[1:1] Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, [2] just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, [3] it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, [4] that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught. Luke 1:1-4

The discovery of the US News and World Report Secrets of Christianity

Consider the arrogance and implications of this statement: "Like massive desert sand dunes that shift and re-form, some of the most cherished beliefs about early Christianity are collapsing, and fresh ideas are replacing them. During the past six decades, crucial discoveries of ancient texts, coordinated scholarly and scientific research and new archaeological finds have helped to reorient the thinking about a time that once appeared to be fixed in stone forever." If you disagree with them, you are rejecting the conclusions of scholars, the findings of science, and archaeological discoveries!

1. We find out that the Gospels as collections of sayings before being written in their final forms.

2. We find out that Jesus had really conspired with John the Baptist and his brothers to found an earthly kingdom with Jesus and John as joint, and only humanly, Messiahs.

3. That a group of tolerant and inclusive Christians called gnostics were suppressed by the orthodox thought police and kept the new faith from realizing the ideals of Jesus.

4. We find out that Paul re-invented Jesus as a divine savior and Jesus didn’t think of himself as a savior.

1. People have long speculated about a "source document" behind the synoptic gospels. They call it "Q." [This document is named "Q" for "quelle," the word for "source" in German. This document allegedly accounts for material which Luke and Matthew hold in common outside of the material that they both allegedly borrow from Mark.] The sayings of Jesus, and some of the narrative around the sayings, is remarkably similar from gospel to gospel. The idea, an old one, is that there were different collections of sayings and only later did editors string them together in stories using the names of famous characters.

The problem with all of this, besides the dishonesty of such an enterprise, has always been that we don’t have any of these allegedly original documents. Now USNWR tells us that the Gospel of Thomas proves this theory. But no one reputable believes that the Gospel of Thomas came before the Gospels. It was probably composed around AD 175, which means that it is 100 years later than any of the Gospels. Also, it has sayings found in all four Gospels, which means that it is written based on the Gospels, rather than the other way around. Add to that weird neo-platonic philosophy which was unknown to the first century and it is pretty difficult to understand how this document proves anything. N.T. Wright has helpfully pointed out that collections of sayings are always based on stories, not the other way around.

No one has ever, aside from wishful thinking, ever demonstrated that Gospels we have in our Bibles are not the original and accurate testimonies to Jesus Christ.

2. What is the evidence for James Tabor claiming that Jesus tried to set up an earthly dynasty? First, in ONE of the DSS documents, there appears to be an expectation of a coming king and coming priest. This is very debated. It is also questionable whether the DSS community thought this. On the basis of this document found in the library of extreme Jewish religious monastics he’s decided that this must have been what ALL Jews thought and must have been therefore what Jesus was really all about. The scholarly word for this kind of logic is FANTASY.

Second, he confuses the brothers of Jesus (see Mark 6:3) with the disciples. For example, he confuses Judas, the son of James with Jude the brother of James (the brother of Jesus). He confuses James the apostle with James the brother of Jesus. The evidence of the Gospels, which is the only evidence we have, tell us that Jesus’ brothers only believed after the resurrection.

Tabor’s idea is fiction, with no basis in fact, except for the fact that he’s come up with a clever idea designed to sell books.

3. What is the deal with the Gnostics? It is a common trick to decide how you would like things to be and then come up with a group people know little about and project your desires onto them. This gives your ideas the air of respectability and authority. It is kind of like modern nature-worshipping environmentalists who claim to resurrected Druidism. The truth is that Druids were not nature-worshipping hippy environmentalists, but brutal pagans who dis-emboweled people in order to read the future in their entrails. Ancient gnostics were not tolerant inclusivists, but misogynistic intellectuals who thought only the really educated could achieve true salvation and that women had to become men in order to be saved. Gnostic teaching seems a lot like neo-platonic philosophy and nothing at all like the teaching of Jesus.

Gnosticism was an attempt to hijack Christianity by intellectuals and do it in such a way that would make it acceptable to a pagan world. It was the orthodox who put their lives on the line for faith. It was the orthodox who believed that the Gospel was foolishness to the wise.

4. The idea that Paul re-created Christianity and changed it from the teachings of Jesus is also a very old claim, usually made by people who have a distorted idea of Jesus that can’t withstand the preaching of Paul. So the answer for them is to get rid of Paul.

These people want to claim that Jesus didn’t teach that he was divine and didn’t think he was any kind of heavenly savior, but more of a charismatic rabbi who was loved by the masses. This doesn’t stand up to the evidence. Jesus constantly called himself "the son of man," evoking the identity of the divine figure in Daniel 7. Jesus took divine prerogatives to himself, such as forgiving sin (Mark 2) and laying aside the law of Moses (Mark 7). Jesus called himself by the divine name (John 8), accepted worship (John 20), and exercised divine power (Mark 4). He claimed to hold the power of judgement and salvation in his hand (Matthew 25). Paul wasn’t inventing anything when he taught Jesus as our Saviour.

The point of all of this is that the Gospels are trustworthy, part of the inerrant and infallible deposit of God’s Holy Word.

This is what Luke is getting at in the first chapter of his Gospel.

1. Luke is going to write a narrative of the life of Jesus, as others have done. We don’t know how many people he is talking about. It may just be the other two or three gospels. The whole story is important. It is not just the trappings for a group of sayings and principles. This is a common modern technique – from The Road Less Traveled to several Og Mandino books.

The entire story is important because it isn’t only the teachings of Jesus that are important, but the person and work of Jesus. a) what Jesus DID is as important as what he SAID. If Jesus went on a lecture tour and didn’t go to the cross, we are all lost, still in our sins. b) but if someone else did and taught the same things as Jesus did, including the cross, we’re still lost. It isn’t just what he said and did, but who he IS. If Jesus isn’t God in the flesh, his death doesn’t accomplish anything for us. Luke is going to give us the whole thing.

2. Luke’s story is going to be orderly. He is interviewing eyewitnesses and ministers of the word (meaning the apostles, who knew and worked with Jesus). He has followed all things closely for a long time. This is not a story "based upon real events," as many movies are. He is not taking artistic license with anything here. It is very important to Luke that he write the exact truth. It isn’t that he just wants these things to be "spiritually true" or "figuratively true," but that he is writing what is "historically true." This is why J. Gresham Machen, the founder of the OPC and WTS, preached in a sermon that the NT student is "essentially a historian." Our faith is grounded in HISTORY.

If our faith is not historically and literally true, we are to be pitied, as the apostle Paul teaches.

3. Luke’s goal is that Theophilus, and we, have certainty about these things. All of these attacks on the Gospel have a spiritual, rather than factual, basis. As Paul notes in Romans, these people "suppress the truth in their unrighteousness." Anyone who investigates the Gospel with a completely open heart and mind will conclude that they are accurate accounts of the coming of the Messiah. If someone comes to the Gospel with a closed heart and mind, only the Spirit of God can open it. Facts won’t make it through.

But Luke writes to you who have already accepted the Gospel or you who are "not far from the kingdom of God." He wants you to have all of the facts, all of the information. He wants you to be sure. This is something "you can bet your life on." Even more than your life, your eternal destiny and all of your significance and the meaning of your existence.

Part of faith is "knowing for sure." It’s knowing that no criticism of the truth of the Gospel has ever stuck. Most of the criticisms are very old and have been demonstrated false many, many times. Most errors are old errors. The same Deceiver is at work now as then. Luke is saying to us today, Here is the Gospel. It’s the story of Jesus. Every word of it is true. It’s the real deal. You can stake everything on it.

This Advent, as we consider the story of Jesus and tell the story of Jesus, I wonder if we could think about a few things:

1. Do I have holes in my certainty? Are there nagging doubts I carry with me? Are there things which I think I believe, but I’m embarrassed about? Am I willing to do the work to resolve my doubts so that they will not undermine my faith and my holiness and my joy?

a. check out our resources in the library

b. buy a good book on Bible answers (list on website)

c. have I prayed about these things? commit to pray about this for two weeks

d. have I shared my doubts with my small group or spiritual mentor or study group? enlisted their prayer?

e. it is not as important that you are able to recall answers as know that there are answers (easy answers, plausible explanations, genuine mysteries)

2. Do I know the story of Jesus fully? Would you be willing to spend the Advent and Christmas season reading the Gospel of Luke several times? Would you try to read the entire Gospel of Luke in the next week? Fathers and other heads of families, would you endeavor to read the Gospel of Luke to your families, one chapter a night, every night that you are home during the Advent and Christmas season?

Highlands Presbyterian Church

Small Group Discussion Questions

2 December 2007

Luke 1:1-4

A Holy Certainty

Pastor Travis

1. Is there anything that needs to change in your life or thinking as you reflect on this passage?

2. What doubts of yours have been resolved as you have grown as a Christian?

3. What areas of doubt do you still have that others could pray about?

4. Which of the challenges that Pastor Travis gave (below) could you commit to?

"Do I know the story of Jesus fully? Would you be willing to spend the Advent and Christmas season reading the Gospel of Luke several times? Would you try to read the entire Gospel of Luke in the next week? Fathers and other heads of families, would you endeavor to read the Gospel of Luke to your families, one chapter a night, every night that you are home during the Advent and Christmas season?"