"CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS"
Evidence For The Early Existence Of The New Testament
In our last lesson we looked at the evidence found in internal and historical evidence for the early existence of the New Testament and why this is crucial. In continuing this lesson we will be looking at the evidence for the early existence of the New Testament in the papyri fragments.
CHESTER BEATTY BIBLICAL PAPYRI (dated 200-250 A.D.)
Made public in 1931, contains the Gospels, Acts, Paul's Epistles, and Revelation
PAYPRUS BODMER II (dated 200 A.D.)
Discovery announced in 1956 contains fourteen chapters of John, and portions of the last seven chapters
EARLY CHRISTIAN PAPYRI (dated 150 A.D.)
Made public in 1935, written by someone who had the four gospels before him and knew them well
JOHN RYLANDS MSS (dated 130 A.D.)
This is oldest fragment of the NT "Because of its early date and location (EGYPT), some distance from the traditional place of composition (ASIA MINOR), this portion of the gospel of John tends to confirm the traditional date of the composition of the gospel."
GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE BIBLE, Geisler & Nix
Looking at the evidence for the early existence of the New Testament we find patristic writings.
EPISTLE OF POLYCARP TO THE PHILIPPIANS (dated 120 A.D.)
A personal acquaintance of John, the apostle, he quotes from the Synoptic Gospels, Acts, Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and 1 John
LETTERS OF IGNATIUS (dated 115 A.D.)
Written to several churches in Asia Minor, he quotes from Matthew, John, Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus
EPISTLE OF CLEMENT TO THE CORINTHIANS (dated 95 A.D.)
This letter was written to encourage the church to respect their elders, he quotes from the Synoptic Gospels, Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, Ephesians, Titus, Hebrews, and 1 Peter
The implications of this evidence shows that the New Testament was in existence and well known by the end of the First Century A.D. As stated by Nelson Glueck, former president of the Jewish Theological Seminary in the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati, and renowned Jewish archaeologist: "In my opinion, every book of the New Testament was written between the forties and eighties of the First Century A.D."
"We can already say emphatically that there is no longer any solid basis for dating any book of the New Testament after 80 A.D." - W. F. Albright, biblical archaeologist.
Thus the New Testament passes the "Acid Test" for the authenticity of "any" document of antiquity. It was written in the same generation in which the events took place. It was circulated among the very people about whom these documents spoke while they were still alive to deny them! For example, remember Clifford Irving and his "biography" of Howard Hughes? It was quickly denounced as a fraud by those who knew best and soon lost its credibility. The fact that the first generation preserved the New Testament for posterity shows their regard for the genuineness of its contents.
But the "ACID TEST" is only the FIRST test any historical document must pass. So what if it was written early? How do we know that what we read today is an accurate representation of the original "autographs" (the manuscripts actually penned by the authors)? How can we be sure that in the passing of time the content of the original did not become corrupted through mistakes in copying? These questions shall be examined in the next study...
The Executable Outlines Series, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2000
Saturday, April 23, 2005
Saturday, April 16, 2005
Apologetics - IV
"CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS"
Evidence For The Early Existence Of The New Testament
The New Testament presents itself as a historical record of events that supposedly occurred during the First Century A.D. How reliable is it? How do we determine the reliability of any ancient document that professes to record events of history? To establish the reliability of ANY historical document, one of the first questions to be raised is:
"How soon after the events took place were they recorded?" Applied to the New Testament, this involves trying to determine what evidence there is for THE EARLY EXISTENCE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT...
Why is evidence for the early existence of the New Testament crucial? If some event is recorded long after it occurred it is not likely to have been written by "eyewitnesses". It is not likely to have been written when "other eyewitnesses" were around to confirm or dispute its accuracy. It’s credibility would be weakened; for example, which would be the more credible source for information about an event that occurred during The Civil War Between The States. A present day writer depending totally upon second-hand sources? Or diaries and letters written by eyewitnesses of the event? Of course, it would be necessary to show that such diaries and letters were authentic and where possible shown to be accurate.
During the last Century, some scholars asserted that the Gospels and the Book of Acts did not exist before 130 A.D. This would mean the Gospels and Acts were not written by eyewitnesses! Rather, it was written by frauds who misrepresented themselves as eyewitnesses! For the author of Acts claims to have been present during some of the events described in that book - cf. "we" in Ac 16:11-12 "Setting sail therefore from Troas, we made a straight course to Samothrace, and the day following to Neapolis; and from thence to Philippi, which is a city of Macedonia, the first of the district, a Roman colony: and we were in this city tarrying certain days." The author of the Second Epistle Of Peter claims to have been an eyewitness of the Transfiguration - 2 Pe 1:16-18 "For we did not follow cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received from God the Father honor and glory, when there was borne such a voice to him by the Majestic Glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased: and this voice we ourselves heard borne out of heaven, when we were with him in the holy mount."
Written by eyewitnesses and others who lived during those times, or a book written by liars in a effort to deceive...these are the only choices we have! This is why it is important to establish the early existence of the New Testament! Looking at the evidence for the early existence of the New Testament we find internal evidence at the ending of the Book of Acts. The book ends abruptly with Paul in prison, awaiting trial - Ac 28:30-31 "And he abode two whole years in his own hired dwelling, and received all that went in unto him, preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching the things concerning the Lord Jesus Christ with all boldness, none forbidding him."
A plausible explanation is that Luke wrote ACTS during this time, before Paul finally appeared before Nero. This would be about 62-63 A.D., meaning that ACTS and LUKE (which came first - cf. Ac 1:1 with Lk 1:1-4) were written within thirty years of the ministry and death of Jesus. There is no mention of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Matthew, Mark and Luke record Jesus' prophecy that the temple and city would be destroyed within that generation - e.g., Mk 13:1-4 "And as he went forth out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Teacher, behold, what manner of stones and what manner of buildings! And Jesus said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left here one stone upon another, which shall not be thrown down. And as he sat on the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when these things are all about to be accomplished?", 14 "But when ye see the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not (let him that readeth understand), then let them that are in Judaea flee unto the mountains:", 30 "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, until all these things be accomplished."; Lk 21:5-9 "And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly stones and offerings, ehe said, As for these things which ye behold, the days will come, in which there shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. And they asked him, saying, Teacher, when therefore shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when these things are about to come to pass? And he said, Take heed that ye be not led astray: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am he; and, The time is at hand: go ye not after them. And when ye shall hear of wars and tumults, be not terrified: for these things must needs come to pass first; but the end is not immediately.", 20-24 "But when ye see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that her desolation is at hand. Then let them that are in Judaea flee unto the mountains; and let them that are in the midst of her depart out; and let not them that are in the country enter therein. For these are days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. Woe unto them that are with child and to them that give suck in those days! for there shall be great distress upon the land, and wrath unto this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led captive into all the nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.", 32 "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all things be accomplished."
History records that in 70 A.D. Jerusalem with its temple was destroyed, exactly as Jesus foretold! Yet not a single book of the New Testament refers to this event as having happened! Such would be very unlikely if they had been written after 70 A.D. For that event helps to verify Jesus' claim to be the Son of God, and it is hard to imagine that any writer after 70 A.D. would not make mention to the fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy! This has prompted some scholars to conclude that ALL of the books of the New Testament were written prior to 70 A.D.- e.g., John A. T. Robinson, in his book REDATING THE NEW TESTAMENT
In our continuation of this lesson we will be looking at the evidence for the early existence of the New Testament in what we can find in papyri fragments.
God Bless,
Jim Newsted
Evidence For The Early Existence Of The New Testament
The New Testament presents itself as a historical record of events that supposedly occurred during the First Century A.D. How reliable is it? How do we determine the reliability of any ancient document that professes to record events of history? To establish the reliability of ANY historical document, one of the first questions to be raised is:
"How soon after the events took place were they recorded?" Applied to the New Testament, this involves trying to determine what evidence there is for THE EARLY EXISTENCE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT...
Why is evidence for the early existence of the New Testament crucial? If some event is recorded long after it occurred it is not likely to have been written by "eyewitnesses". It is not likely to have been written when "other eyewitnesses" were around to confirm or dispute its accuracy. It’s credibility would be weakened; for example, which would be the more credible source for information about an event that occurred during The Civil War Between The States. A present day writer depending totally upon second-hand sources? Or diaries and letters written by eyewitnesses of the event? Of course, it would be necessary to show that such diaries and letters were authentic and where possible shown to be accurate.
During the last Century, some scholars asserted that the Gospels and the Book of Acts did not exist before 130 A.D. This would mean the Gospels and Acts were not written by eyewitnesses! Rather, it was written by frauds who misrepresented themselves as eyewitnesses! For the author of Acts claims to have been present during some of the events described in that book - cf. "we" in Ac 16:11-12 "Setting sail therefore from Troas, we made a straight course to Samothrace, and the day following to Neapolis; and from thence to Philippi, which is a city of Macedonia, the first of the district, a Roman colony: and we were in this city tarrying certain days." The author of the Second Epistle Of Peter claims to have been an eyewitness of the Transfiguration - 2 Pe 1:16-18 "For we did not follow cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received from God the Father honor and glory, when there was borne such a voice to him by the Majestic Glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased: and this voice we ourselves heard borne out of heaven, when we were with him in the holy mount."
Written by eyewitnesses and others who lived during those times, or a book written by liars in a effort to deceive...these are the only choices we have! This is why it is important to establish the early existence of the New Testament! Looking at the evidence for the early existence of the New Testament we find internal evidence at the ending of the Book of Acts. The book ends abruptly with Paul in prison, awaiting trial - Ac 28:30-31 "And he abode two whole years in his own hired dwelling, and received all that went in unto him, preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching the things concerning the Lord Jesus Christ with all boldness, none forbidding him."
A plausible explanation is that Luke wrote ACTS during this time, before Paul finally appeared before Nero. This would be about 62-63 A.D., meaning that ACTS and LUKE (which came first - cf. Ac 1:1 with Lk 1:1-4) were written within thirty years of the ministry and death of Jesus. There is no mention of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Matthew, Mark and Luke record Jesus' prophecy that the temple and city would be destroyed within that generation - e.g., Mk 13:1-4 "And as he went forth out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Teacher, behold, what manner of stones and what manner of buildings! And Jesus said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left here one stone upon another, which shall not be thrown down. And as he sat on the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when these things are all about to be accomplished?", 14 "But when ye see the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not (let him that readeth understand), then let them that are in Judaea flee unto the mountains:", 30 "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, until all these things be accomplished."; Lk 21:5-9 "And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly stones and offerings, ehe said, As for these things which ye behold, the days will come, in which there shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. And they asked him, saying, Teacher, when therefore shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when these things are about to come to pass? And he said, Take heed that ye be not led astray: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am he; and, The time is at hand: go ye not after them. And when ye shall hear of wars and tumults, be not terrified: for these things must needs come to pass first; but the end is not immediately.", 20-24 "But when ye see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that her desolation is at hand. Then let them that are in Judaea flee unto the mountains; and let them that are in the midst of her depart out; and let not them that are in the country enter therein. For these are days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. Woe unto them that are with child and to them that give suck in those days! for there shall be great distress upon the land, and wrath unto this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led captive into all the nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.", 32 "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all things be accomplished."
History records that in 70 A.D. Jerusalem with its temple was destroyed, exactly as Jesus foretold! Yet not a single book of the New Testament refers to this event as having happened! Such would be very unlikely if they had been written after 70 A.D. For that event helps to verify Jesus' claim to be the Son of God, and it is hard to imagine that any writer after 70 A.D. would not make mention to the fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy! This has prompted some scholars to conclude that ALL of the books of the New Testament were written prior to 70 A.D.- e.g., John A. T. Robinson, in his book REDATING THE NEW TESTAMENT
In our continuation of this lesson we will be looking at the evidence for the early existence of the New Testament in what we can find in papyri fragments.
God Bless,
Jim Newsted
Sunday, April 10, 2005
Apologetis - III
Having looked at the evidence of Jesus being a historical person we will continue our studies in Apologetics by looking at the New Testament as a historical document and the evidence of its reliability.
"CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS"
Our Dependence Upon The New Testament
We have seen the evidence from UNBIASED SOURCES that establishes Jesus of Nazareth as a person of history who lived and died in the First Century A.D. But we also pointed out that such sources tell us nothing about who He was or what He did to earn such a reputation that, centuries later, His teachings and life still has so much influence in our society.
For the Christian, the only record which describes in any detail the life and death of Jesus is the NEW TESTAMENT. But as a HISTORICAL DOCUMENT, is it reliable? Can we trust it to be accurate in relating facts of history concerning Jesus, His life, death and resurrection? Can we even have confidence that what we have today in the form of the New Testament is an accurate copy of that penned by the original authors? These are some of the questions we shall attempt to answer as we begin to examine "The Historical Reliability of the New Testament".
But first, to appreciate the importance of this subject, it may help to demonstrate how dependent our faith is on the reliability of the New Testament as a historical document. Why do we believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God? The answers we would give are "because of the miracles He did" and "because He fulfilled hundreds of the Messianic prophecies found in the Old Testament" also "because He rose from the dead." But where does one learn about these things? Where do we read about His miracles? THE NEW TESTAMENT! Who says that He fulfilled the Messianic prophecies? THE AUTHORS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT! What evidence is there for the resurrection of Jesus Christ? AGAIN, IT IS PRIMARILY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT!
What if it is shown concerning the New Testament that it was written over 100 years after the events supposedly happened? Then the New Testament was not written by eyewitnesses, nor by those whose names are connected with it (Paul, Peter, etc.)! It was the general consensus of many scholars in the last century that the New Testament was in fact composed during the Second Century A.D., not the First. If such is true, then the New Testament is a FORGERY! What if it is shown concerning the New Testament that it is filled with errors in reference to geography, people, and events? Then how could we trust the authors of the New Testament to be accurate in describing supernatural events, when they were careless with describing the natural ones? This would make the New Testament an UNRELIABLE RECORD!
What if it is shown concerning the New Testament that the manuscript evidence is very scarce, and a thousand years removed from the original documents? Then we would have no way of testing the accuracy of the copyists, who for hundreds of years preserved the New Testament only by making copies by hand. Then our faith in Jesus would be based upon shallow ground, upon a document which is historically questionable!
Our faith in Jesus is dependent on the New testament being reliable as a historical document! Blind faith may seem adequate for some such as children who believe whatever their parents say; people who are never placed in an environment where their faith is challenged (like state universities) or for people who are not trying to convince others to trust in Jesus for their salvation. But if we desire to have a "stong faith" for ourselves and others then we need to understand our dependency upon the New Testament. We need to know how to demonstrate the evidence which supports it as a reliable, historical document!
Hopefully, we now appreciate the need to carefully examine the evidence for the historical reliability of the New Testament. In doing so, we shall apply the same kind of tests applied to any ancient document to determine its reliability! The next study will examine what is called the "ACID TEST" for any ancient document claiming to be a historical record of certain events.
The Executable Outlines Series, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2000
God Bless,
Jim Newsted
Shamrock, Tx
The town that turns green for a week every year
View my new Blog at http://jimsbiblestudies.blogspot.com/
Join my Bible Study Group at internet-bible-studies-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
or http://groups.yahoo.com/group/internet-bible-studies
Even though you can't see the air, It doesn't stop you from breathing
Even though you can't see God, It doesn't stop you from believing
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS"
Our Dependence Upon The New Testament
We have seen the evidence from UNBIASED SOURCES that establishes Jesus of Nazareth as a person of history who lived and died in the First Century A.D. But we also pointed out that such sources tell us nothing about who He was or what He did to earn such a reputation that, centuries later, His teachings and life still has so much influence in our society.
For the Christian, the only record which describes in any detail the life and death of Jesus is the NEW TESTAMENT. But as a HISTORICAL DOCUMENT, is it reliable? Can we trust it to be accurate in relating facts of history concerning Jesus, His life, death and resurrection? Can we even have confidence that what we have today in the form of the New Testament is an accurate copy of that penned by the original authors? These are some of the questions we shall attempt to answer as we begin to examine "The Historical Reliability of the New Testament".
But first, to appreciate the importance of this subject, it may help to demonstrate how dependent our faith is on the reliability of the New Testament as a historical document. Why do we believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God? The answers we would give are "because of the miracles He did" and "because He fulfilled hundreds of the Messianic prophecies found in the Old Testament" also "because He rose from the dead." But where does one learn about these things? Where do we read about His miracles? THE NEW TESTAMENT! Who says that He fulfilled the Messianic prophecies? THE AUTHORS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT! What evidence is there for the resurrection of Jesus Christ? AGAIN, IT IS PRIMARILY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT!
What if it is shown concerning the New Testament that it was written over 100 years after the events supposedly happened? Then the New Testament was not written by eyewitnesses, nor by those whose names are connected with it (Paul, Peter, etc.)! It was the general consensus of many scholars in the last century that the New Testament was in fact composed during the Second Century A.D., not the First. If such is true, then the New Testament is a FORGERY! What if it is shown concerning the New Testament that it is filled with errors in reference to geography, people, and events? Then how could we trust the authors of the New Testament to be accurate in describing supernatural events, when they were careless with describing the natural ones? This would make the New Testament an UNRELIABLE RECORD!
What if it is shown concerning the New Testament that the manuscript evidence is very scarce, and a thousand years removed from the original documents? Then we would have no way of testing the accuracy of the copyists, who for hundreds of years preserved the New Testament only by making copies by hand. Then our faith in Jesus would be based upon shallow ground, upon a document which is historically questionable!
Our faith in Jesus is dependent on the New testament being reliable as a historical document! Blind faith may seem adequate for some such as children who believe whatever their parents say; people who are never placed in an environment where their faith is challenged (like state universities) or for people who are not trying to convince others to trust in Jesus for their salvation. But if we desire to have a "stong faith" for ourselves and others then we need to understand our dependency upon the New Testament. We need to know how to demonstrate the evidence which supports it as a reliable, historical document!
Hopefully, we now appreciate the need to carefully examine the evidence for the historical reliability of the New Testament. In doing so, we shall apply the same kind of tests applied to any ancient document to determine its reliability! The next study will examine what is called the "ACID TEST" for any ancient document claiming to be a historical record of certain events.
The Executable Outlines Series, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2000
God Bless,
Jim Newsted
Shamrock, Tx
The town that turns green for a week every year
View my new Blog at http://jimsbiblestudies.blogspot.com/
Join my Bible Study Group at internet-bible-studies-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
or http://groups.yahoo.com/group/internet-bible-studies
Even though you can't see the air, It doesn't stop you from breathing
Even though you can't see God, It doesn't stop you from believing
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sunday, April 03, 2005
Apologetics - II
| "CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS" The Historical Jesus In the previous lesson, we laid the foundation for a study in Christian apologetics. We established that the Christian faith is an objective faith, with Jesus of Nazareth as the object of that faith. We established that He is the Son of God, who died for our sins and rose from the dead. A historical faith in Jesus is based upon real people, places, and events that actually took place in history. It is an intelligent, rational faith which invites people to use their minds. It invites them to examine the historical evidence which logically supports placing one's faith in Jesus of Nazareth as the Son of God. With these things in mind, we begin by considering the evidence which establishes Jesus of Nazareth as a HISTORICAL FIGURE. One who actually lived in Palestine during the First Century A.D. Some might wonder was there ever any question? There are skeptics who believed Jesus was just a "myth." This concept was popular with some scholars of the 1800s'. It is rarely found today, except among those who are ignorant of the facts and who purposely suppress the evidence (e.g., as was done in formerly communist-dominated countries) Today, no serious historian (even those who are atheists) disputes the fact that Jesus existed. H. G. WELLS, as an atheist, spoke of Jesus in his book, Outline Of History "...one is obliged to say, 'Here was a man. This part of the tale could not have been invented.'" WILL DURANT, an ex-professor of Philisophy of History at Columbia University. He spent two chapters in The Story Of Our Civilization depicting Jesus as a historical figure right along with the Caesars. ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, used over 20,000 words to describe Jesus. More than Aristotle, Cicero, Alexander, Julius Caesar, Buddha, Confucius, Mohammed, or Napoleon. So there appears to be sufficient evidence to have convinced these and others like them that Jesus actually lived. What is this evidence? There is evidence among "pagan" sources. THALLUS (a Samaritan historian, ca. 52 A.D.) wrote attempting to give a natural explanation for the darkness which occurred at the crucifixion of Jesus. Note carefully: he did not deny the existence of Jesus, but only tried to explain away the strange circumstances surrounding His death. LETTER OF MARA-SERAPION (written to his son, ca. 73 A.D.) He tells of the deaths of Socrates, Pythagoras, and of Jesus. "What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise king?...Nor did the wise king die for good; he lived on in the teaching which he had given." CORNELIUS TACITUS (Roman historian, ca. 112 A.D.) Writes of Jesus in his ANNALS; "Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberias." PLINY THE YOUNGER; Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor, ca. 112 A.D, wrote to the emperor Trajan about Christians and their devotion to Christ. SEUTONIUS (Court official and annalist under Hadrian, 120 A.D.) "As the Jews were making constant disturbance at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome." Luke makes reference to this same expulsion in Ac 18:1-2 "Paul left Athens and went to Corinth, where he met Aquila, a Jewish man from Pontus. Not long before this, Aquila had come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Emperor Claudius had ordered the Jewish people to leave Rome. Paul went to see Aquila and Priscilla" There is evidence among "Jewish" sources.THE TALMUD Consists of two separate books dealing with Jewish law, written during the period from 100 A.D. to 500 A.D, speaks frequently of Jesus of Nazareth, in unfriendly terms, of course. But never disputing his status as a historical figure. FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS A Jewish general turned Roman historian, born 37 A.D. He makes several references to Jesus in his History Of The Jews. E.g., "...and brought before it the brother of Jesus, the so-called Christ, whose name was James." Such is the evidence which must be taken into account by any intelligent and rational person. But what are the implications of such evidence? It provides a solid basis upon which one can intelligently believe in Jesus as a person who actually existed in history. It exposes the shallow thinking of any who would try to mark off Jesus as a myth. It requires everyone to give some sort of answer to the question posed by Jesus Himself: "But who do you say that I am?" - Mt 16:15 The evidence we have seen thus far DOES NOT prove Jesus to be the Son of God. In fact, it does not tell us anything about Jesus except that He lived and died during the First Century A.D. and that He must have done something significant to gain some notoriety by the historians. To learn more about Jesus, we must look elsewhere. There have been many fanciful stories written about Jesus. But the Christian considers the twenty-seven books known as the New Testament to be the only reliable source of information about Jesus. But are they? Is the New Testament reliable as a historical document? Can we even be sure that what we have is actually what was penned by the original authors of the New Testament? The next study shall begin an attempt to answer these questions. For now, we have simply laid one block as we build a foundation upon which we can rest our faith. We have seen that it is more logical to believe that Jesus did in fact exist. To assert that He is a myth is groundless. And since He actually existed, that requires our giving some answer to the question Jesus asked: "WHO DO YOU SAY THAT I AM?" Will our answer be "LORD!", or "A CAREFULLY CONTRIVED LIE!" As we shall see, these are the only two choices we have. The evidence we shall continue to examine should help give us the right answer! Original Outline, The Executable Outlines Series, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2000 God Bless, Jim Newsted Shamrock, Tx The town that turns green for a week every year View my new Blog at http://jimsbiblestudies.blogspot.com Join my Bible Study Group at internet-bible-studies-subscribe@yahoogroups.com or http://groups.yahoo.com/group/internet-bible-studies Even though you can't see the air, It doesn't stop you from breathing Even though you can't see God, It doesn't stop you from believing ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | |||
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
