Psalm Trees

After hearing the Gospels,  I was still an atheist, but something happened after hearing a particular preacher clearly and simply present what Christians believe.  I realized that if this is true, this has huge implications for my life.

My wife was a Christian.  For her, God was a heart issue. She wanted to experience God, to feel his presence.  She sought community with God through experience.

My approach was very different. I needed information about the New Testament that I could put to the test.

I thought it was going to be so easy to expose the fallacious thinking behind Christianity.  As it turns out, my investigation into Christianity would take me on the most exciting journey of my life.

Objection: The NT docs were written so far after JC’s death that it’s really hard to say.

Objection: I wasn’t there at the time, 2000 years ago.

Objection: As an attorney, I rely on evidence.  It would be tough to get evidence at this late date.

How did I know the Gospels were telling me the truth about Jesus?  I certainly did not accept that the Gospels were the inspired Word of God.  Or that this Word was inerrant.  But what I had to accept them as being, which is undeniable, was that they were a set of historical documents and that historians have criteria that they can apply to determine whether such documents are trustworthy.

So I started reading the experts on such things who could help me sort through such issues.

NT Wright: Over the last 200 hundred years, it’s been common coin in western culture that you cannot believe

in what’s written in the Gospels.  That skepticism has wormed its way into modern culture and indeed, many Christian circles as well.  Where they’ll say Matthew made this up or Luke added this bit to the parable.  I and others have spent our lives researching what was actually going on in the 1^st third of the 1^st century AD in Palestine and try to get inside the minds of the 1^st century Jews and Romans.  And the more I’ve done that, the more I’ve found that what you see in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John comes up in 4 dimensions and says my goodness, this actually belongs, it makes sense, it fits.  It gives us very vivid portraits of who these people were and what they were doing and thinking.

The NT Gospels are biographies of Jesus.  While the authors are anonymous, from very early in the Christian tradition, they’ve been attributed to Matthew (a disciple of Jesus), Mark a colleague of Peter the disciple, Luke an historian and confidante of Paul and John a disciple of Jesus.

Both Matt and John were disciples of Jesus – closest to Jesus.  They’d have personally witnessed most of the events they describe in their Gospels.  Mark and Luke were contemporaries of Jesus and wrote theirs based on the testimony of eye witnesses.

It is accepted among scholars that the Gospels were attempts to write biographies of Jesus.  Not biographies in the modern sense.  For instance, they were not particularly interested in his early years.  Adult life biographies.  Attempts by Jews to chronicle exactly what Jesus said and did. 

Luke’s prologue begins with a prologue –literary artist.  Says he has carefully investigated and checked with eye witnesses.  The work of a historian.

People in 1st century valued eye witness testimony.  It was very important to the Church fathers that the 1st century Gospels were actual, accurate eyewitness accounts.

We have very early attestation of the authorship of the Early Church father Papias, as recorded by church historian Eusibius.  It records Marks gospel as essentially the eye witness of Peter.  Papias was the disciple of John.  Only one generation removed from JC. Pretty close.  Strongly suggests based on eyewitness.

7BC – 4 BC birth  death AD 33

AD 27-30 ministry

AD 60-75 Mark written

AD 60 – 85 Matt and Luke

AD 65-95

All gospels written in the 1st generation when the eye witness were still around.  If the Gospels were not passing on reliable history, we would expect the eye witnesses to come forward and say what had really happened.

The question is not just was this information accurate, but was it reliably preserved during the time period before it was finally written down?

New Testament scholar, Craig Blomberg – In the ancient world, there was no printing press.  The only and standard way of preserving info was through memorized oral tradition.

Young rabbis had to memorize Scripture perfectly – it was not unusual for them to have to perfectly memorize the entire Torah.  What about the accusation that oral transmission is like the game of Chinese Whispers?  This is a bad analogy, says JP Moreland. The 1st cent apostles were deeply concerned with getting the information correct because they saw it as sacred holy tradition.  It was not about what Joe ate for dinner.

Nowadays, we want instant film.  But oral tradition is a community event.  Individuals tell stories in a community.  The community will correct them if wrong.  It is self-correcting.  These stories were passed on reliably because they were based on and by the community of disciples.

Oral studies have been shown to be capable of being passed on through generations without changing a thing.

Even if that’s possible, isn’t the Bible really filled with contradictions???

Alleged Synoptic Gospel contradictions

Ex. 2 Gospels record the same event but records 2 blind men, the other records 1 blind man.

Vast majority of scholars say that Mark describes 1 blind man as being merely the most prominent And Luke describes both men.  It would be a contradiction if Mark had said there was only one blind man.  It does not say that.  It merely describes a man, leaving open the possibility that there was another and that Mark was merely giving his perspective.   Had all the Gospels given the same detail, we would accuse them of collusion.

Multiple eyewitnesses to the same event give different interpretations. We’re interested in the core events, even

 if the incidental details vary.  In a court of law with multiple witnesses, the first objection is collusion when things sound alike.

Earliest NT manuscripts were written on papyrus:

Codex Sinaiticus written in AD 330 and 350. Almost all NT and some of the Old

Codenx Vaticanus – a Greek copy of entire Bible

Fragment of Gospel of John AD 125 less than a single generation after it was originally written

No originals.  Copies of copies – how do we know what the originals said?

We have better attestation of the NT manusciptrs than we have for any ancient document

The earliest copy of Homer’s manuscript was written 1000 years later.

 We have 5000 NT manuscripts

We also have the whole NT quoted in the manuscripts of ancient fathers.  So that if we had no copies at all of the NT we would be able to piece a complete copy of the NT together simply from quotes by the church fathers.

Next Step – any corroborative evidence outside the NT?

Jesus was no king or ruler but he left an impact.  The truly remarkable thing is that we have so much written about him.  Josephus, Suetonius, Tacitus    Critics refer to him.  Jesus caused ripples that are astonishing, given his isolated stature.

AD 93 Josephus Antiquities of the Jews  “Now there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man for he was a doer of wonderful works. A teacher of such men as received the truth with pleasure.  He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the gentiles.  When Pilate at the suggestion of the principle men among us, condemned him to the cross, those that loved him first did not forsake him and the tribe of Christians so named for him are not extinct to this day.”

Gnostic Gospels – Mainstream sources?

No – these are religious writings from 2nd and 3rd century.  They combine the teachings of Jesus with a variety of philosophical and religious beliefs.  According to tenets of Gnosticism, the universe was the creation of a flawed and wicked god for all matter is evil.  Salvation from this world could only be obtained by secret knowledge about the spiritual nature of man.

Gospels according to Mary, Thomas, Philip – all written MUCH later and don’t record historically reliable events.

Gospels give us a portrait of a 1st century Palestinian Jesus.  The 2nd century Judas, Thomas, Philip Gospels give us a very different Jeses.  You can pick and choose if you want, if you like the Gnostic Jesus better.  Others might want the earlier Jesus.  But if you going to be a scholar about it you’ll choose the earlier one, closer to the time the actual events took place.

There’s this myth that there were all these competing views about Jesus and the one that won out became the Jesus we know today.  Jesus was a 1st century Jewish teacher who revealed  himself and demonstrated himself to be the Messiah.  That’s what the Gospels tell us.  The Gnostics give us a very different, Greek philosophical, esoteric Jesus.  Not the historical Jesus Christ.

The Gospels are the best sources for JC and they are reliable and we can form an accurate picture of him.  About his teachings and his life.

Jesus’ parables, healings, warnings – they are recounted for us because it actually mattered that it happened.  And if it didn’t happen, then you have a totally different worldview – you would hold a world view of ideas about self realization – this worldview is hugely popular today.  But JC didn’t come to help you discover who you really are, he came to tell me he knew who I really was and to help me do something about it.  This is much better news.

As I read this, I moved from atheist, to spiritual seeker, a skeptic, willing to follow the evidence where it went.

My wife was praying as I looked into the evidence.  My world was opening up into something new and more exciting than anything I ever experienced.  I would take two steps forward,. Three steps back.  Sometimes look like I was really getting it and other times, I’d become an angry, frustrated person again.

Objection: JC did live but his life is full of exaggerations

Objection:  We’ll never know.  Folklore.  Historical misrepresentation and wishful thinking.  But we won’t know or ever prove Jesus.

Biographies gave me a lot of info about Jesus.  But Christians were saying he was the son of God.  That’s a huge step to take to believe that!

Who was Jesus???

Ben Witherington – Jesus’ identity is complex, a lot of aspects, he can’t be pigeon-holed.  But always he presents

himself as a challenge to the status quo, to preconditioned thinking about what the Messiah God must be.  He’s carving out his own niche.  Not replicating the past.  He’s taking bits of the past – prophecies, wisdom – and he’s serving up a whole new gumbo.  And people don’t know what to think.

He teaches with authority this amazing new teaching.  His OWN authority.  Not in the name of anyone else.  “But I say unto you”.  He would clarify and even overrule parts of the law.  This law was given by God himself. For Jesus to say that I am the law, I am the one who has come to fulfill the law.  He is saying he has the authority of God. 

Jesus in front of Caiaphas and Sanhedrin – they are looking for incriminating evidence and testimony –  “Tell us are you the Messiah?” He answers, “I am and you will see the Son of Man coming upon the clouds of heaven.”  Jesus is combining phrases of Daniel  7 and Psalm 110.  Jesus sees himself as this heavenly figure.

Son of Man – Daniel 7:13…Son of Man – humanity? Partly.  It has a much greater significance.  In the verse, a glorious Messianic figure comes before the Ancient of Days (God) and he is given all power and glory and majesty.  That portrait is what Jesus is referring to.  He sees himself as that glorious messianic figure.

Refers to humanness and more than humanness – his dominion will have no end.

Reports of Miracle – Is there evidence they’re the result of a divine nature?

JC’s contemporaries, including both his friends and enemies acknowledged he did extraordinary things.  Even the Talmud says Jesus was a magicianAny different from miracle workers of the age?

What about other so-called magicians?  They use spells and incantations and try to coerce gods.  Jesus demonstrates the power of the kingdom of God.  That it is arriving.  He’s an exorcist.  Not found in the OT.  He reveals his identity in his own way.  He can take on the powers of darkness and win.  He needs no spells.  He calls on the demon by name and it comes out.

Only God forgives sins.  Jesus doesn’t do things on behalf of God.  They didn’t hear it this way.  They heard him as speaking on his authority.  And then he heals the man.

Is Jesus the Messiah, the Christ, the Anoinited One?

Dozens of prophecies predicting him.  Jesus, against all probabilities fulfills those prophecies.  Thumb print that only JC matches Isaiah 53:6  All of us, like sheep have gone astray, but the Lord has put upon him the iniquity of us all – written 8 centuries before Jesus came.

JC engineering the fulfillment – well, couldn’t engineer Bethlehem or the cross.

The fact he performed events – he’s simply saying yes, I am the Messiah.  He was self-consciously fulfilling the prophecies that were written centuries before.

Strobel – This was not just an intellectual journey.  It was also deeply emotional.  I would recoil.  There were so many reasons why I didn’t want there to be a God.  I did not want to be accountable.  I was angry, frustrated.  I was meeting people who were Christians.  And you can tell the people who understand their faith and live it through Gospel study.  Their life stood in marked contrast to my own.

Objection: I don’t think a physical body can rise.

Experts on the Resurrection: William Lane Craig, Gary Habermas, N.T Wright and Mike Licona

The pivotal event of History.  Anyone can claim to be the son of God.  Can he back it up?  The Resurrection.

Swoon theory.  No way Jesus could survive the scourging and then the spear in his side.

In Roman times, if you let a prisoner escape, your life was forfeit.  Even if he did somehow survive, he would be so badly injured that no one could say that he triumphed over death.

Joseph of Arimethea – he was a member of Jewish Sanhedrin.  All of whom condemned Jesus.  The record of his presence is an awkward and embarrassing fact for the early church.  He was not buried by his disciples or family.  Unlikely he would have been made up as it does not help the ‘story’.

Women witnesses – another embarrassing feature.  The Status of women = second class citizens.  If you’re going to invent an account of empty tomb, why use women as witnesses?  Also, a woman with a shady past (Magdalene).  But the Christians stuck to their guns.  This is what happened.

If the body was still in the tomb, why did the Jewish authorities tell guards to say the disciples stole the body?  Tertullian verifies that’s what the Jews were saying 100 years later.

Did 100s of people really see him alive?

Letter of Paul to Corinth

Raised on the 3rd day, to Peter, the 12 and 500 and then to James and apostles.  Last, he appeared to me.

Paul describes resurrection appearances.  Eyewitness first-hand account.

He could ask any of these 100s of people that are still alive.

Paul thinks the best argument is he got it from trustworthy people in Jersulam about 35 AD

1 Cor 3-15 – belief in Resurrection was recorded and taught within 2-3 years of the events.

Is there any circumstantial evidence? Yes – the growth of early church in the face of intense persecution.

Tacitus – Nero tortured and murdered the apostles.

Earliest disciples at least BELIEVED Jesus was raised from the dead.  Even critics realize this.

The disciples didn’t expect  Jesus to die.  His death was a terrible disappointment.  Skepticism transformed to confidant faith and joy when they saw him.  Transformation of a bewildered following on the basis of the good news.

No movement arose around other dead messiahs.

But these defeated cowards were transformed to bold disciples willing to be tortured to death -something must have happened.  Lives of hardship, martydom and execution without recanting.  No money.  Abandoning family.  Got death for their efforts.  Died for something they saw themselves as well as believed.

James, half brother of Jesus, didn’t believe in Jesus in life.  Died a martyr.  Saul the persecutor became Paul. We believe something we wish is true.  It is very hard to explain people coming to believe something they originally were standing against.  James and Paul did not accept Jesus at his crucifixion.  They thought he was deranged.  Something happened.  Their minds were changed.  They became willing to die for the truth.  You don’t die for something you know to be a lie. 

Ok, the skeptic sometimes accepts that the alternative hypotheses don’t work.  But they say there must be some other explanation because bodies just don’t rise.

We say, ok, if you want to make the absoluteness of the bodily death your stance, I can’t stop you.  If that’s your worldview, so be it. But that worldview is strongly challenged by the evidence of the Resurrection and it’s up to people as to what they do with that challenge.

Strobel – The evidence accumulated.  I measured the plus and minus side.  I realized I needed more faith to be an atheist, than to be a follower of Jesus.  I realized that the most rational thing to do was to take a step of faith in the direction of Jesus and put my trust in Him, based on the evidence.

That decision began a transformation.  Relations, parenting, philosophy etc.  It all started to change, for good. 

I’ve resisted.  I’ve backslid.  But I’ve persevered.  If Jesus came back from the dead, it changes everything.

What about your own journey.  If you’ve never done it for yourself, I really encourage you to investigate the evidence for yourself.  Make three resolutions

1)         Make it a front burner issue in your life

2)         Resolve to have an open mind even if it takes you to the uncomfortable position that Jesus might be who he says he is

3)         Resolve to make a verdict in the case for Christ.