancestral home (John Elder, “Prophets, Idols, and Diggers,” New
York: Bobba-Merrill, 1960, pp. 159-160;
and Joseph Free, “Archaeology and Bible History,” Wheaton, Illinois: Scripture Press Publications, 1969, p. 285).
In
Acts 14:6, Luke writes that Lystra and Derbe was in Lycaonia and Iconium was
not. This, however, is contradicted by
the Roman historian Cicero, who indicated that Iconium was in Lycaonia. To the credit of the New Testament, Sir
William Ramsey, in 1910, discovered a monument that showed Iconium to be a
Phyrgian city. This is also confirmed
by later discoveries (Joseph Free,
“Archaeology and Bible History,” Wheaton, Illinois: Scripture Press Publications, 1969, p. 317).
It
is obvious, from the examination of external sources (extra-biblical writing
and archaeological discoveries), that the internal testimony of New Testament
in historically reliable.
Possible
Objections
Although we have established, beyond a reasonable doubt,
that the New Testament is a historically reliable document, most people will reject
the testimony of the documents solely because it records “miraculous”
events. Rejections of such are based on
the assumption that miracles can never happen.
But we can know that miracles have never happened if we have evidence
that they have never occurred. If a
person assumes that miracles are impossible from the outset, then no evidence
will be convincing. But such a state of
mind is closed-minded and unbecoming of any self-respected skeptic. C.S. Lewis, late Professor of Medieval and
Renaissance Literature at Cambridge University, in response to a skeptical
philosopher David Hume, reveals the fallacy of this anti-miraculous thinking:
“Now of course, we must agree with Hume that if there is
absolutely ‘uniform experience’ against miracles, if in other words they have
never happened, why then they never have.
Unfortunately, we know the experience against them to be uniform only if
we know that all the reports of them are false.
And we can know all the reports if them to be false only if we know already
that miracles have never occurred. In
fact, we are arguing in a circle.” (C.S.
Lewis, “Miracles,” New York: Macmillan,
1947, p. 105.)
So, the question that needs to be asked is not “Can miracles
occur?” But rather: “Have miracles occurred?” Since we have demonstrated that the New
Testament is a reliable, primary-source recording of the life, death, and
resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth-a life loaded with miracles-miracles did in
fact occur. There is also abundant,
reliable evidence available for miracles occurring today.
If, of course, one believes that the disciples of Jesus all
got together and concocted the whole thing, then one is left with a great
psychological absurdity; eleven out of twelve men (John died of natural causes)
allowed themselves to be martyred for what they knew from the outset was a
colossal lie. Having left everything
considered precious in the worlds eyes-family, social stability, loved ones,
religious security-in order to preach that a Jewish carpenter (who they knew
was dead) had been resurrected and was now sitting at the right hand of God,
these men willingly let others put them to death. Having ample time to recant, they did
not. Though it may be argued that many
have died for a lie, it is always a lie that is believed to be the truth. However, this is not the case with the
disciples of Christ. These men had
personal access to His life and knew whether or not their message was true. It takes an enormous amount of faith to
believe the psychological absurdity that they concocted the whole thing, and
then went out and died for it.
In addition, it is equally absurd to believe that the
disciples were somehow deceived into believing the reality of the resurrection
and the miracles of Christ’s ministry.
Norman L. Geisler, a professor of systematic theology at Dallas
Theological Seminary, in reference to this objection, writes the following:
“These charges have been made but must be ruled out by the
known facts of the case. Mass
hallucination or delusion is eliminated by several factors. First, there was the inclination to
disbelieve the reports of the resurrection.
Hallucination is a phenomenon which occurs when people are already
inclined to believe in something.
Second, the apostles and eyewitness were persons who had known Jesus
intimately for years. Recognition was no
real problem. Third, there were numerous
and independent occasions of long duration, involving conversation and verification
by various groups of people, that rule out any possibility of psychological
deception. Fourth, mass delusion is
ruled out by the numerous independent occasions when one, two, seven, ten, and
eleven persons had the same experience that the five hundred had…the number and
repetition of these miracles rule out any possibility of delusion.
Since, then, there is no evidence for either individual or
collective delusion or hallucination of the eyewitnesses it is necessary to
conclude that they were not only honest but also sane witnesses of the event of
which they spoke.” (Norman L. Geisler
and Willian Nix, “A General Introduction to the Bible,” Chicago: Moody Press, 1968, p. 316.)
Jesus: Deceiver, Deranged, or Deity?
God reveals himself to Moses in the Old Testament:
“And God said unto Moses, ‘I AM THAT I AM:’ and He said,
‘Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel I AM hath sent me unto
you.’” (Exodus 3:14)
The New Testament teaches that Jesus is this same God:
“Jesus said unto them, “Verily, verily, I say unto you,
Before Abraham was, I AM.” (John 8:58)
Since we have demonstrated that there is no reason to
believe that His disciples knowingly lied about His claims, we only have three
choices concerning His character:
1) He was a deceiver-He
intentionally and knowingly lied about His nature. Therefore he was not a good man; 2) He was deranged-He sincerely believed himself
to be God, but was not; 3) He was
Deity-He was who He said He was, and should be worshipped. Let’s look at each possibility.
Jesus As Deceiver
The idea of Jesus as a deceiver doesn’t square well with the
portrayal of His life in the New Testament.
He placed a premium on honesty, love, and righteousness, and despised
hypocrisy. If Jesus was a deceiver, He
let himself be put to death when He could have recanted prior to His
crucifixion. He obviously had ample time
to do so (see Matthew 26-27), but chose not to.
Therefore, we can only conclude that He sincerely believed himself to be
God Incarnate. If this is the case, He
was either God Incarnate or mentally deranged.
Jesus As Deranged
If Jesus sincerely thought himself to be God, and was not,
the conclusion cannot be avoided that He was deranged. Psychiatrists Noyes and Kolb, in their
standard medical text, “Modern Clinical Psychiatry,” describe a schizophrenic
person as an individual who permits himself to “retreat from the world of
reality,” (“Modern Clinical Psychiatry,”
Philadelphia and London: Saunders, 1958,
p. 401). If Christ believed himself to
be God , and was not, then He mad a significant “retreat from the world of reality,”
and therefore must be judged as mentally deranged. But, in light of the profound insight of
Christ’s moral and ethical precepts, and the New Testament’s picture of Christ
as a well-balanced individual, can we really doubt His sanity? For this reason, skeptics have been, for the
most part, unwilling to declare Christ insane.
In fact, psychiatrist J.T. Fisher has written the following psychiatric
appraisal of Christ’s teachings:
“If you were to take the total sum of all authoritative
articles ever written by the most qualified of psychologists and psychiatrists
on the subject of mental hygiene -if you were to combine them and refine them
and cleave out all the excess verbiage-if you were to take the whole of the
meat, and none of the parsley, and if you were to have these unadulterated bits
of pure scientific knowledge concisely expressed by the most capable of living
poets, you would have an awkward and incomplete summation of the Sermon on the
Mount. And it would suffer immeasurably
through comparison. For nearly two
thousand years the Christian world has been holding in its hands the complete
answer to its restless and fruitless yearnings.
Here….rests the blueprint for successful human life with optimum mental
health and contentment.” (J.T. Fisher
and L.S. Hawley, “A Few Button Missing,” Philadelphia: J.P. Lippincott, 1951, p. 273)
If one still believes that Jesus was insane, we have a
situation which one must believe the colossal absurdity that a completely
deranged lunatic has given the human race “the blueprint for successful human
life with optimum mental health.” Who,
in their right mind, can accept the conclusion without sacrificing his own
sense of reasonableness? As the Catholic
apologist, G.K. Chesterton, has written:
“No modern critic in his five wits thinks that the preacher
of the Sermon on the Mount was a horrible half-witted imbecile that might be
scrawling stars on the walls of a cell.
No atheist or blasphemer believes that the author of the Parable of the
Prodigal was a monster with one idea like a cyclops with one eye.” (G.K. Chesterton, “The Everlasting Man,”
Garden City, New Jersey: Image Books,
1955, pp. 201-202)
Jesus As Deity
Since He was not a deceiver or deranged, only one option is
left: Jesus was who He said He was,
namely, God.
The Resurrection
Verified
From the abundance of all the historical evidence, we
believe that we have sufficiently demonstrated the reliability of the New
Testament, and have verified the resurrection of Jesus. In light of this, the following quote is most
appropriate:
“Out of the first century AD, when the Resurrection, if
untrue, could have been easily by anyone who took the trouble to talk with
those who had been present in Jerusalem during the Passover week of 33, no
contrary evidence has come; instead, during the century the number of
conversions to Christianity increased by geometric progression, the influence
of the Gospel story spreading out like a gigantic web. If Christ did not rise as He promised, how
can we explain this lack of negative evidence and number of conversions? Furthermore, if the body of the crucified
Jesus naturally left the tomb, how did He leave? Not by its own accord, for Jesus was
unquestionably dead. Not through the
efforts of the Jewish religious leaders or the Romans, for they placed a guard
at the tomb for the express purpose of keeping the body there. Not Jesus’ followers, for to perform such an
act would have been to deny the principles of truth upon which their latter
lives were predicated and which they preached until killed for their own
convictions.” (John Warwick Montgomery,
“The Quest For Absolutes: An Historical
Argument,” unpublished mimeograph, p. 7)
It is truly amazing that even the works of antiquity do not
even begin to approach the reliability of the New Testament, people continue to
reject the truth of the resurrection.
The rejection is not supported by evidence, but runs contrary to it,
The Inescapable
Truth
The following is an outline of what our study has covered:
·
Jesus claimed to have defeated death in history.
·
Historical verification operates on the
principal of probability. This is not a
disadvantage, because this is a contingent universe, the certainty of synthetic
statements (statement about the world) religious or otherwise, can never rise
to 100% proof.
·
In the New Testament, which contains the account
of Jesus’ resurrection, can be shown to be historically reliable, then Christ’s
resurrection can be verified.
·
According to three tests *bibliographical,
internal, and external) of examining the historicity of any document, the New
Testament is historically reliable. In
addition, to dispense with the New Testament because it contains miracles, as
Lewis has observed, is to reason in a circle.
·
Claiming that the disciples (eyewitnesses) made
the whole thing up is to ignore the fact that eleven out of twelve of them
signed their testimony in blood. And due
to their personal access to the event of Christ’s ministry, it is equally
absurd to believe that they were somehow deceived.
·
Therefore, Jesus rose from the dead.
From these conclusions, the following are deduced:
·
Jesus, throughout the Gospels, claimed to be
God, He also claimed that His resurrection would verify His Deity.
·
Jesus rose from the dead, and He is therefore
God.
·
Concerning Christ’s character, we only have
three choices: deceiver, deranged, or deity.
We have concluded that He could only be deity.
·
Thus we have an excellent reason to put our
faith in Jesus Christ. Through a
commitment of Christ (putting our faith in Him), the gap between the high
probability of the resurrection and the desire for inward certainty is able to
be bridged. As Francis Schaeffer once
put it: “It should be added in
conclusion that the Christian, after he is a Christian, has years of
experimental evidence to be added to all the above reasons…”
Unlike other religious options, Christianity is not an
irrational leap into the darkness of the unverifiable, but rather, a rational
and reasoned leap into the light.
And finally, for those who still cling to the popular
fallacy that all religions lead to God, and that there are no criteria to judge
the truth or falsity of any religion, please accept the following poetic
excerpt as a gentle rebuke:
“’All roads lead to
God,’
I’ve heard so many
say
But when they get to
Jonestown
They beg to look the
other way”
What you are about to read now is even more revelating and
important than what you’ve already read.
It is personal evidence that Jesus is God and ruler over all creation.
First of all, you must realize that God separated himself
from man because of sin. Sin is an
abomination in the eyes of God. Also, it
is helpful to understand this parallel-that when light shines darkness
flees. So, when Jesus (the Light) is in
your heart, then Satan and his demons (darkness) flee. You must also realize that you are worthy of
death and hell for your sins.
In this passage of scripture, we see that David is leading
his men into a heated battle with the
Philistines. Look what happens and what
is said:
“And David longed, and said, ‘Oh that one would give me
drink of water of the well of Bethlehem, that is at the gate.’ And the three broke through the host of the
Philistines, and drew water out of the well of Bethlehem, that was by the gate,
and took it, and brought it to David:
but David would not drink of it, and poured it out to the Lord, and
said, ‘My God forbid it me, that I should do this thing: shall I drink the blood of these men that
have put their lives in jeopardy? For
with the jeopardy of their lives they brought it.’ Therefore he would not drink it. These things did these three mightiest.” (1 Chronicles 11:19)
Is not salvation the blood of Jesus who put himself in
jeopardy for all of us?
“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten
Son, that whosoever believeth in Him shall not perish but have everlasting
life.” (John 3:16)
“If we confess our sins, then He is faithful and just to
forgive us of our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” (1 John 1:9)
But just knowing what you must do in order to be saved from
damnation is not enough to save anyone.
Only Jesus can save. So, you must
come before God in prayer and confess your sins and ask for forgiveness. There is no particular prayer or “magic”
words to say to God, but here is a sample prayer that you may pray as you read:
Dear Heavenly Father, Lord of the Universe, I know that you
created all things. I also know that by
my sin you were separated from me. My
sin is a detestable thing., and I know that I am worthy of death and hell. I humbly ask you, Lord, to have mercy on my
soul and forgive me of these sins which I have committed against you-where I
have rebelled against you and failed you.
I know that Jesus bought me with His blood when He died on the cross for
me. Please have mercy on me and let His
death be the payment for my sins, God. I
also know that Jesus rose again on the third day after His death by conquering
death, hell, and the grave. And now my
Lord Jesus sits at your right hand making intercessions for his people. Have mercy on me, Lord.
Thank-you, Lord, for saving me. I pray that you will use me, your servant, to
glorify and serve you, teach, serve, and lead others to Christ, and lastly to
care for myself so that I might bear the fruit of the Spirit to please you,
God. May your will be done on earth as
it is in Heaven, my Lord. By Jesus
Christ I pray these things and for His sake, amen.
Congratulations!
You are a child of the Lord!
Jesus has entered your heart and claimed your salvation! The kingdom of heaven is within you!
I am so happy that you have made this choice and all of
Heaven is now rejoicing your salvation.
Now, it is my recommendation that you begin reading the
Bible (the greatest textbook ever written!) everyday. If you don’t have one, go buy one, or go to a
church house and ask for one-any church worth its salt will give you a bible if
you ask. Also, go to church whenever you
can and have fellowship with the other saints.
Because the church is the body of Christ! If you don’t go to church, then find a church
which preaches the Bible as the inspired living Word of God, After visiting churches, then consider
baptism (which we are commanded to do) and become a member,
Again, I congratulate you on the victory which you allowed
Jesus to win through you! Now, I
challenge you-be a soul winner! Lead
others to Christ like you’ve been lead.
You are truly BORN AGAIN!
No comments:
Post a Comment