CHRISTIAN EVIDENCE: CHRISTIANITY IS A FACTUAL RELIGION OF CONVINCING FAITH
Prof. Satheesh Kumar
Academic Dean, AECS
Introduction
Christianity is a factual faith, Christianity appeals to history, and its historical facts that are clearly recognizable by everyone. J.N.D. Anderson says, “Christianity is based on indisputable facts”. Sufficient facts can be found to explain the historical reliability and divine origin of Christian religion. Many skeptics and critics have made numerous attempts to attack against biblical Christianity based on their mere philosophical assumption and speculations are a task which never accomplish.
Luke, the first-century Christian historian demonstrates the truth of Christianity in his Gospels and in his the Acts of the Apostles. Luke said that he strove to provide an orderly and accurate historical “narrative of those things which are most surely believed among us, just as those, who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word, delivered them to us” (Luke 1:1-2 NKJV). Among those historical, knowable events was the resurrection of Jesus Christ, which was validated by Jesus himself through “many infallible proofs” over a forty –day, period before numerous eyewitnesses (Acts 1:3).
One of the main purposes of this course on Christian evidence is to present some of these “indisputable evidences” for Christian faith before critics, skeptics, infidels, of the bible , in an intellectual fashions so that they can mask a meaningful decision under the convicting power of the Holy spirit.
Being a Christian, it is important for everyone to be able to give a good reason for the hope that is in him in regard to the eternal verities of the Christian faith. Hopefully, this study of Christian evidence will help student to give indisputable scientific evidence for their Christian faith.
VOCABULARY FOR THIS COURSE
Darwin
Charles Robert Darwin, an English naturalist, lived between A.D. 1809 – 1882.
Existentialism
Philip R. Stover, psychologist, says, “Existentialism is a school of thought that would deny the necessity of belief in the inspiration of the Scriptures”
Hedonism
The doctrine that teaches that pleasure or happiness is the sole or chief good in life.
Humanism
A philosophy that asserts the dignity and worth of man and his capacity for self-realization through reason, and that often rejects supernaturalism.
Nihilism
A viewpoint that traditional values and beliefs are founded and that existence is senseless and useless.
Spinoza
Baruch or Benedict Spinoza was a Dutch philosopher who lived A.D. 1632 – 1677
Theism: Believes in the existence of God. God is transcendent (beyond) and imminent (in the world).
Deism: God created everything and He left. A belief in creator God who has nothing to do with the creation now. God is beyond but nit in the world-Thomas Jefferson, God created everything and He left it.
Pantheism: This idea of God is propounded by Benedict Spinoza. God is everything and everything is God. All finite things are the part of one eternal self-existing being. This is eastern concept of God.
Panantheism: God is in the universe as soul is in the body. The idea is holed by Alfred Whitehead and Charles Harthorne.
Finite Godism: God is beyond the universe but not in supreme control of it. Held by Plato, and Aristotle etc. Universe is like a robot, to which God cannot control.
Finite Monotheism: Belief in one God.
Finite Polytheism: Belief in many gods.
Henotheism: Belief in one God without rejecting the existence of the goodness of other religion. There are many finite gods, but only one supreme.
Atheism: Denial of the existence of God.
Agnosticism: Neither the nature nor the nature of God can be known.
Dualism: Belief in two equal force or gods (good or evil).
Tritheism: Belief in three different gods (denying the unity).
Animism: Belief in spirit (dead one).
Skepticism: Doubting in God’s existence.
Humanism: Man is own god, the highest of all beings.
Agnosticism:
It teaches that, “the existence and nature of God are not known or God to be unknowable.” The term agnosticism was coined by T H. Huxley. It means literally no-knowledge, the opposite of a Gnostic. Thus agnosticism is, we can know nothing about God. Dogmatism is, we can know everything about God. Realism teaches, we can know something about God, but not everything, He is partially knowable. Problem with agnosticism: It is self defeating. Because it assumes some knowledge about reality in order to deny any knowledge of reality. Agnosticism is self-destructing, because it says, “one knows enough about reality in order to affirm that nothing can be known about realty.” Of course if one knows nothing about reality then he has no basis for making a statement about reality.
Skepticism:
The believes that “any reliable or absolute knowledge is impossible, and any aspect of the supernatural are unattainable by any individual.” The chief proponent of skepticism is David Hume. He denied that we can know the truth about a cause from an effect. Problem of skepticism: Skepticism is self-defeating. St. Augustine
Relativism:
Relativism is the theory that “there is no objective standard by which truth may be determined, so that truth varies with individuals and circumstance.” They don’t believe in absolute truth but in relative truth. For them truth is relative. Problem of relativism: It is self-defeating. The theory is true either absolutely (for all people, at all times, and all places) or relatively. If the theory is true absolutely, then relativism is false, for at least one truth is true absolutely. E.g. “There is milk in the refrigerator” and you say there is not any milk in the refrigerator” and we both are right, them there must both be and not be milk in the refrigerator at the same time and in the same sense. But that is impossible. So, if truth were relative, then an impossible would be actual.
Pluralism:
Pluralism simply means “the people have the tight to adopt any religion.” in other wards, any religions lead to God or salvation. Following any religious path enables believers to reach the religious goal” pluralism is the opposite of exclusivism (only one religion is right). Problems of pluralism: Pluralism says all religions are true. God is completely infinite and therefore unknowable. They do not know who God is.
Rationalism:
It is a belief that what is knowable or demonstrable by human reason is true. Something independent of sense experience (a priory) is true, in contrast of empirical experience (empiricism – a posteriori). Rationalist uses human reason as the final authority of what they believe. Problem of rationalism: It is based on an invalid move from thought to reality, from the possible to the actual. E.g. Because something does not make it actual- Golden mountain.
Evidentialism (objectivism):
It teaches that truth must be based in facts or events, not in ideas or theories. Emphasis is given on the objective and public nature of facts. In this respect they regard private and subjective experience as non evidential. If truth is to be tested, it must be available to others. The subjective and personal source of truth can not be a deciding test for truth. Problem of evidentialism: As a test for the truth of a world view it is entirely inadequate. Because, facts and events have ultimate meaning only within and by the context of the world view. Meaning always demands a context. For example Resurrection of Christ, was not a miracle but merely an unusual natural event. Meaning is given to the event from a certain perspective.
Pragmatism:
Another inadequate test for the truth and is meaning is pragmatism. It teaches that, “truth is not what is consistent or what is empirically adequate but what is experientially workable.” One can not think or even feel truth, but he can discover it by attempting to live it. According t it what is practical or workable is true. Problem of pragmatism: Pragmatism shows only what works, but it does not prove that worked is true. The results or consequences of an action do not establish what is true but simply what happened to work. Truth may be unrelated to results. E.g. Unlawful entry into a house by picking a lock, it does work but that doesn’t mean that entry was the right result. Increasing of people in a local Church is not the criterion for the truthfulness of the doctrines taught and practiced in the Church.
Combinationalism:
The failure of the traditional tests for the truth of a world view such as expriantionalism, rationalism, evidentialism, and pragmatism led to the combinational approach. They believe that no one test for the truth is an adequate test for truth. Combinationalism come from various epistemological back ground. Problem of combinationalism: Combinationalism can not solve the weakness of expriantionalism, rationalism, evidentialism, pragmatism etc. Therefore it is also an inadequate test6 for the truth. Combinationalism is a form of the “leaky bucket” argument. Just adding together inadequate solutions does not make an adequate solution.
Fideism:
It is related to religious epistemology. It teaches that faith alone is the way to God; the only way to the truth about God is through faith. God cannot be attained by human reason. Certainly there are mo valid proofs for the existence of God. If man could know God by natural reason, God’s grace would be negated and human works would be established as a means of knowing God. Problem of Fideism: As a methodology for establishing the truth of a theistic world view, fideism is completely inadequate. Because according to it a Christian fideist is right in what he believes about God but wrong in the reason for that belief. Fideism fails to clearly distinguish belief “in” and belief “that” there is a God. Before one put a trust in God he must have some reason to believe that it is the true God to which he is committed. E.g. Can one, place his trust in his wife unless he first has some warrant or support for believing that she is his wife? Fideism never claims a test for truth.
Experientialism:
It teaches that all religious truth must be built upon experience. Experience is necessary to religion. Without a basic source in experience there is no meaningful religious expression. Experience must be the final court of appeal. Problem of experientialism: It makes a dilemma of what is true experience. Experience in the primary sense is neither true nor false. Experience is something one has, and truth is something one expresses about experience. An experience cannot be used to support or prove the truth of that experience. Experience is private not a public dogma.
As a conclusion, we have set forth and evaluated various tests for truth. Each in turn has proven itself inadequate in testing the truth of a world view for different reasons. If no test for truth is sufficient, then truth cannot be established and tested; and if the truth cannot be established, then the Christian apologist is out of business. Fortunately this is not the case, there is a test for truth that meets the standards of adequacy, and it can establish one view over against all opposing views:
B. Definition:
1. “Christian evidence is the scientific proofs of the divine authority of the Christian
religion.
2. “Christian evidence is the scientific proofs of the divine origin of the Christian
religion
C. Reason for preferring the word “Evidence”.
There are at least three reasons for preferring the word “evidence”, as follows:
1. It carries a more positive sense.
. 2. It may be used without explanation to include both proof and defense.
3. It may be easily understood by all, needing no explanation, because it has no bad sense.
Use and value of Christian Evidences
Christian Evidence cannot provide immediate and compelling certainty. But they can establish a high probability in favor of Christianity. Since probability is considered a safe and reliable guide in the practical affairs of life, it is inconsistent to refuse Christian Evidences on the grounds that they cannot provide absolute certainty.
D. Christian religion
Christian religion is man’s relation to God through the meditation of Jesus, according to the teachings of the Holy Scriptures.”
E. The Bible for Christianity
“Christianity is a movement, which is based upon the teachings of the person of Christ, the teachings of Christ can be found only in the bible. Therefore, the Bible is necessary for Christianity”
Apologetics and Christian Evidence
“Presenting a rational basis for faith or proving Christianity to be true.” Jesus and the apostles often offered evidence to people who had difficulty believing that the gospel was true. Note John 14:11; 20; 24-31;1 or. 15:1-11. Believers themselves sometimes doubt, and at that point apologetics becomes useful for them even apart from its role in dialogue with unbeliever as well as in the unbeliever.
a. Faith, Scripture, and Evidence.
Faith is not “belief in the absence of evidence”; rather it is a trust which rests upon sufficient evidence. This fact is evident in Scripture, e.g. Abraham (Gen. 22). God’s word is rational basis to believe. When God tells us to do something, we need no grater rational basis for doing it. So faith does not believe despite the absence of evidence; rather, faith honors God’s word as sufficient or absolute evidence Rom.4: 20-21; 1Cor. 15:1-11.
Scripture often contains its own reasons for the things it says. The word “therefore” indicates a reason, e.g. Rom. 8:1. Scripture does not merely proclaim the truth, it also proclaims reasons for believing the truth. Believe it for Scriptural reasons. The word “therefore also indicates the scriptural authoritative reasoning. For the first century believers, at least, the 500 witnesses of 1 Cor.15:6 were a valuable resource for evidence. So the witnesses’ testimony is to be evaluated by way of a biblical view of evidence not by theories like those of David Hume and Rudolf Bultman, who reject all supernatural claims from the outset.
b. Concept of Proof
Cornelius Van Til says that “there is absolutely certain proof for the existence of God and the truth of Christian theism.” What do we mean by “proof?” The most uncontroversial examples of proof are those in mathematics, where proposition are derived by strictly logical inference. For examples, a proof for God’s existence:
Premise 1: What Scripture says is always true.
Premise 2: Scripture says that God exists.
Conclusion: Therefore, God exists.
c. Existence of God
The evidence for Christian theism is “absolutely certain.” There is no excuse for disbelief since the evidence obligates belief. God’s justice is implicit in the fact that He is the very source, the very definition of moral standards. No circumstances are conceivable without Him, and so it is impossible for God not to exist.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE SKEPTICISM OF OUR DAY
Contributions of the Secular Philosophers
In the seventeenth century, the Dutch philosopher “Benedict” Spinoza, an excommunicated Jew, used a method that would be widely emulated the rationalistic critics during the enlightenment. Spinoza was convinced that the Bible was a purely human book, had no Divine authorship, and he therefore set out to disprove it along several lines.
1. Spinoza questioned the date of the writings of the Old Testament books. He rejected the traditional dates that were given for the books and for the most part set a much later date than either Judaism or Christianity had ever considered.
2. Spinoza rejected the authorship of the books. He claimed that they were actually pseud-epigraphical; that is, in essence, they were fakes, written by other men who remain nameless, but passed off upon the gullible religious leaders as authentic documents written by the famous prophets and leaders whose name they bear.
3. Spinoza questioned the composition of the books, criticizing what he believed to be contradictions, particularly in dating, numerology, or the facts themselves concerning certain events. He found particularly fruitful ground for this criticism by researching the several accounts of a particular event which might appear in different books (for instance, the variant numbers given for particular events in the Books of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles).
4. Spinoza, of course, refused with other critics to recognize and allow for obvious explanations which as copyist errors.
5. Finally, Spinoza questioned the historic setting of the books. He raised violent criticisms against various statements in the Scripture that regarded nations (which Spinoza denied even existed except in the minds of the writers of Scripture), cultural settings, and a host of other details.
The Theory of Evolution and Biblical Criticism
Biblical criticism today takes all of its impetus from the presuppositions of Darwinism. Darwinism, therefore, is the womb in which the modern school of Biblical criticism was nurtured and developed and from which it emerged in its present form.
Darwinism – a philosophical presupposition that wove a fabric of superstition out of unsupported and unverifiable assumptions, turning it into a competed cosmology and world-view that was, in fact, totally in opposition to the teaching the Scriptures themselves.
Darwin’s theory gained easy and immediate acceptance among the rationalists at that time. The skeptical religious thinkers could not accept the Bible’s explanation of the universe with its Creator/ God because they had adopted the presuppositions and assumptions of Darwinism. They held a view that an inspired and literally accurate Bible is impossible; and hence, other theories must be found to explain that Book and its teachings. The result was the emergence of higher criticism.
Thus, the school of higher criticism began with the basic assumption that the Bible was wrong:
1. Scientifically
2. Historically
3. Textually (it was assumed that there were errors and contradictions within the text itself). Such a book, could not possibly be the work of an omnipotent, omniscient God superintending human authors so that His message would be delivered in an accurate and authoritative manner. A book that is wrong scientifically, historically, and textually can only be a patchwork of fallible men on the same level as any other religious book that has ever been written. Beginning with that premise, therefore, the school of higher criticism immediately dismissed any idea of Divine inspiration or authority in the Scriptures and set out to prove that the Bible was merely a human production.
A. D.1300 – 1500 was the period of renaissance (reawakening of human wisdom or enlightenment). During this middle ages it was a time of the emergence of superstition, the errors of scholastic religious thought, and almost total ignorance even about the universe in general and the world in which they lived.
When Copernicus declared in A.D 1475 that the earth was round and that it revolved around the sun, he was violently opposed by the religious hierarchy of the time – not because of their enlightened Biblical conceptions of the universe, but because of their gross ignorance of both the Bible and Science.
Many people really believe that the ignorance of the religious hierarchy of the Middle Ages concerning the universe resulted from their study of the Scriptures. No wonder they rejected the Scriptures as a reliable source of true information. Copernicus and Galileo taught that the earth is round in shape but they were persecuted by the religious ignorance of the time. The Scripture for example, taught and prove the fact, in Proverbs 8:27 and Isaiah 40:22, God makes reference to the “circle” of the earth, indicating that the earth is round and not flat. In Job God declares that He “hangs the earth upon nothing.” Bible also declares the earth is heliocentric (has the sun as its center).
When Galileo declared the no scientist could number the stars, he was persecuted by the traditional superstitious religious leadership of his time. But God had long since said to Abraham, “Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them” (Gen. 15:5), and to Jeremiah, “The host of heaven cannot be numbered” (Jer. 32:22)
Old Liberalism
At the turn of the century, which man exalted his intellect and rejected the Bible and its Christ, he held high humanistic hopes for the future. Man’s exalted intellect which rejects the authority of the Bible and its historic Christ.
New Liberalism
This is often called, “neo-orthodoxy”, lives in two worlds at the same time. For neo-orthodoxy theologians Christ, and the Bible, the Cross, and the Resurrection have no significance or relationship to the world of fact and reality. This is not a true biblical concept. True biblical concept of faith is rested upon the divine revelation of God.
The skepticism of today has produced the following crisis:
1. A faith in God without a belief in Creation,
2. An incarnation without a virgin birth,
3. A Messiah without miracles,
4. A redemption without blood,
5. A resurrection that has no empty tomb,
6. A Christianity that is devoid of a living Christ,
7. A revelation without a book, and
8. A faith without any reason.
Such are like a man who built his upon the sand: (Matt. 6:26-27).
The Methods of the Critical School
Critics claim that the Bible was indeed unreliable in the following three areas:
1. Scientifically (science)
2. Historically (history)
3. Textually (textual errors)
Critics and the Bible Writers
The critics do not consider the any of the Bible history as the true history, but rather merely religious mythology. Critics question the authorship of every books in both Old and New Testament. For example, Isaiah did not write all of book of Isaiah (I Isaiah, Duetero Isaiah, and Tritero Isaiah). Our question: “If the Biblical books were not written by the men whose signatures they bear, who were these nameless authors?”
F. Clearing Misconception about Christian faith.
1. Misconception #1: “Blind Faith.”
A common accusation sharply aimed at the Christian often goes like this: “You Christians are pitiful! All you have is a ‘blind faith”. This would surely indicate that the accuser seems to think that to become a Christian, one has to commit “intellectual suicide.” It is not true. Because, “one heart cannot rejoice in what our mind rejects” says Josh McDowell.
Our heart and head were created to work and believe together in harmony.
Christ commanded us to “love the Lord God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your ‘mind’ (Mt.22:37). When Jesus Christ and apostles called upon a person to exercise faith, it was not a “blind faith” but rather an “intelligent faith” The apostle Paul said, “I know whom I have believed” (Tim.1:12) and Jesus said in John 8:32. “You shall know (not ignore) the truth and the truth shall make you free”.
The belief of an individual involves “the mind, the emotions, and the will”. The Holy Spirit does not work a blind and ungrounded faith in the heart. Faith in Christianity is based on evidence. It is reasonable faith. Faith in the Christian sense goes beyond reason but not against it. Faith is the assurance of the heart in the adequacy of the evidence. Christianity is a step in to the light. The Christian faith is the faith in Christ. Its values or worth is not in the one believing, but in the One believed – not in the one trusting but in the One trusted.
2. Misconception # 2: “Just be sincere.”
The Christian faith is an objective faith; therefore, it must have an object.
The Christian concept of “saving” faith is a faith that establishes one’s relationship with Christ (the object). If a Muslim would say that, sincerely, “we have more faith in Mohammad than some Christians have faith in Christ” or we are more dedicated and have more faith in Buddha than Christian have in Christ”. Well it may be true, but the Christian is “saved.” It doesn’t matter how much faith you have, but rather who is the object of your faith; that is important from the Christian perspective of faith.
Moreover, the Christian faith is faith in Christ. Its value or worth is not in the one believing, but in the one believed-no in the one trusting, but in the One trusted.
3. Misconception # 3: “The Bible is full of myths.”
Critics sometimes charge, “Events such as the virgin birth, the resurrection and ascension, Jesus’ turning water into wine and walking on water didn’t really happen. They were instead to elevate Jesus to the status of a divine figure, though, if he lived at all, he was no more than a mere mortal.”
There is an obvious difference between the events recorded about Christ in the Bible and the stories conveyed in Greek Mythology. The similar stories, such as resurrections, and others, of Greek Mythology were not applied to real flesh-and–blood individuals, but instead to nonhistorical, fictional mythological characters. But when it comes to Christianity, these events are attached to the historical Jesus of Nazareth whom the New Testament writers knew personally. “The Christ of theology is same as the Jesus of history, and Jesus of history is same as the Jesus of faith”.
a). Eyewitnesses of Jesus.
The writers of the New Testament either wrote as eyewitnesses of the events they described or they recorded eyewitness firsthand accounts of these events. Their personal attachments to the events are clear from statements they made such as the following :( 11 Peter.1:16; 1.John 20:30, 31; Luke 1: 1-3; Acts 1:1-3; 1 coth15:6-8; John20:30, 31; Acts 10:39-42; Acts1:9; Acts 2:22; Acts 26:24-28). These are the same as the firsthand and in disputed evidences for Jesus of history.
b).Critics knew the fact concerning Christ.
The writers of the NT also appealed to the firsthand knowledge of their readers or listeners concerning the facts and evidence about the person of Christ. The writers not only said “Look, we saw this”, or “we heard that”, but they turned the tables around and right in front of their most adverse critics said, “You also know about these things. You saw them; you yourselves know about it.” One had better be careful when he says to his opposition, “You ‘know’ this also”, because if he is not right about the details, his critics will gladly and quickly expose his error. But this is exactly what the apostles did, and their critics could not refute them.
c).The different between myth and history The NT writers certainly knew the difference between myth, legend, and reality. The biblical narratives are not mythological or legendary.
S. Estborn, in ‘Gripped by Christ’, tells about a man named Anath Nath who was committed to Hinduism. Nath studied both the bible and the Shawstras.Two biblical themes in particular deeply engaged his mind: First the reality of Incarnation, and second, the Atonement for human sin. These doctrines he sought to harmonize with Hindu scriptures. He found a parallel to Christ’s self-sacrifice in Prajapati, the Vedic creator-god. He saw, too, a vital difference. Whereas the Vedic Prajapathi is a mythical symbol, which has been applied to several figures, “Jesus of Nazareth is an historical person. “Jesus is the true Prajapati”, he said, ‘the true savoir of the world”.
4. Misconception # 4: “The Jesus of History is Unknowable.”
Some would say like this: “If one were to study historically the life of Jesus of Nazareth, he would find a very remarkable man, not the son of God”. Or according to modern historical approach one would never discover the resurrection.” Then don’t believe in miracles and supernatural.
History is the record to the activities of mankind. Furthermore history is knowledge of the past based on testimony”, The records left by participants or by eyewitnesses are called source materials of historical evidence.
Do you believe that Lincoln lived and was president of the United States India
However we ever met them and has seen personally observed them. The only way one knows is by testimony-physical, verbal, and written.
Jesus is unique from all other human beings of the history.
We have better historical evidence for Jesus than the founder of any other ancient religion. E.g.: Zoroaster who lived about 1000 B, C. But the biography of this man did not written until after the third century. A.D, his biography was written in only 1278 A.D. Buddha, who lied in sixth century B.C. and his biography was written only after Christian Era (after Christ’ Birth). His first biography was written in 1st century (100-A.D).
Mohammad who lived from AD. 570 to 632. His biography was written in more than a full century after his death (135years).
He did not perform any miracles. He was born in the tribe of Kuraishy in Mecca
5. Misconception # 5: Loving Christians should accept other religious views”.
“You Christians seem to think that your way id the only way and that all other views are wrong. Why can’t you accept other people and what they believe as also true?
This misconception assumes that truth is inclusive. It leads to inclusivism of Clark Pinnock, says:” Believe in anyone god, Jesus is the fulfillments of all religions”; and Pluralism of John Hicks: “Anybody can be saved without Jesus Christ”.
Both of these conceptions are against biblical concept of Exclusivism of Gillett and Philips, it says: “salvation is only through Jesus Christ (Act.4:12, John 14:6; 1Tim .2:5). Another misconception is Henotheism, it teaches that, “Belief in one God, without rejecting the existence of the goodness of other religion”.
The rejection of Christ is often not so much of the “mind” problem, but of the “will”; not so much “I can’t”, but “I won’t”. Excuses can cover a multitude of reasons.
Most people reject Christ for one or more of the following reasons:
1. Ignorance: Rom.1:18-23(often self-imposed, Mt.22:29).
2. Pried (John5:40-44)
3. Moral Issues :( John 3:19, 20).
Even if we give sufficient evidence for the truth people don’t believe, in such a situation the problem is not with their “mind” but with their “will”. They know the truth but they don’t “willing” to accept the fact. No “mind” problem but “will” problem.
CHAPTER - II
THE UNIQUENESS OF THE BIBLE
The Bible is only the “Book of books”. The only unique book. The definition for “unique:” (1) “One and only; sing; sole. (2) Different from all others; having no like or equal.” The bible stands alone among all other books. The Bible is only “Unique.” The Bible is unique in its ability to stand up to its critics. A person looking for truth would certainly consider a book that bears these qualifications such as follows:
A. Unique in its continuity
1. Written over about a fifteen-hundred-years span.
2. Written by more than forty authors from every walk of life:
Including kings, Military leaders, peasants, Philosophers, fishermen, tax collectors, poets, Musicians, statesmen, scholars, and shepherds. For example: Moses, a political leader and Judge, trained in the universities of Egypt: David, a king, poet, Musicians, shepherd, and warrior; Amos, a herdsman; Joshua, a military general; Nehemiah a cupbearer to a pagan king; Daniel, a prime minister; Solomon, a king and Philosopher; Luke, a Physician and historian; Peter, a fisherman; Mathew, a tax collector; Paul, a rabbi; and Mark, Peter’s secretary.
3. Written in different places:
By Moses in the wilderness, Jeremiah in a dungeon, Daniel on a hillside and in a palace, Paul inside prison walls, Luke while traveling, John while in exile on the isle of Patmos :
4. Written at different times:
David in times of war and sacrifice; Solomon in times off peace a and prosperity.
5. Written during different moods:
Some writing from the heights of Joy; Others writing from the depths of sorrow and despair; some during times of certainty and conviction; others during days of confusion and doubt.
6. Written on three continents:
a. Asia .
b. Africa .
c. Europe .
7. Written in three Languages:
#. Hebrew: The language of the Israelites and practically all of the OT
#. Aramaic: The “common language” of the Near East until the time of Alexander the Great (6th cent. B.C.through the 4th cent. BC.) E.g.: Daniel 2 through 7 and most of Era 4 through 7 are in Aramaic, and in NT Jesus’ cry on the Cross. “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani,” Which means “My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?” (Mt. 27:46).
#. Greek: The language comprising almost the entire NT. It was also the nternational language spoken at the time of Christ, as English is becoming in the time of modern world.
8. Written in a wide variety of literary styles:
9. The Bible addresses hundreds of controversial and hot subjects e.g., marriage, divorce and remarriage, Homosexuality, adultery obedience to authority, truth-telling and lying, character development, parenting, the nature and revelation of God. Yet from Genesis through Revelation these writers addressed them with an amazing degree of harmony!
10. In spite all of its diversity the Bible presents a single unfolding story: God’s redemption of human beings. Norman Grislier and William Nix, put it this way: “The Paradise lost of Genesis becomes the Paradise regained of Revelation.”
11. The leading character throughout the Bible is the one, true, living God made known thorough Jesus Christ. Consider first the Old Testament. The Law provides the foundation for Christ, the historical books show the preparation for Christ, the poetical books aspire to Christ, and prophetical books display an expectation of Christ. In the Gospels record historical manifestation of Christ, the Acts portrays propagation of Christ, the Epistles interpretation of Christ, and in Revelation the consummation all things in Christ.
12. The Bible has no contradiction on or with any subjects or authors.
The authors of the Bible not only separated from each other by hundreds of years and hundreds of miles, but belonging to the most diverse walks of life. We have already mentioned of their ranks. In contrast the books of the Bible with the competition of western classics called the ‘Great Books of the western world’! The Great books contain selections from more than 450 works by close to100 authors spanning a period of about twenty-five centuries: Homer, Plato, Aristotle, Platinum, Augustine, Aquinas, Dante, Hobbes, Spinoza, Calvin, Rousseau, Shakespeare, Hume, Kant, Darwin
B. Unique its survival.
The noted French infidel Voltaire, who died in 1778, declared that in hundred years from his tine Christianity would be swept from existence and passed into history. Only 50 years after his death, the Geneva Bible Society used Voltaire’s press and house to produce stacks of Bible. According to the United Bible associate’s 1998 scripture distribution report reaches a staggering 585 million-this number only included bible distributed by the U.B.S alone! According to the UBS the bible has been translared into more than 2,200 languages! There are 6,500 world known languages. The Bible was one of the first major books translated. Around 250B.C. the Hebrew O.T. was translated into Greek and given the name Septuagint. No other book in history comes close to comparing with the Bible in its translation activity.
Ø Unique in its continuity
Ø Unique in its circulation
Ø Unique in its translation
Ø Unique in its survival
§ Through time
§ Through persecution
§ Through criticism
Ø Unique in its teachings:
§ Prophecy
§ History
§ Character
Ø Unique in its influence on literature.
Ø Unique in its influence on civilization.
The evidence presented above is clearly indicates that it is uniquely superior to any other book, if you are searching for the truth. The Bible certainly qualifies as this one book.
C. General observation.
1. Possibility of a special divine Revelation.
One cannot deny the possibility of a specific effect (existence of a book from God) without logically first denying the possibility of the existence of a cause sufficient to produce such an effect. Hence, the possibility of the claims of the Bible being true it must be admitted by anyone who believes in God and the denial of this possibility can only be made by those willing to also adopt atheism.
2. The probability of a special divine revelation.
The failure of man throughout history to solve his most urgent problems has culminated in a world –wide crisis of deteriorations. Men commonly attempt to alleviate and correct difficulties related to that in which they have essential interest, and it is therefore highly probable that God would do the same.
3. Why God made a Book.
Experience has proven the untrustworthiness of memory and oral tradition, but has also proven the much higher trustworthiness of written history.
Objection: If God was really vitally concerned with man he would covey to each man a subjective revelation. Answer: We are in no position to determine what made God would use; we can only determine that the mode used would be sufficient to accomplish His purpose.
4. Some terms to know.
i). Orthodox: (from GK orthos, “straight, true” and doxa, “opinion”). Therefore orthodox means, sound in opinion or doctrine; holding the Christian religion as it has been historically preserved and conveyed to our day.
ii). Conservative: One who wishes to conserve the truth of the past.
iii). Evangelical: Holding to and propagating the true evangel, the gospel as set forth in
the Bible.
iv). Fundamentalist: One who believes that he is following both the example of Christ and the command of scripture by (1) exposing as false as those who propagate doctrines, which would overthrow Christianity, and (2)by preaching and teaching the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith.
5. Internal proofs of the divine inspiration of the Bible.
a). Its profound and rational doctrines.
The doctrines of the Bible are not superficial nor may contradictory to what may be learned from natural Theology. But they are deep, having engaged the intellects and efforts of many men renowned for their mental superiority, and they are fully compatible (harmony) with those truths which are supplied by natural Theology.
b). Its doctrine of God.
Personal, Holy, Just, yet loving and gracious.
All- powerful yet tender. Stern, but only toward those who persist in rebellion.
This view is not developed or evolved, but is taught consistently in both Testaments.
c). Its doctrine of man.
Made in the likeness of God for fellowship with God. Not a robot but endowed with true freedom of choice and given the opportunity to choose God as the supreme object and goal of life. A rebel but not beyond still being loved by God and becoming the object of a redemptive plan involving the greatest personal sacrifice to God.
d). Its doctrine of salvation.
Antedating creation itself, the redemptive plan anticipated the need even though the redemptive price was so great.
e). Its relevancy to human needs.
1. It satisfies man’s longings for communion with God.
2. It provides power for man’s conscious weakness.
3. It offered comfort in adversity.
4. It promises the solution of all problems.
5. It satisfies the desire to be right with God.
6. It cancels the fear of death.
f). Inspiration of the Bible.
The Greek word Theopneustos is usually translated “inspiration” N.I.V. translated it as “God-breathed” the Bible is from the breath of God (Tim 3:16). Inspiration can be defined as, “the mysterious process by which God worked through human writers, employing their individual personalities and styles to produce divinely authoritative and inerrant writings”.
g). The Bible claim to divine inspiration.
1. The claims of the Bible writers.
According to William Evans, in the OT. “Such expressions as “The Lord speak,” “the word of the Lord came”, are found 3,808 times. The N.T. likewise abounds with explicit or implied claims to its divine origin. Therefore the Bible writers claims that their productions are not merely human but with divine authority. Furthermore there are (1) references in later OT. writers to the divine authority of earlier OT. writers (e.g. zech.7:12); (2) dozens of references by N.T. writers to the authority of other N.T. to the authority of O.T plus almost 350 quotations from the O.T. in the N.T. and over 600 references to thoughts, persons and events from all parts of the O.T.
Therefore, it is clearly evident, that the entire Bible is bound together by the testimony of its writers, and it is their clear and oft-repeated claim that they are writing by divine command and hence under divine supervision.
6. External proofs of the divine inspiration of the Bible.
(1) Its influence on individuals.
Notable conversions, such as Paul’s, have been repeated many times thought the history of Christianity. The drastic change in these lives has been recorded in detail and is well attested as to their truthfulness.
No such results have ever followed in the lives of those who have submitted whole heartedly to infidelity and rationalism, but often the opposite has resulted.
(2) Its influence on communities:
The best civilization goes with the Bible. The more widely its influence, the more essential and beneficial the changes wrought. Examples: Education, institutions, elevation of women.
(3) The Bible canon.
The question concerning how it was decided which books would become part of the Bible is the question of canonicity. Canon means “standard”, as applied to Scripture it means, “An officially accepted list of books”. The third-century Church father origin used the word canon to measure and evaluates the scripture.
The Church did not create the canon; it did not determine which books would be called scripture, the inspired word of God. Instead, the church recognized, or discovered, which books had been inspired. The chief test for N.T. canonicity was “apostolicity.”
A quotation from Justin Martyr (A.D.10-165, “And on the day called Sunday there is a gathering together to one place for all those who live in cities or in the country and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits, Then when the leader has ceased the president presents admonition and invitation to the imitation of these good things”.
We have a total number of 24,970 manuscripts for N.T. alone in different languages and a numerous 86,489 quotations of church fathers.
These quotations are found in the British Museum
The quotations are so numerous and widespread that if no manuscripts of the N.T. were extant, the N.T.could be reproduced from the writings or quotations of the early Church fathers alone.
# The history of the formation of the N.T. canon begins with the writings of the N.T. itself, as witness Peter’s recognition of Paul’s writings as Scripture (2 Peter. 3:16) and Paul’s recognition of Luke’s gospel as scripture (1 Tim. 5:18; Lk.10:7)
# The external testimony to the N.T. canon begins as soon as the N .t. was completed of the end of the first century, at which time clement of Rome
The basic argument which sustains the conviction that we have in our day those books which were produced by the accredited followers of Christ id the same argument used in determining the geniuses of other books coming from past age.
For example we have a famous poem entitled Paradise lost, which bears the name of Milton. The problem is how do we know that it was composed in his day and by him? What would be the reasoning line? For the following reasons:
(1)There is an unbroken chain of testimony reaching back from our time to his time, crediting him with the poem. (2) Those who lived in his day agree that he wrote it. (3) The language of the poem reflects the usage and circumstances of his day. (4) Although Milton had many enemies who would have been happy to have called in question his authorship of this poem which brought to Milton
It is not the Christian’s obligation to prove the historical accuracy of the Bible; it is the critic’s obligation to disprove the historical accuracy of the bible, and he cannot do this except by proving the existence of historical error in the Bible, a task which has never yet been accomplished.
Other books claim divine inspiration, such as the Koran, the book of Mormon, and parts of the (Hindu) Veda. But none of those books contains predictive prophecy-Norman Geisler &William Nix.
CHAPTER- III
JESUS, A MAN OF HISTORY
In His day he was known as Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus is the most extraordinary person who ever lived kin the history. Jesus made claims unequalled by any other man who has ever received a substantial following including person of acknowledge intellectual achievement and honest. Sir Isaac Newton the most brilliant scientist who ever lived; Blasé Pascal the world’s greatest Philosophers, William Gladstone, Louis Pasteur, and multiplied thousands of brilliants scholars, scientists, and authors, as well as millions of ordinary people never tried to compare themselves with Jesus instead, they all became an or dent believers in and follower of the Nazarene. Before summarizing we will look first of all at lead four non- Christian writings of very early times, and quotations of their actual word are to be examined for the historical evidence of Jesus Christ.
A. Evidence from Non- Christian Writings:
1. Cornelius Tacitus: One of the greatest of Latin historians wrote a history of the Roman Emperors of the Julian line from Tiberius to Nero (reign of Nero, A.D .54-68). In A.D. 64Rome was burned by Nero himself. Tacitus quotation ass follows: “to get rid of this rumor, Nero substituted as culprits, and punished with the utmost refinement of cruelty, a class of men hated for their abominations, which are commonly called Christians. Christ us, from whom they got their name, was executed at the hands of the procurator Pontius palate in rein of Tiberius”.
In this brief quotation we have outside evidence from a noted historian that Jesus lived, that it was executed under Pontius Pilate at a definite time, and that ire was the founder of a religious community.
2. Thallus: A non- Christian, whose Christian, histories were written in the middle of the first century. Julius Africanus, a Christian writer of the early 3 century, speaking of the darkness over all the land at the time of the crucifixion, makes direct reference to the work of Thallus,, when he says: “ Thallus, in the third book of his histories, explains away this darkness an clips of the sun-unreasonably, as it seems to me”.
3. Suetonius: a Roman historian, who wrote: “Since the Jews were continually making disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he (Claudius) expelled them from Rome
4. Pliny the Younger: Roman governor of Bithynia in Asia minor, who sent an important document of the Emperor Trajan in A.D.112 these Christians, he said, “were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang a hymn to Christ as to a god, and bound themselves by a Sacramento (Latin word for “oath”) no9t to commit any wicket deed.”
B. Two alternatives in connection with historicity of Christ. If the person of Christ did not exist in the history, then one of the following alternatives must be true:
(1) He invented himself, either
a). Knowingly or
b). Unknowingly.
(2). He was invented by the writers, either
a). Knowingly, or
b). Unknowingly.
We will now examine these alternatives, and if it can be shown that they all are contrary to the evidence, then they must be judged invalid.
(1). Christ invented this portrait.
1. Knowingly: This would make Christ a liar, but is opposed by two undisputed facts.
a). Lack of ability: A liar would be incapable of creating such a unequal honest, upright person, just as a colorblind person would be incapable of creating a masterpiece.
b). Lack of motive: Frauds are perpetrated in the hope of gain, but the opposition suffered by Christ made hope of gain impossible
2. Unknowingly:
This would make Christ a lunatic, but a lunatic would lack ability to create a person admired by millions of sane people.
(2). The writers invented this portrait.
.
a). Knowingly:
This would make the writers liars, but (as above) the is kid opposed by two facts.
* Lack of ability: Liars would be incapable of creating such etc.
* Lack of motive: Frauds are perpetrated in the hope of gain, but the opposition suffered by the writers made hope of gain impossible.
b).Unknowingly: This makes the writers lunatics, but lunatics would lack ability to create a person admired by millions of sane people.
Note: Many well-known skeptics have nevertheless paid high tributes to Jesus Christ, even though they inconsistently rejected Christianity. For example: Renan wrote: “Jesus is in every respect unique, and there is nothing to be compared with Him”. Ingersoll Scoffed at Christianity, and attempted to expose the mistakes of Moses. But of Christ he said; “If Christ were living today, I should delight to give him homage”, similar tributes have been found in the writings of J. S Mill, Straus, Goethe, Matthew Arnold, Lecky, Theodore Parker etc.
A. The uniqueness of Jesus Christ.
1. Unique in His life and teaching.
2. Unique in His impact or influence.
3. Unique in His personal life.
4. Unique in His titles give to him.
No person other than Jesus has been addressed by the following titles, because no other person qualifies for them. Some of these titles were given to him by angels, other by disciples or followers or even by Hebrew Prophets. Jesus cannot be compared with any other human being because He is unique. No ‘one’ titles that are given bellow is fully describes Him:
The Almighty
The Mighty God
The Word
My Lord and My God
The Grate God
Our Savior Jesus Christ
Wonderful
Counselor
The Father of Eternity
The Prince of Peace
Alpha and Omega
First and Last
God blessed forever
The Christ
The Son of God
Jehovah
The beginning and the end
The Lord
Savior
The Holy One
Lord of All
Emmanuel
The Way, The truth, and The Life
King of Kings
Lord of Lords
How marvelous is Jesus Christ in His Uniqueness!!!. No wonder He is the only true God.
CHAPTER –IV
THE RELIABILITY OF CHRIST’S RESURRACTION
The resurrection of Christ is an event in history where in God acted in a definite times space dimension. The meaning of the resurrection is a theological matter, but the fact of the resurrection is a historical matter. The surjection of Christ is the foundation of Apostolic Christianity. As a historic fact, it has been his resurrection that has enabled men to believe in his resurrection official exaltation over humanity.
A. Historical Evidence.
1. The resurrection of Christ was an event in history. Wilbur Smith says: “As a vast mass of literature tells us, this person, Jesus, was living person, amen among men whatever else he was and the disciples who went out to preach the risen Lord were men, men who ate, rank, slept, suffered, worked, died. What is their “doctrinal” about this? This is a historical problem. Ignatius (A.D.50-115); Bishop of Antioch, a native of Syria
2. The evidence for the empty Tomb.
All the famous tombs in the world are famous for the bodies they contain, whereas the tomb of Jesus id the only tomb in the world that is famous for what it does not contain. It was empty on that first Easter morning and it is so still. (Mtt.28:6) it was attested by both Jesus friends and his enemies; it was mentioned by all four Gospel critters; example Matthew wrote: (Matt.27:57-61)
(a) Eye witnesses
i). The Angel ((Matt28:6)
ii). Mary Magdalene (John20:15)
iii).Peter and John (John20:2-8)
iv) Testimony of Jesus’ Enemies (Matt.28:13-15).
The Jewish leaders were eager to disprove the resurrection but could’\not because they didn’t have the body of Jesus! The tomb of Jesus’ was empty because it was empty. A challenge to the critics is this if Jesus didn’t risen from the dead you critics should disprove the fact of resurrection by producing Jesus’ body! No one can deny the historicity of the empty tomb.
(b). The stone covered over Jesus’ tomb.
According to Jews they called it as the stone golel! T.J. Thorburn mentioned that this stone was used “as a protection against both men and beast”. In a fourth century manuscript (Codex Bazae in the Cambridge
(c). The seal on the stone.
A. T. Robertson, Greek scholar of the N.T. says about the method of sealing the stone at Jests tomb was: “probably by a cord stretched across the stone and sealed at each end as in Dan.6:17. The sealing was done in the presence of the Roman guards who were left in charge to protect this stamp of Roman authority and power.
They did their best to prevent theft and the resurrection, but they over reached themselves and provided additional witness to the fact of the empty tomb and the resurrection of Jesus. The guard, were Roman soldiers, “custodian, as borrowed from the Latin, indicating Roman soldiers (Mt.28:14).
3. Jews concept of physical resurrection.
The Jews had a physical concept of resurrection. After the flesh rotted away, the Jews would gather the bones of their dead ones and put them in boxes to be preserved until the resurrection at the end of the world; in light of this, it would have been simply a contradiction of terms for an early Jew to day that some one was raised from the death but his body still was left in the Tomb. So when this early Christian creed-says Jesus buried and then rose of the third day, it’s saying implicitly but quite clearly empty tomb was left behind.
4. The enemies of Christ gave refutation of the resurrection.
The enemies of Christ were silent. In Acts 2. Luke records Peter’s sermon of the day of Pentecost. There was no refutation given by the Jews to his bold proclamation of Christ’s resurrection. Why? Because the evidence of the empty tomb was there for anyone of examine if they wanted to disclaim it.
5. Established historical fact.
The empty tomb, the silent testimony to the resurrection of Christ, has never been refuted. The Romans and Jews could not produce Christ body or explain where it went The empty bomb is not the product of a naïve apologetic spirit aspirin not content with the evidence for the resurrection contained in the fact that the Lord had appeared to his own and had quickened them unto new victorious life, it is an original, independent and unmotivated part of the apostolic testimony.
B. The Post Resurrection appearances of Christ.
1. To Mary Magdalene: Mark 16:9; John: 20:14.
2. To women returning from the tomb: Mat. 28:9, 10.
3. To Peter later in the day: Luke 24:34; 1 Cor. 15:5.
4. To the Emmaus disciples: Luke 24:13-33.
5. To the apostles without Thomas: Lk.24:36-43; Jn. 20:19-24.
6. To the apostles with Thomas present: Jn. 20:-26-29.
7. To the seven by the lake of Tiberius
8. To a multitude of 500-plus believers on a Galilean mountain: 1 Cor 15:6.
9. To James: 1Cor:15:7.
10. To the eleven: Mat .28:16-20; Lk. 24:33-52; Acts. 1:3-12.
11. At the ascension: Acts 1:3-6.
12. To Paul: Acts 9:3-6. 1. Cor 15:8.
13. To Stephen: Acts 7:55.
14. To Paul in the Temple
15. To John on Patmos : Rev. 1:10-19.
C. The remarkable change in the disciple’s lives.
The transformed lives of the disciples of Jesus Christ apostle is the greatest evidence of all for the resurrection apostle.
(a) James the half-brother Jesus, describes himself as “ a bondservant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ” (James1:1)
The only explanation for this change in his life is that which Paul gives: “After that he (Jesus) was seen by Apostle James” (1Cor. 15:7).
(b) Thomas: The skepticism of Thomas comes out in the belief that the death of Jesus would be the death of his kingdom. He said “Let us go, that we may die with him”. He thought on hope for Christ’s resurrection.
However, Jesus made himself known to Thomas. The result was Thomas exclaimed: “My lord and my God” (John 20:28). He had changed his perspective on Jesus after seeing is lord raised from the tomb. He went on to die a martyr’s death.
D. The conversion of Paul.
(1) Its importance:
If Paul’s conversion is true, than Christianity is true.
(2) Its extreme improbability
(a). He was a Pharisee. The Pharisees were the strictest of Jews in seeking to maintain what they conceived to be the historic faith of the O.T. and this sect had been the bitterest opponent of Christ.
(b). He was a completely and violently dedicated enemy of Christianity.
He had dedicated himself to the extermination of Christian faith; and the claim by a Jew to be God incarnate.
(3). Its reality:
The complete and radical ethical transformation of Paul’s innermost being is clearly evidenced by his subsequent conduct. A complete dedication of Paul to the propagation of that which he once sought to destroy is very much emphatic. When those Jews who continually persecuted him we find that he was gladly bearing this persecution without any trace of his former violent disposition.
Finally, we have in the extensive writings of Paul a complete exposition of the essentials of the Christian faith, together with those evidences by which it was supported in his day; adequate proof that Paul’s conversion experience was fully supported in his rational faculties by subsequent reconsideration and reflection in t6he light of all the facts.
We conclude, them, that the conversion of Paul, took place; its reality fully supported by his changed conduct and written explanation of the grounds for his new way of life are the indisputable evidence for Christ’s resurrection and the fact of Christianity.
False Views concerning the
Resurrection
1. Soon (Survival) Theory
According to this view, Jesus did not
die on the cross, he merely lapsed into unconsciousness and in such a low state
of physical activity that he was thought to be dead by ignorant disciples. In
the cool of the tomb he revived. Then made his way out appeared to his
disciples, and was proclaimed to be risen from the dead. And in more recent
years, Hugh Schoufield presented a modified form of the theory, in that he
says, Jesus’ cry, “I thirst” was signal for someone to pass him a “sponge
containing a drug” which induced this cataleptic state.
Problem with this theory
This theory presents both moral and physical
problems. The moral difficulty is that it makes Jesus a deceiver and charlatan.
The physical difficulty is that, the description of the crucifixion, and
especially the spear thrust into Jesus side it is difficult to believe that
anyone could have a survived experience. How could Jesus survive without
medical care? How could he, in his weakened condition, remove the stone from
the tomb? Even supposing all of this were possible, would a person in this
condition be able to inspire the disciples to believe in his resurrection and
go out to preach it? Why did the disciples not treat him as a patient rather
than as the risen Lord? The NT bears clear witness to Christ’s death, John
19:33-34; Mk. 15: 44-47. This would mean that the disciples bore false witness
when they proclaim God raised him from the dead. How could they have suffered
and died for a hoax? Christ died on the Cross according to the judgment of the
soldiers, Joseph and Nicodemus.
2. Wrong Tomb Theory.
This theory was developed
by Krisopp Lake. According to this theory the, the women made a
mistake and went to the wrong tomb which was empty because there were number of
similar tombs in the burial area. Realizing the women’s mistake, a young man at
the site said to them, “You are seeking; He is not here.” The tomb which the
women found was empty in which Jesus had been buried (Mk. 16:6).
Problem with this theory:
This has both psychological and moral
problems in that it is difficult to see how the women could have made this
mistake when they had seen the body of Jesus being laid in its tomb only three
days before (Mt. 27:61; Mk. 15:47; Lk. 23:25). They had carefully made note of
the tomb, so that they would be able to return (Lk.23:55).
Finally, Lake is very selective in his quotation of the “young man”
at the tomb, he cites the words, “He is not here”, while passing over, “He has
risen.”
3. Theft Theory.
It was propounded by the Jews within the NT period
itself. It proposed by Celsus in late second century and refuted by Origen and
Eusebius the Church historian. According to this theory, the disciples stole
the body from the tomb and hid it, then proclaimed that Jesus was raised.
Another form of this theory suggests that the body of Jesus was stolen by Jews.
Problem with this theory:
This theory has both moral and physical
problems: Moral, the disciples were persons of such moral character that the
deliberate promulgation of a hoax seems unlike. Further, it seems incredible
that, the disciples who had been frightened extremely at the capture of Jesus
would now preach emphatically what they knew to be lie, even give their lives.
Physical, the difficulties of moving the stone and removing the body so quietly
that the sleeping guards were not awakened. Indeed those professional soldiers would
all fall asleep on such an important duty, where their jobs and even their
lives depended upon their keeping of Jesus body from thief seems incredible.
Why did the Jews not produce the body of Jesus to disprove the testimony and
claims of the disciples that God had raised Him from the dead
4. Hallucination (subjective vision) Theory.
An emphatic advocate of this theory was
Johannes Weiss. According to this view, the disciples did not actually see a
risen Christ; but rather out of their unfulfilled hope and disappointment, they
had a vision of a Jesus.
Problem with this theory:
There are several psychological problems to
this theory. Disciple’s vision of Jesus is contrary to what we today know of
hallucinations, the facts that the phenomenon was experienced by more than one
person at a time (1Cor. 15:1-6), and in one case by as many as five hundred, in
varied settings, over period of forty days.
5. Telegram (objective vision) Theory
This theory says that Jesus did not make a
bodily appearance to his disciples; rather, He sent them a visual
representation of Himself as a message. Michael Perry for example, holds that
Jesus experienced a spiritual resurrection and then sent a telepathy vision
back to the disciples. This theory holds a spiritual resurrection not physical
resurrection.
Problem with this theory:
The major problem here is a moral problem.
Jesus and God in effect deceived the disciples to deceive themselves. This
theory is contradict to the gospel accounts (Mt. 28:9, John 20:17, 27).
B. The negative value of these
theories
None of these theories has ever been met with
general acceptance, even among radical critics and rationalist. Those who deny
the reality of Christ’s resurrection contradict among themselves as to what
theory most can be used to escape from the evidence presented by the NT. If
anyone denies the historical reality of the resurrection of Jesus, then first
of all he has to disprove the New Testament records about Christ are
unhistorical. This is impossible.
Therefore, we are forced to conclude that the
most reasonable explanation is that Jesus did indeed come back to life again in
a bodily resurrection. The resurrection of Christ is an event in history
wherein God acted in a definite time space dimension. The New Testament
documents are the greatest historical value for the resurrection of Jesus
Christ.
Bibliology
Bibliology
1. Josh McDowell, The New Evidence that Demands A Verdict,
Secunderabad: OM- Authentic Books, 1999.
2. Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ, Michigan: Zondervan
Grand Rapids, 1998.
3. Francis
J. Beckwith, To Everyone An Answer,
Illinois: Inter Varsity Press, 2004.
4. Bill Shade, Christian Evidences:
World Wide Bible Institutes, South Gibson: Grace and Truth Evangelistic
Association, 1978.
No comments:
Post a Comment