|~~~~~._O_.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~._O_.~~~~~| | [_____]_______________________________________________[_____] | | | | | | | | | | PUTTING CHRISTIANITY TO THE TEST | | | | !___!_________________________________________________!___! | | [_____] [_____] | |______'O'___________________________________________________'O'______| While 100% proof would leave no question as to who was right, it is impossible to prove any faith "beyond the shadow of a doubt." Even so, let us put the Christian faith to the test: Verification Of The Resurrection Of Jesus The New Testament claims Jesus is the promised Messiah of Israel and for Christians this does not have to be proven, but for the sake of the spreading of the good news, I will put the New Testament to the test. The historian, C. Sanders, in his "Introduction to Research in English Literary History," wrote there are three tests used in determining the historical reliability of any document. These are: 1) bibliographical test, 2) internal evidence test, and 3) external evidence test. Since the New Testament is a document, 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: 1) amount of existing manuscript copies & dates of composition; 2) the dates of the original autographs; and 3) a comparison of the manuscripts of the New Testament with those of ancient secular history. First, we must define what a "manuscript" is. In Geisler and Nix, "A General Introduction to the Bible" a manuscript is "a handwritten literary composition in contrast to a printed copy. An original manuscript is the first one produced, usually called an autograph." Our next question concerns the quantity of N T manuscripts. Here is a breakdown of numbers: "The John Rylands Fragment" contains five verses from the book of John dated AD 117-138. "The Bodmer Papyri" contains most of John and Luke, 1 and 2 Peter and Jude. It preserves the earliest complete copies of books of the New Testament dated AD 200. "Codex Vaticanus" contains the entire New Testament (dated AD 325-350) and the Greek Old Testament. "Codex Sinaiticus" contains the New Testament & half of the Old Testament and is dated AD 340. The "Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus" contains most of the books of the New Testament and part of the Old Testament, dated around AD 350. "Codex Alexandrinus" is a complete manuscript of the Bible (Old and New) and can be found in the British Museum National Library. It is dated from about AD 450. "Codex Bazae" is a manuscript written in Greek and Latin containing the four Gospels, the book of Acts, & part of 3 John. It is dated AD 450 or 550. According to N T scholar Burce Metzger, Professor Emeritus of New Testament at Princeton Theological Seminary, there are 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 N T (around AD 150), the Coptic versions dating from the 3rd to the 6th century. There are more than 20,000 known manuscripts of the New Testament in existence. Dates of Original Autographs: Pauline Epistles (AD 48-64), Mark (AD 50-70), Luke and Acts (AD 70-85), Matthew (AD 80-100), and John (AD 90-110). Most scholars believe that Acts and Luke are a part of the same document. Since the book of Acts ends aburptly without mentioning that Paul was tried and martyred by Nero in AD 64, it and Luke were therefore probably written before AD 64. In the opinion of William F. Albright, the W.W. Spence Professor of Semitic Languages, "...every book of the New Testament was written by a baptised Jew between the forties and the 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. Author Date Written Earliest Copy Time Span Copies Caesar 100-44 BC 900 AD 1000 yrs. 10 Plato 427-347 BC 900 AD 1200 yrs. 7 (Tetralogies) Tacitus 100 AD 1000 AD 1000 yrs. 10(-) (Annals) Pliny The 61-113 AD 850 AD 750 yrs. 7 Younger (History) Thucydides 460-400 BC 900 AD 1300 yrs. 8 (History) Heroditus 480-425 BC 900 AD 1300 yrs. 8 (History) Sophocles 496-406 BC 1000 AD 1400 yrs. 193 Aristotle 384-322 BC 1100 AD 1400 yrs. 49+ Demosthenes 383-322 BC 1100 AD 1300 yrs. 200 Homer 900 BC 400 BC 500 yrs. 643 (Illiad) New Testament 48-110 AD 125 AD 15-90 yrs. 20,000+ (John Fragment) 200 AD (Bodmer Papyri) Metzger wrote: "...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. On 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 millenium 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 John Warwick Montgomery: "...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" ("History and Christianity," pp. 29-30). In other words, hear the claims of the document under analysis, and don't assume fraud or error unless the author disqualifies himself by contradictions or known innaccuracies. Note that the authors of the entire New Testament claims time and time again they are recording testimony from eyewitnesses or 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." Lk 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 also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and his Son, Jesus Christ." 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 Jesus' words and deeds 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 life 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 on the ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. The External Evidence Test In this portion of the analysis, we ask the following question: "Do other historical materials confirm or deny the internal testimony provided by the documents themselves?" The following extra-biblical writings, which quote the New Testament, support the evidence already presented. "The Epistle of Psuedo-Barnabas" (c. AD 70-79) contains quotes, 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 very 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 Revelations 22:12. Clement, incidently, 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 theology. Therefore, in the case of Clement, his supernatural depiction of Jesus can't be easily explained away by assuming it to be a product of oral tradition or legend. "The Seven Epistles of Ignatius" (c. AD 110-117) contain quotes from Matthew, John, Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians, Galatians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, James and 1 Peter. Both Ignatius and Clement, who were disciples of the apostles (eyewitnesses), validate the theology contained in the New Testament as being the theology of the Church. For example Ignatius affirms Christ's Deity, the virgin birth, and the resurrection of Jesus. And Clement also substantiates the apostles' belief in Christ's resurrection and the fact that they taught the resurrection of all believers. Both these men, being personal acquaintances of eyewitnesses, successfully demonstrate New Testament's primary-source value. 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 interpre- ter of Peter, also handed down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter. Luke, also the companion of Paul, set down in a book the 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 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 Fathers." 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 had seen the Lord, and how he would recall their words to mind. All that he had heard from them 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 follwing 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. "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 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, attracted both Gentile and Jewish followers (Antiquites 28.33). "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 that fell on the land during Jesus' 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 argued virgorously against Thallus' interpretation). "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). (from his "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 had killed many Christians while he was governor of Bithynia and that Christ was worshipped as a god by His disciples. He also wrote that the 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 on 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, documents many citations from the "Talmud" that verify Christ's historicity.). The above non-Christian sources confirm the folling internal testimony of the New Testament: 1) Jesus was worshipped as God; 2) Jesus performed miracles [though attributed to nontheistic sources]; 3) The disciples of Christ believed that He had risen from the dead; 4) Jesus was crucified under Pontius Pilate in Palestine at the time of Passover; 5) The sun was darkened on the day of Christ's crucifixion; 6) The early Christians repudiated polytheism; 7) Roman rulers, including Nero, persecuted Christians; 8) The Jewish religious establishment accused Christ of sorcery and of being a bastard; 9) Jesus' ministry occurred under the seige of Tiberius Caesar; and 10) Christ attracted both Jew and Gentile. 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.) 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, Mich.: Baker Book House, 1969, p. 329). "The Census." as described in Luke 2:1-3, not recorded outside the New Testament, was assumed to have never occurred. In addition, there was no evidence that Quirinius was governor or that everyone had to return to his 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 reutrn his ancestral home (John Elder, "Prophets, Idols, and Diggers," New York: Bobbs-Merrill, 1960, pp. 159-160; and Joseph Free, "Archaeology and Bible History," Wheaton, Ill.: Scripture Press Publications, 1969, p. 285). In Acts 14:6, Luke writes that Lystra and Derbe were 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 Phrygian city. This is also confirmed by later discoveries (Joseph Free, "Archaeology and Bible History," Wheaton, Ill.: Scripture Press Publica- tions, 1969, p. 317). It is obvious, from the examination of external sources (extra-biblical writings and archaeological discoveries), that the internal testimony of the New Testament is 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 these documents solely because it records "miraculous" events. Rejections of the such are based on the assumption that miracles can never happen. But we can only 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- respecting skeptic. C.S. Lewis, late Professor of Medieval and Rennaisance 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 of 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 isn't "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 death) allowed themselves to be martyred for what they knew from the outset was a collosal lie. Having left everything considered precious in the world's 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 absurb 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 eye-witnesses 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, eleven persons had the same experience that the five hundred had...The repitition and number of these miracles rule out any possibilty of delusion. "Since, then, there is no evidence for either individual or collective delusion or hallucination of eyewitnesses it is necessary to conclude that they were not only honest but also sane witnesses of the events of which they spoke." (Norman L. Geisler and William 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, 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. Therefore, He was insane, and a man to be pitied, not emulated; 3) He was Diety--He was who He said He was, and should be worshipped. Let's look at each possibility. 1) Jesus As Deceiver The idea of Jesus as a deceiver doesn't square well with the protrayal 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. 2) Jesus As Deranged If Jesus thought Himself to be God, and was not, the conclusion cannot be avoided that He was deranged. Psychiatrists Noyes and Kolb, in their medical text, "Modern Clinical Psychiatry," describe a schizophrenic as a person 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 made 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 the excess verbiage--if you were to take the whole of the meat and none of the parsley and if you were to have this unadulterated bit 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 Buttons Missing," Philadelphia: J.B. 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 mine, can accept this conculsion without sacrificing his own sense of reasonableness? As the Catholic apologits, G.K. Chesterton, has written: "No modern critic in his five wits thinks 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, N.J.: Image Books, 1955, pp. 201-202) 3) 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 Incarnate. 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 disproved 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 that century the number of conversions to Christianity increased by geometric progression, the influence of the Gospel spreading out of Jerusalem like a gigantic web. "If Christ did not rise as He promised, how can we rationally 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 had 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 though 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. This rejection is not supported by evidence, but runs contrary to it. The Inescapable Truth The following is an outline of what our study has concluded: 1) Jesus claimed to have defeated death in history. 2) Historical verification operates on the principal of probability. This is not a disadvantage, because in a contingent universe, the certainty of synthetic statements (statements about the world), religious or otherwise, can never rise to 100% proof. 3) 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. 4) According to the 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 events of Christ's ministry, it is equally absurd to believe that they were somehow deceived. 5) Therefore, Jesus rose from the dead. From these conclusions, the following are deduced: 1) Jesus, throughout the Gospels, claimed to be God, he also claimed that His resurrection would verify His Deity. 2) Jesus rose from the dead, and He is therefore God. 3) Concerning Christ's character, we only have three choices: deceiver, deranged, or Deity. We have concluded that He could only be Deity. 4) 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. HalleluYAH! THE BLACKSMITH'S ANVIL Last eve I passed beside the blacksmith's door And heard the anvil ring the vesper chime; Then looking in, I saw upon the floor Old hammers, worn with beating years of time "How many anvils have you had," said I, "To wear and batter all these hammers so?" "Just one," said he, and then, with twinkling eye, "The anvil wears the hammers out, you know." And so, thought I, the anvil of God's Word For ages skeptic blows have beat upon Yet the noise of falling blows was heard The anvil is unharmed- the hammers gone. -anon. >=> >=> >=> >=> >=> >=> >=> >=> >=> >=> >=> >=> >=> >=> >=> >=> >=>
This Electronic Tract was produced by Fisherman's Net Publications: a division of New Covenant Ministries. For additional information regarding other publications write: Seventh Day Baptist Center 3120 Kennedy Road P.O. Box 1678 Janesville, WI 53547-1678 ____________________________________________________________________
MIDI files Copyright © 1997 Conrod Technical Services
Get your own Free Home Page