United with Christ
Session 5
Last night, I was reading about some ex-Muslims who smuggle NTs into Saudi Arabia. They risk their lives to get God’s Word to people. They know how valuable it is! Would to God we would also appreciate it as they do!
“Why would the apostles lie? ...If they lied, what was their motive, what did they get out of it? What they got out of it was misunderstanding, rejection, persecution, torture, and martyrdom. Hardly a list of perks!” Peter Kreeft
We’ve seen powerful evidence that the major New Testament documents were written by eyewitnesses and their contemporaries within 15 to 40 years of the death of Jesus. Add to that the confirmation of non-Christian sources and archeology, and we know beyond a reasonable doubt that the New Testament is based on historical fact. But how do we know the authors did not exaggerate or embellish what they say they saw? There are at least ten reasons we can be confident that the New Testament writers did not play fast and loose with the facts:
- The New Testament Writers Included Embarrassing Details About Themselves. (pg. 276)
The tendency of most authors is to leave out of their writings anything embarrassing about themselves. There is a list of things which really make the NT authors look bad on page 276. Dim-witted, failing to understand Jesus time after time. Uncaring, falling asleep when Jesus really needed them, not trying to give Him a proper burial, etc. They are often rebuked, and Peter is even called “Satan.” Paul rebukes Peter for being a hypocrite. They were cowards, Peter denied the Lord 3 times, the others took off or hid. They are doubters, even doubting the Resurrection after seeing Jesus. They are more fearful than the women in their group. No one who was making up a story like this would ever admit to all these negative things about themselves unless they had to because it was true!
- The New Testament Writers Included Embarrassing Details and Difficult Sayings Of Jesus. (pg. 277,
278)
Many details seem to show Jesus in a bad light. For example: He is considered out of his mind, is not believed by His own brothers, is thought to be a deceiver, is deserted by many of His followers, turns off “Jews who had believed in Him,” to the point they want to stone Him, is called a drunkard, demon-possessed, a madman, has His feet wiped with the hair of a prostitute, is crucified by the Jews and Romans, despite the fact that “anyone who is hung on a tree is under God’s curse.”
There are also many very difficult sayings: The Father is greater than I, seems to incorrectly predict He’s coming back within a generation, says no one knows the day or hour that will happen, seems to deny His deity, is seen cursing a fig tree for not having figs when it wasn’t even the right season for them, seems unable to do miracles in His hometown.
They also have Him saying it’s necessary to eat His flesh and drink His blood to have life. Why have the hero of their story say such things if you’re trying to get people to accept and believe in Him? Why present a Messiah who is a weak, sacrificial lamb?
- The New Testament Writers Left In Demanding Sayings of Jesus. (pg. 279)
If the NT writers were making up a story, they sure could have made one up that was easier for them to follow. The Sermon on the Mount is so difficult as to seem impossible! Looking at a woman lustfully is committing adultery, divorce is adultery, turn the other cheek, give to him who asks of you, love your enemies, be perfect, don’t store up treasures for yourself on earth, don’t judge or you’ll be judged. These are all difficult or impossible! Writing them goes against the writers own best interests.
If thinking about a sin is sinful, then everyone – including the NT writers, is guilty! Page 280 shows how all of the above are contrary to our natural interests and ways. No one would impose such commands upon themselves voluntarily! Only a perfect person could live up to them. Hmmm, maybe that’s the point?!
- The New Testament Writers Carefully Distinguished Jesus’ Sayings From Their Own.
Even though they didn't use quotation marks in those days, they wrote in such a way that it’s pretty easy to distinguish what Jesus said from what others said. This is important, because it would have been easy for them to insert words, change words, etc., in order to avoid controversies, make points, clear up issues that developed later on in the history of the Church. But they simply did not do any such thing. They stayed true to what Jesus really said, even though there could’ve been real temptation not to. There’s no reason for them to do such a thing unless what they wrote was really true and inspired by God.
- The New Testament Writers Include Events Related To the Resurrection That They Would Not Have
Invented.
The burial of Jesus in Joseph of Arimathea's tomb puts a member of the Sanhedrin in a good light. That’s strange, since most of them were totally contrary to Jesus and His followers. Having women, and even a demon-possessed woman of ill-repute be the first witnesses of the resurrection is very contrary to all logic, since women were not esteemed in ancient times, not thought to be reliable, and their testimony wasn’t even accepted in court! The NT writers would never have used them if it were not true they were the first witnesses! Many priests were converted in the early days (Acts 6:7), and many Pharisees were as well (Acts 15:5). Luke would never have mentioned this if it weren’t true, because it would be easy to verify or refute. Since Pharisees were among the worst opponents of Christianity, they would’ve come forward to refute Luke’s story of some of them becoming believers if it weren’t true. Since all the gospels mention Joseph of Arimathea, if his part in the story weren’t true, it would mean none of the Gospels are true. The explanation of the Jews for the resurrection was widely known, according to Matthew (28:11-15). If that weren’t true, Matthew would’ve been giving the Jews an easy way to refute him by including it. But he did include it, so it must be true.
- The New Testament Writers Include More Than Thirty Historically Confirmed People In Their
Writings.
We’ve already discussed this. But if these people had not truly been involved in the story of the Gospel and Acts, it would’ve been really foolish to include their names, because they were people of power and influence. As such, they would have become angry and indignant about their names being used, and if their participation were not true, it would easily have been refuted.
- The New Testament Writers Include Divergent Details.
If witnesses tell their story with exactly the same words, it’s evidence of collusion on their parts. It would indicate they’d gotten together beforehand to decide on what to say. Divergent details indicate their stories are independent of each other, and thus, more believable. If the authors of the NT were making up the story, wouldn’t they have gotten together to make sure they were all saying exactly the same thing, with no variation? The fact that they didn’t is strong evidence that what they wrote was true. The amount of uniformity and divergence in the Synoptics seems to be just right. Not too much agreement to show collusion, but not too much divergence to make them contradictory. Just the right amount to show they’re genuine eyewitness accounts, yet independently written. Simon Greenleaf, who “wrote the book” on what constitutes legal evidence, says the four Gospels, “would have been received in evidence in any court of justice without the slightest hesitation.” (qtd. on page 286)
- The New Testament Writers Challenge Their Readers To Check Out Verifiable Facts, Even Facts
About Miracles.
Luke told Theophilus his account was accurate (Lu. 1:1-4). Peter said they were eyewitnesses (2 Pet. 1:16). Paul talked boldly to Festus and Agrippa about the resurrection (Acts 26) and about there being over 500 witnesses to the resurrected Christ (1 Cor. 15). But Paul also reminded the Corinthians that he had worked signs and miracles among them to prove he really was an apostle (2 Cor. 12:12). If he really hadn’t done such miracles, writing such a thing would have completely destroyed his credibility with them.
- The New Testament Writers Describe Miracles Like Other Historical Events: With Simple,
Unembellished Accounts.
A supposed gospel account that was written some 100 years after Jesus’ death and resurrection was very embellished and spectacular. That’s what happens with such accounts written long after the events they describe. But the Gospel accounts aren’t like that. They’re simple and unadorned. They also don’t have any theological “additions” whereby the authors might have tried to tell the meaning of the resurrection or given some sort of application to it. They just told the bare facts, which shows remarkable restraint and is evidence they wrote the truth and that’s all they were concerned with. It was history, not theology they wrote.
- The New Testament Writers Abandoned Their Long-Held Sacred Beliefs and Practices, Adopted
New Ones, and Did Not Deny Their Testimony Under Persecution Or Threat Of Death.
The early followers of Jesus were all dyed-in-the-wool Jews with customs they’d followed “religiously” for over 1500 years, yet thousands of them gave up these customs and changed them overnight when Jesus rose from the dead. The customs we’re talking about here were: the animal sacrifice system, the binding supremacy of the Mosaic Law, strict monotheism, the Sabbath, and belief in a conquering Messiah. There’s a great quote from J. P. Moreland on page 291 that shows how drastic and sweeping these changes were for them. They also took on new customs right away, such as worshipping on Sunday instead of Saturday, baptism as the sign of the New Covenant, and Communion instead of Passover. This latter custom is especially strange and inexplicable. Why would they make up a practice where they symbolically eat the flesh and drink the blood of Jesus?!
The writers of the NT also endured persecution with great suffering and even martyrdom for their new beliefs. Why would they do such a thing, if the resurrection never happened and Jesus wasn’t their new Lord? Ten of the 12 apostles died for their faith, and John was exiled to Patmos. (Judas hanged himself). So many others over the centuries have died for their faith in Christ. Why endure such things if it were all a made-up story?
Chuck Colson’s story is told on pages 292, 293, recounting the way the Watergate conspirators quickly caved and confessed when their careers were in danger. How much more would the early believers have caved in the face of terrible brutality and death if the Gospel were made up? I like Antonin Scalia’s quote on page 293 especially! “Everything from Easter morning to the Ascension had to be made up by the groveling enthusiasts as part of their plan to get themselves martyred!”
What About Muslim Martyrs?
There are lots of people who are sincere and sincerely willing, even to die for what they believe. Suicide bombers, kamikaze pilots, or suicidal cult followers. However, Christian martyrs had more than sincerity. They had evidence. They were eyewitnesses of the resurrected Christ. Current Muslim martyrs don’t have such evidence, and neither did the contemporaries of Muhammad. Christianity spread, even when the Church was horribly persecuted and people were put to death for it. Islam spread because people were put to death if they didn’t accept it! The spread of Christianity is thus contrary to all logic and reason! It’s supernatural and that’s the only explanation for it. Even those who died years after the miraculous events were willing to die because of the strong evidence for Christ that had changed their lives and outlooks.
What’s the point today? The New Testament is totally reliable!
The only reason the apostles wrote what they did is because it was true. The NT is a reliable historical record of what God has done for this world through His Son.
Because of this, the authors say, “we don’t have enough faith to be skeptics concerning the New Testament.” (pg. 297)
What we need to grab hold of is that the Bible is the Word of God, and it’s 100% reliable. That means God so loved the world, He sent His only Son to die for our sins and save us. He is the only way to be right with God. He will come back and judge all mankind. We need to repent and receive Christ, and we need to live according to His Word. We can confidently share it with others. It’s the only way to heaven, and it’s the best way to live your life on earth!