Simple Faith A lot of people in the West are turning away from the Christian faith these days.

In America, young adults, swayed by a wide range of attacks against Christian truth, are convinced that they cannot trust God, Jesus, the Bible, their faith or believe that anyone could convince them otherwise. Parents, siblings, friends, pastors are watching their loved ones slipping step by step into godless worlds, worlds often bitterly anti-god or anti-Bible in their actions and attitudes. One way these days Christians sometimes try to counteract through blogging, I have discovered. Take a look at blogs dealing with faith issues, and you will see a multitude of often angry atheists attacking a seemingly shrinking group of often angry faith defendersthe two groups arguing back and forth, back and forth. No matter what challenge an atheist brings, some Christian somewhere will produce some kind of answer which the atheist then disproves which then the Christian refutes which then... Well, you already know how it goes. And the debate gets confusing because their scholars dismiss your scholars who dismiss their scholars and nobody knows which scholars are really good and which ones are not. The whole thing becomes so theoretical and so academic that only a person with five PhDs can feel confident beyond a doubt she is right and the others wrong. The rest of us just have to hold our breath and hope that our faith is not in vain, that our PhDs can beat their PhDs so that we can go to heaven without worrying that maybe it was all in vain. That simply cant be right... It has to be ridiculous to say that only scholars can figure out whether or not our faith is reliable. That is what it has come to these days, but it simply cant be right. So we are going to try to cut through all of this debating and battling by suggesting that what is needed is simple faith. Before we defend our faith, we need to figure out what that faith is really based upon. Simple faith is going to begin with several undeniable statements, statements which would pretty much be accepted by most anyone who is not insane or utterly ignorant. Those simple statements inform our intellect enough to allow us to make a simple stand on what we believe is true. Then, every time we run into a question that shakes us, we will be coming back to those statements and making sure that they are actually accurate so that our Faith is really not Foolishness. Simple faith begins with Facts and then makes its decision to Follow Jesus. I am going to list the ten facts we are going to talk about in this book. Then the rest of the book will take each statement and show the evidences out there which proves that simple faith can rely upon that statement s a fact.

Statement #1 Historians unanimously agree that between A.D. 49 66, a Jewish Christian named Paul wrote at least the New Testament letters Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, and Galatians. In those letters, Paul states that Jesus original disciples approved of Pauls message and had joined his ministry with theirs, and that the earliest Christians, including men who had been Jesus' disciples, believed that Jesus had been crucified and that they themselves were eyewitnesses to the resurrection of Jesus, who they claimed rose three days after his death. Statement # 2 Jesus was a Jew who lived and died in Palestine somewhere around 4BC to AD 30 (the dates may not be exact). We cannot prove this from the Bible alone, because it is a matter of history and therefore must be studied by professional historians. By researching what professional historians have written about Jesus, we can know that although the dates may not be exact, virtually every professional historian in the world accepts the fact that Jesus lived and died by crucifixion somewhere between 4BC and AD 30. Statement #3 The Old Testament is a very ancient book and historians currently possess ancient copies of much of it which were copied at least 100 years before Jesus was born. This simple statement is accepted by everyone. Seventy years ago many scholars would have doubted that the Scriptures that we have today which we call the Old Testament were the same Scriptures that were around before Jesus was born, but the Dead Sea Scrolls have entirely silenced those doubts. Notice that this simple statement does not say anything about whether the Old Testament is actually true in any way. Statement #4 There is a very strong theme in the Old Testament which focuses on a future person who is sometimes called the Messiah. Many different passages in the Old Testament describe this person as a human being, as God, Savior, worldwide ruler reigning in Jerusalem for eternity, suffering servant who would die and then rise again, sacrifice who would bear all of the sins of the world in his body, source of blessing for the nations of the earth. This simple statement is easy enough to prove simply by going to the Old Testament. Anyone, regardless of their faith or lack of faith, certainly would

Page 1 of 112

Page 2 of 112

agree that the Old Testament promises that such a person is coming in the future, although they might not agree with every one of the descriptions we have above. Statement #5 The four Gospels present Jesus as a person who taught that he has come to begin a new eternal kingdom (called the kingdom of God or heaven) which will eventually be fully experienced in a recreated Heavens and Earth, although now it is only experienced in Jesus the Messiah through the work of the Holy Spirit. Anyone who studies the Gospels will quickly realize that the kingdom of God is the most important message preached by Jesus. It does not take long as well to realize that Jesus talks about himself as the bringer and Lord of the kingdom of God. People may argue reject the Gospels as historically reliable, but they cannot deny what the Gospels say that Jesus taught. Statement #6 The books and letters of the New Testament were written within 70 years of the death of Jesus Christ. This is the third of four statements which require us to go outside of the Bible to prove, but, again, the statement is accepted as true by virtually every professional historian in the world, with the exception of some historians whose religion forces them to deny it. These professional historians may not accept that what the New Testament teaches is accurate, nevertheless they universally recognize that the New Testament books were written before A.D. 100. Statement #7 Scholars have enough ancient New Testament manuscripts that they are able with confidence to say that the original four gospels and the original letters are almost entirely (and probably entirely) the same gospels and letters that we have in our Bibles today. Not every historian knows a lot about ancient New Testament manuscripts, but any historian who is an expert in these areas will agree that the Gospels and letters we have today in our New Testaments are pretty much the same as they were when they were originally written in the first century. More important than that, however, is the fact that even if there were serious differences (but in reality there are not serious differences), the original manuscripts without any doubt taught the basic facts about Jesus life, death and resurrection. Statement #8 According to the Gospels, Jesus taught that sinners can only enter the kingdom of God by facing their sin and taking the first steps in turning from it (called repenting), putting faith in Jesus as Messiah and Lord, and following him. Page 3 of 112

The rest of the New Testament strongly teaches that this act of faith in Jesus and following him is a dependence upon Gods grace, i.e., the favor and mercy which God gives to sinners so that they can become righteous before him through faith in Christ and be born a second time as his children and members of his kingdom. Statement #9 In the Gospels, Jesus presents his teachings as the only reliable interpretation of the Old Testament and as Gods program for life in the kingdom of God now and in the future. It is impossible to read the teachings of Jesus without realizing at once that he sees what he says as the only way of life for those who belong to the kingdom of God. Everyone will also have to agree that Jesus in several places affirms the reliability and truthfulness of the entire Old Testament. Statement #10 The writers of the New Testament consistently portrayed Jesus as the Messiah and the son of God and treat him as God. Most scholars would deny that Jesus is the son of God, but it would be impossible for any scholar who has actually studied the New Testament to claim that the New Testament writers deny his divinity, for it is mentioned or alluded to on almost every page. History, History, History Beyond anything else, the heart of Christianity is history. After all, almost half the Bible is plain old history (history of the Jews, of Jesus, of the early church). The gospel is more than anything else good news about something that happened (i.e., Jesus Christ, the Son of God, came to earth, died on the cross and rose again in glory). The Bible is a history about something that happened. When Paul, one of the earliest Christians, wrote about the heart of Christianity, he talked about historical events. Look at the events in the following paragraph, taken from 1 Corinthians 15.
And now I want to remind you, my brothers and sisters, of the Good News which I preached to you, which you received, and on which your faith stands firm. 2 That is the gospel, the message that I preached to you. You are saved by the gospel if you hold firmly to itunless it was for nothing that you believed. 3 I passed on to you what I received, which is of the greatest importance: that Christ died for our sins, as written in the Scriptures; 4 that he was buried and that he was raised to life three days later, as written in the Scriptures; 5 that he appeared to Peter and then to all twelve apostles. 6 Then he appeared to more than 500 of his followers at once, most of whom are still alive, although some have died. 7 Then he appeared to James, and

Page 4 of 112

afterwards to all the apostles. 8 Last of all he appeared also to meeven though I am like someone whose birth was abnormal. 9 For I am the least of all the apostlesI do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted Gods church. 10 But by Gods grace I am what I am, and the grace that he gave me was not without effect. On the contrary, I have worked harder than any of the other apostles, although it was not really my own doing, but Gods grace working with me. 11 So then, whether it came from me or from them, this is what we all preach, and this is what you believe. (1 Corinthians 15:111, GNB)

When Paul said this is the Good News which I preached to you, which you received, and on which your faith stands firm. That is the gospel... he was talking about those underlined events in this paragraph. He only preaches one gospel; it is the good news about these events which took place in history. Paul goes on to write that without these historical events, the Christian faith would be completely useless. And if Christ has not been raised, then your faith is a
delusion and you are still lost in your sins. 18 It would also mean that the believers in Christ who have died are lost. 19 If our hope in Christ is good for this life only and no more, then we deserve more pity than anyone else in all the world. (1 Corinthians 15:1719, GNB) If Christ has not been raised from the dead, then Christians are

all entirely fooled into believing a lie. They should be pitied, because their lives are utterly meaningless and hopeless. Therefore the Christian faith is all about history and stands or falls on whether these events actually happened. This is not true for other religions of the world. Other religions can still be true even if the stories in their holy books did not occur in real history. That is even true for Judaism. There can still be a true Creator God in the Jewish religion, even if Moses and Abraham might be rejected as myths. Take away the resurrection of Jesus Christ, however, and you have no Christian faith. Enemies of Christ, therefore, have for 2000 years put all of their efforts into attempting to disprove the key event in Christian history, which is the coming of Jesus Christ, his crucifixion, and his resurrection. When you read the 10 points listed at the beginning of this introduction, you might notice that they all seem to have something to do with history. Having read what Paul said in 1 Corinthians 15, that makes sense, doesnt it? That is, therefore, the central point of these notes, i.e., to prove the historical truthfulness of the life, crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Without this, it would not matter whether or not Christianity is meaningful, philosophically impressive, emotionally satisfying, or theologically consistent. You should be a Christian not because your parents are Christians. You should be a Christian because our central message, i.e., the gospel, is actually historically true. Jesus Christ really did come and die and rise again. The problem is that professional historians would generally deny that Jesus is the son of God just as they would deny that Jesus rose from the dead. They Page 5 of 112

would also deny that Jesus is the Messiah promised in the Old Testament. They admit that the New Testaments makes these historical claims all throughout its pages. Furthermore, they also admit that the Old Testament writers talked about a coming savior who was sometimes called the Messiah. Nevertheless, many professional historians deny that the writings in the Gospels accurately portray Jesus Christ. They often suggest that some aspects of the Gospels do give us hints about Jesus and his teachings, but argue that most of the teachings and stories are close to being simple fables. They claim that it is almost impossible to know much about Jesus except that he was a Jew and was crucified. They often believe that Jesus was mistaken, possibly even deluded, probably misunderstood and misinterpreted, a failure, a simple Rabbi, or a teacher who simply repeated what Jews had been saying for centuries. If most professional historians reject the most important event of Christian history, i.e., the resurrection of Jesus Christ, doesnt that mean that Christian faith has been proven false? This is the question we will try to answer throughout these notes. We will rely on historians in four important areas: a) the Old Testament promises about the Messiah were made before Jesus was born; b) Jesus was a real person in history; c) Paul wrote at least seven New Testament letters by A.D. 66; d) the New Testament Gospels and letters had already been written before A.D. 100. These are pretty much universally agreed upon by professional historians, with some lingering doubts in the minds of some about d). If they agree on these four statements, why do they doubt the rest of it? Well there can be any number of reasons. Perhaps they are correct (which means that Christians are in a lot of trouble). It could be that there are conflicting theories concerning what happened. Often, historians simply write what they have read other historians write without examining the evidence themselves (how much time would it take to examine every single historical theory?). Of course, as with any scholar, presuppositions (i.e., miracles are impossible, there is no God, my religion says its something different, etc.) may cloud a scholars ability to be able to assess the evidence. Often, the people writing history about the events surrounding the Bible are not actually historians in the normal sense of the word, but are actually theologians. Their theology about the New Testament and Jesus can significantly impact how they interpret the evidence. What then can we do in order to figure out if our faith is based upon reality? We need to face some basic facts and then decide to take steps based on them, steps of simple faith. Examples in Real Life of Simple Faith I was talking with a young man who had turned away from faith in Christ and had become an atheist. I presented a evidence to him (I thought it was pretty Page 6 of 112

conclusive) that the Christian faith was true. My biggest question was this: what do you think about these strong evidences that Jesus is Gods Son? This young man was looking at two very different kinds of evidence. First he was impressed about scientific evidence. He admitted that the world seems so amazing that only an intelligent God could have created it. He argued, however, that scientists are satisfied that it all happened by chance according to the laws of nature. Therefore, to him, scientific evidence proves that God does not exist. I told him, however, about another kind of evidencethe amazing prophecies which clearly point to Jesus Christ. These prophecies are historical evidence that God always planned to save the world from its sins through Gods unique Son, Jesus of Nazareth. This man had to make a decision about his lifewould he return to Christ or choose to reject Christ? He had to make his decision based on these two types of evidence, scientific or prophetic. Strangely, the two types of evidence tried to prove entirely different kinds of things. Logically speaking, the evidence of the scientist did not prove anything about Jesus as Gods Son. Even if every one of the worlds scientists were 100% correct in what they taught about science, it could still be 100% true that Jesus died on the cross and rose from the dead as the living Son of God. In a similar way, the prophetic evidence did not say anything about whether scientific evidence about anything in the universe was true or false. All the prophetic evidence tried to show was thisJesus Christ is very likely the Son of God who died for our sins. When I asked him about the prophecies, he paused for a moment. Well, the evidence from prophecy is quite impressive, I must admit. But there are too many scientists who deny the basic beliefs of the Bible. I might consider the possibility, but science has disproved the Bible. I have decided to trust in science over the Bible. For the rest of these notes, I am arguing that the decision you need to make is not about atheism, science, or another religion. My argument is simple; there is amazing evidence proving that Jesus is the living Son of God who died for our sins, rose from the dead and is coming back to judge the world. This evidence is not about science, philosophy or other religions. The only question we are going to try to answer is thisis Jesus Christ the Son of God? Adding up the Numbers This is what we have to do when we consider all of the attacks against Christianity today. The majority of historians and scholars reject the New Testament claims that Jesus is the son of God. They deny the claims that he is the Messiah who has brought the kingdom of God into this world. Other religions attack the Bible and say that the New Testament was changed. Masses of atheists constantly ridicule Christianity as being a backward and dangerous Page 7 of 112

religion. In America, between 60 to 80 percent of children who were raised in evangelical homes have abandoned the faith in varying degrees. Movies, books, American and British articles tear into pieces the Bible and the Christian faith. Increasingly, scientists are publishing books claiming that science disproves the existence of God. In light of all of these negative attacks against Christianity, should we abandon our faith? Just like the young man who left his faith because of science, we must decide which facts about Jesus are the most important to evaluate. Which claims about Christianity are so important that if they are proven to be false, we know that we must abandon our faith? Once we figure out which facts to investigate, then we can decide whether or not our faith is worth keeping. These notes are going to argue that the key facts are historical in nature. I have listed above those key ten facts which if proven to be true are enough to make a costly decision to follow Jesus. Even if two or three of them are true, certainly you could make a good case that your faith is not wasted following Jesus. If six or seven are true, you have a strong assurance that Jesus really is the Son of God. If when you prove all ten statements to be reliable, no matter what scientists or historians or other religions throw at your faith, you can be confident that following Jesus Christ leads to eternal life. Now that we have introduced the ten facts, it is time to study them one by one to determine if simple faith is even possible in a world bombarded by doubts and fears.

Page 8 of 112

Statement #1 Historians unanimously agree that between A.D. 49 66, a Jewish Christian named Paul wrote at least the New Testament letters Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, and Galatians. In those letters, Paul states that Jesus original disciples approved of Pauls message and had joined his ministry with theirs, and that the earliest Christians, including men who had been Jesus' disciples, believed that Jesus had been crucified and that they themselves were eyewitnesses to the resurrection of Jesus, whom they claimed rose three days after his death. In my mind, Paul is the least understood Christian from the first century. I constantly read and hear claims about Paul and his relationship to Christianity. Oh, people claim, Paul changed the teachings of Jesus from being a simple Jewish rabbi into a Greek philosophical religion. There are scholars who claim that Paul did not know any of the details about Jesus life because he mentions little other than Jesus death and resurrection (no miracles, almost no teachings, nothing about Jesus interactions with the Pharisees, etc.). Paul is often contrasted with Jesus or Peter as if he changed Christianity into something altogether new. You yourself can answer all of these attacks and many more simply by reading Pauls letters in the New Testament. We may, however, have a bit of a problem using all of Pauls letters for establishing our foundational facts, because some historians doubt whether some of Pauls letters are really from Paul.1 If we are going to stick to the simple facts rather than spend days and days arguing about why this letter or that letter of Paul is true, then we should stick to the letters which virtually all scholars accept as written by Paul. Historians agree that there are four letters by Paul which are indisputably authentic. These letters are often called Pauls capital epistles2 or capital letters. Romans. The letters authenticity has never been disputed by reputable scholarship, liberal or conservative, and Romans stands at the head of virtually every ancient list or collection of Pauline letters.3
4
1

1 Corinthians. There is no doubt about who wrote 1 Corinthians, for all scholars agree that the apostle Paul wrote it on his third missionary journey while he was living in Ephesus. 4 2 Corinthians. One of the areas in which there is a consensus among NT scholars is that Paul was the author of 2 Corinthians, along with the other three letters, viz. Galatians, 1 Corinthians, and Romans, which make up the chief epistles (Hauptbriefe), as Baur called them. On the one hand, 2 Corinthians contains examples of all the characteristically Pauline stylistic devices, such as antithetic parallelism, chiasmus, paradox, anacolutha, ellipsis, and litotes;2 it reflects that delicate blend of generous encouragement, gentle expostulation, and (if necessary) stern rebuke that was typical of Paul when he addressed his spiritual children; and it witnesses to most of the distinctively Pauline doctrines, such as justification by grace through faith, the Christian life as being lived in Christ and by the Spirit, and Christian suffering as a sharing in Christs suffering. 5 Galatians. Pauline authorship of Galatians has been an axiom of NT criticism. Galatians has traditionally been recognized as one of the four capital epistles of Paul (the other three being Romans and 1 and 2 Corinthians); indeed, it has been regarded as a standard by which other documents claims to Pauline authorship could safely be measured.6 Although many great scholars include all thirteen of the letters which are signed by Paul, for our purposes we need only know that these four lettersRomans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, and Galatiansare accepted as authentic by virtually every professional historian. Now, as you are going to see throughout the rest of this book, there are always people who doubt that. Some people have to doubt it because their faith requires them to do so. Some atheists doubt it and a few of them write books declaring their theories of why Paul did not write those letters, but they claim this only because they are not professional

I personally believe that Paul wrote all of the letters which have his name at the beginning (Paul, an apostle, to the church ... but the real issue focuses on the seven letters which are virtually universally accepted as written by Paul.
2

Walter A. Elwell and Barry J. Beitzel, Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House, 1988), 514.
5

The word epistle means letter. The word capital here means foremost.

Murray J. Harris, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians : A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids, Mich.; Milton Keynes, UK: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co.; Paternoster Press, 2005), 1-2.
6

Walter A. Elwell and Philip Wesley Comfort, Tyndale Bible Dictionary, Tyndale reference library (Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001), 1136. Page 9 of 112

D. R. W. Wood and I. Howard Marshall, New Bible Dictionary, 3rd ed. (Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1996), 392. Page 10 of 112

historians. As you can see from the quotes above, professional historians are unanimous concerning these four letters. Why Are We Looking At Pauls Letters? You might at this point say, But studying Pauls letters wont prove anything to anyone who rejects the Bible! What difference does it make whether or not Paul wrote these four letters? Perhaps Paul was lying! Perhaps he was deceived by others! Even if Paul was lying or even if he had been deceived by others, we still know this: these four letters of Paul are universally accepted as authentic historical documents of what a Jewish-Christian writer named Paul wrote about Christianity. Because the documents are real documents, actually written by a real man, before we do anything else, we need to study them as historical artifacts from the ancient world. We are going to use the normal processes of historical investigation using primary documents (a primary document is something which was not written by historians but is written by the original people we are studying), i.e., Pauls four Capital Letters. When Did Paul Live? This is a surprisingly easy question to investigate and usually the answer surprises most people who do not study the New Testament backgrounds carefully. As good historians, we need to look at our primary documents (Pauls Capital Letters) to find our clues about Pauls life. The best place to start would be with Pauls conversion, which he discusses in Galatians 2. For you have heard about my former way of life in Judaism: I persecuted Gods church to an extreme degree and tried to destroy it. I advanced in Judaism beyond many contemporaries among my people, because I was extremely zealous for the traditions of my ancestors. But when God, who from my birth set me apart and called me by His grace, was pleased to reveal His Son in me, so that I could preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone. I did not go up to Jerusalem to those who had become apostles before me; instead I went to Arabia and came back to Damascus. Then after three years I did go up to Jerusalem to get to know Cephas, and I stayed with him 15 days. But I didnt see any of the other apostles except James, the Lords brother. Now I am not lying in what I write to you. God is my witness. Afterward, I went to the regions of Syria and Cilicia. I remained personally unknown to the Judean churches in Christ; they simply kept hearing: He Page 11 of 112

who formerly persecuted us now preaches the faith he once tried to destroy. And they glorified God because of me. (Galatians 1:1324, HCSB) In this passage, Paul tells us historical facts about his life. 1. Before his conversion, Paul was a fanatic Jew who persecuted Christians. a. Therefore Paul did not personally follow Jesus during Jesus ministry in Palestine. b. Paul came to faith some time after A.D. 30, the date for Jesus crucifixion usually accepted by historians. It could have been months or years, but it could not have been too many years. 2. After his conversion, Paul stayed away from Jerusalem for three years 3. Paul came to Jerusalem after three years and met two people, Peter (i.e., Cephas) and James the Lords brother for 15 days. a. Peter: The name Peter and the name Cephas are the same personPeter is the Greek form of the Aramaic name Cephas. Since Jesus and the apostles all originally spoke in Aramaic, when Jesus said, You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my church, in Aramaic he said, You are Cephas and upon this rock I will build my church. b. James, the Lords brother: When Paul calls James the Lords brother here, every historian agrees he means the Lord Jesus brother, i.e., James, the brother of Jesus. Paul here is giving us a strong historical assurance that the Peter we read about in the four gospels was a real person with whom Paul personally had spend fifteen days. We also know that he saw James, the brother of Jesus, who is another person we read about in the four gospels. i. He went to His hometown and began to teach them in their synagogue, so that they were astonished and said, How did this wisdom and these miracles come to Him? Isnt this the carpenters son? Isnt His mother called Mary, and His brothers James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas? And His sisters, arent they all with us? So where does He get all these things? And they were offended by Him. But Jesus said to them, A prophet is not without honor except in his hometown and in his household. (Matthew 13:5457, HCSB) ii. The Jewish Festival of Tabernacles was near, so His brothers said to Him, Leave here and go to Judea so Your disciples can see Your works that You are doing. For no one does anything in secret while hes seeking public recognition. If You do these Page 12 of 112

things, show Yourself to the world. (For not even His brothers believed in Him.) (John 7:25, HCSB) iii. Then His mother and brothers came to Him, but they could not meet with Him because of the crowd. He was told, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, wanting to see You. But He replied to them, My mother and My brothers are those who hear and do the word of God. (Luke 8:1921, HCSB) iv. Then He went home, and the crowd gathered again so that they were not even able to eat. When His family heard this, they set out to restrain Him, because they said, Hes out of His mind. (Mark 3:2021, HCSB) v. We discover from these verses that 1) James was probably the next oldest son of Joseph after Jesus; 2) during Jesus ministry on earth James did not believe in him; 3) along with his family, James tried to restrain Jesus from teaching because they all thought he was crazy. After the resurrection James had converted to believe in his brother. This is the James whom Paul met. c. 15 Days with Peter: Remember, this happened three years after Paul had converted from being a persecutor to becoming a follower of Jesus. What did Peter and Paul discuss during those fifteen days? It must be obvious that Paul had a thousand questions about the life and teachings of Jesus Christ! As a former Pharisee and expert in the Old Testament, Paul also had something to share with Peterall of the Old Testament passages which predicted the life, death and resurrection of the Messiah. Can you imagine spending fifteen days with someone who had witnessed all of the miracles, heard all of the teachings, observed Jesus character, participated with him in ministry, experienced his transfiguration, encountered Jesus after the resurrection? i. This fifteen day period with Peter firmly informs us that Paul would have had a complete grasp on the life and teachings of Jesus. Furthermore, because he personally met the Lords brother James, Paul would have gained remarkable insight into Jesus character, even as James shared with him what it was like to be Jesus younger brother. The fact that Paul tells us about this visit shows us a powerful connection with the men who were preaching the teachings and stories which would later become the gospels. ii. Here is a surprising result of reading what Paul wrote about Page 13 of 112

staying with Peter three years after his conversion: from the very beginning Paul was friends with the earliest Christians, those who had followed Jesus and Paul also knew Jesus brother James. If Paul changed Christianity from what Jesus teachings to something else, Peter and James the Lords brother would definitely oppose him all the way, because they are the earliest eyewitnesses of Jesus. In the next passage, Paul gives us even more historical information which will help us understand about when he lived. Then after 14 years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along also. I went up according to a revelation and presented to them the gospel I preach among the Gentilesbut privately to those recognized as leadersso that I might not be running, or have run the race, in vain. But not even Titus who was with me, though he was a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised. This issue arose because of false brothers smuggled in, who came in secretly to spy on the freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, in order to enslave us. But we did not give up and submit to these people for even an hour, so that the truth of the gospel would be preserved for you. Now from those recognized as important (what they really were makes no difference to me; God does not show favoritism )they added nothing to me. On the contrary, they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel for the uncircumcised, just as Peter was for the circumcised, since the One at work in Peter for an apostleship to the circumcised was also at work in me for the Gentiles. When James, Cephas, and John, recognized as pillars, acknowledged the grace that had been given to me, they gave the right hand of fellowship to me and Barnabas, agreeing that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. They asked only that we would remember the poor, which I made every effort to do. (Galatians 2:110, HCSB) 1. After 14 years : If we add this 14 with the 3 years we had already read about, this would be 17 years after Pauls conversion. 2. With Barnabas and Titus I went to Jerusalem: Barnabas was among the earliest believers in Jesus and we can tell from the book of 2 Corinthians that Paul had depended on Titus to give direction to a difficult group of Christians who lived in Corinth. Paul worked together with Barnabas in the city of Antioch and he also traveled as a missionary with Barnabas. Page 14 of 112

3. When James, Peter (i.e., Cephas) and John... Paul now talks about John, who is almost certainly the son of Zebedee and brother of the other James (who had already died in 42 CE). We know from this that Paul personally met three men who had personally and intimately known Jesus during his ministry on earth. 4. Acknowledged the grace that had been given to me: Paul here is saying that James, Peter and John were announcing that he was an authentic apostle. 5. They gave the right hand of fellowship to me: James, Peter and John announced that they considered Paul to be a fellow worker in the task of proclaiming the gospel to the lost. So, Paul here has made five important historical statements here. First of all, we know about the first seventeen years of Pauls life as a Christian. Secondly, we know that Paul knew James, Jesus brother, which means Paul knew something about Jesus life as a boy and man. Thirdly, Paul knew John and Peter both, which ties him closely with Jesus original disciples. Fourthly, Paul knew from these three men many important things about the life, teachings, death and resurrection of Jesus. Finally, these three men announced that they were accepting Paul as a part of their ministry of preaching the gospel to the world. The fifth point is obvious from this passage but is seldom understood. Paul is talking about real historical people, people we know about from the historical gospels and he is saying that he and they all agreed that his ministry was united with theirs. This unity of ministry brings up the critically important issue of accountability. If James, Peter and John joined his ministry to their, this means that Paul was now accountable to them, and they also were accountable to him. By accountable, we mean that by saying that his ministry was united with theirs, they would be responsible for watching Pauls ministry to ensure that his message stayed on course. Shockingly, Paul also saw them accountable for their preaching and lives. We know this because of the next passage in Galatians 2. But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face because he stood condemned. For he regularly ate with the Gentiles before certain men came from James. However, when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, because he feared those from the circumcision party. Then the rest of the Jews joined his hypocrisy, so that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they were deviating from the truth of the gospel, I told Cephas in front of everyone, If you, who are a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you compel Gentiles to live like Jews? Page 15 of 112

(Galatians 2:1114, HCSB) We need to remind ourselves that the name Cephas is Peter in Aramaic. We discover that Peter came to visit Antioch where Paul and Barnabas ministered. He must have been there for a while because he regularly ate with the Gentiles before certain men came from James. Since Jews consider Gentiles to be unclean, Jews refuse to eat with Gentiles and Peter allowed himself to be pressurized into avoiding eating with his Gentile brothers when Jewish Christians came from the Jerusalem to visit Antioch. This would be an overwhelming demoralization for the Gentile believers. They would feel as if they were not even true Christians if Peterthe disciple who walked with Jesus and was the Rock of the Churchrefused to eat with them! Paul, having united his ministry with Peters, rebuked Peter in front of the entire congregation. There are four critically important points to learn from this story, points that will help us understand so much about Paul and his ministry. First of all, Peter left Jerusalem and traveled to this church, which was about 500 kilometers north of Jerusalem. This was not a quick overnight trip to visit some friends, but a significant journey. Almost certainly along the way Peter visited other towns and cities. Secondly, Peter stayed with them for a fairly long time. What would the first request be from these Christians living in Antioch? Peter, please tell us about Jesus! Tell us his story! Tell us his teachings! Tell us about his crucifixion! Tell us about his resurrection! Thirdly, if Peter told the church Jesus teachings, we can imagine that many people in the congregation would have burning questions about how Jesus teachings applied to their situations there in Antioch. Who has not wondered how to apply Jesus command that we should show the other cheek when slapped or Jesus warning that if we do not forgive our brothers, God will not forgive us of our sin. It is impossible to imagine that Peter would be staying with these people and that no one would think to bring these difficult problems up. Of course, Peters explanation of Jesus teachings would also stir up questions if Paul had been changing Christianity away from the teachings of Jesus into some new kind of Greek way of thinking. You can imagine right away that these Christians would keep saying, But Peter, Paul teaches this.... Paul denies that... Paul commands thus... In fact, if Paul were changing Christian teachings to something new, having Peter come would be a disaster for him. Once the Christians told Peter what Paul had been saying, certainly Peter would have immediately confronted Paul and removed the right hand of fellowship. And if Peter condemned Pauls teachings as new and wrong, it is impossible to imagine that anyone would have continued to listen to Paul. If forced to choose between Paul, the converted persecutor, and Peter the Rock, the Page 16 of 112

disciple of Jesus, almost all (if not all) would have turned away from Paul. Fourthly, Paul is telling this story to people who live in Galatia. Now in the ancient world, there are two different places called Galatia.7 The people who received the letter to the Galatians might have been either in the north or the south of Asia Minor (present day Turkey). In either place, however, they would have been within reasonable traveling distance to Antioch, which is where this story about Peter happened. Since Antioch was the third largest city in the Roman Empire, it is very likely that at least some people from Galatia would have traveled to Antioch and if they did, they would have certainly visited the Christians in that city. Sooner or later, those Christians from Galatia would find out that Peter had been in Antioch and would have asked all sorts of questions about the visit. If during Peters visit, Peter had told the Christians in Antioch, Do not listen to Paul! He is changing Christianity! the Galatians Christians would have found out about it. Of course, Paul would know that he had to tell the truth here about Peter coming to Antioch. He would know that sooner or later people would find out the truth about James, Peter and John approved of Pauls ministry. If Paul is lying here, his lie is going to be exposed to the world and Paul will be utterly shamed. Therefore, if Paul is lying here and if James, Peter and John have condemned Pauls ministry and teaching, why would Paul even mention Peters name in his letter? He would simply stay quiet about it or possibly might go on the attack against James, Peter and John, defending his teachings against the teaching of Jesus disciples. Since he does neither avoids or attacks and since he openly claims that James, Peter and John approved of Pauls ministry and joined his ministry with theirs, we have to assume that it actually happened. So this little bit of history from Galatians 1 and 2 tell us a lot about Paul. 1. Paul knew Peter well and had met John and Jesus brother James. 2. Paul knew the stories and teachings and life of Jesus from eyewitnesses who intimately knew Jesus. 3. Paul believed that he was preaching and teaching the same teachings that James, Peter and John were preaching and teaching. 4. James, Peter and John also believed that Paul was preaching and teaching the same teachings that they were preaching and teaching. 5. James, Peter and John joined Pauls ministry with theirs. Pauls Teachings About Jesus When you read Pauls letters, you discover quickly that he does not say

many different things about Jesus, but what Paul says about him, he says a lot. The best way to summarize what Paul taught about Jesus is to go to 1 Corinthians 15:1-8. Now brothers, I want to clarify for you the gospel I proclaimed to you; you received it and have taken your stand on it. You are also saved by it, if you hold to the message I proclaimed to youunless you believed for no purpose. For I passed on to you as most important what I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that He was buried, that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve. Then He appeared to over 500 brothers at one time; most of them are still alive, but some have fallen asleep. Then He appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one abnormally born, He also appeared to me. For I am the least of the apostles, unworthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by Gods grace I am what I am, and His grace toward me was not ineffective. However, I worked more than any of them, yet not I, but Gods grace that was with me. Therefore, whether it is I or they, so we proclaim and so you have believed. (1 Corinthians 15:111, HCSB) Lets list the statements Paul makes in these eight verses. 1. This is Pauls gospel. 2. Paul received this gospel from others. 3. Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures (we will see in Section #3 what Scriptures Paul means). 4. Christ was buried. 5. Christ was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures. 6. Christ appeared to Peter (remember, Cephas is Aramaic for Peter). 7. After Peter, Christ appeared to the Twelve (this is a title for the 12 disciples, even actually since Judas died there were only 11). 8. After the Twelve, Christ appeared to over 500 believers at one time. 9. Most of these 500 believers are still alive. 10. After the 500 believers, Christ appeared to James (this has to be his brother James, since he had already appeared to James who was one of the Twelve disciples). 11. After all of these people, Jesus appeared also to Paul. 12. Whether Paul or the apostles, they all preach this same message about Jesus death and resurrection.

Actually, Galatia was a name for a Roman province which included a conquered country whose name was also Galatia.

Page 17 of 112

Page 18 of 112

Most scholars believe that verses 3-7 were actually something which people in the early days recited, something like the Apostles Creed or the Nicene Creed. Since Paul wrote this letter about 25 years after Jesus rose from the dead, that would mean this creed comes from an even earlier time! Since we are trying to find the simple facts of things, however, we are going to take as it is in 1 Corinthians without arguing about how much older it might be. What does 1 Corinthians 15:1-11 tell us about Jesus? First of all, what Paul is writing about Jesus death and resurrection is what he received from other people. When did Paul receive this story of Jesus? He could have received this from Ananias, the man who prayed for Paul to receive back his eyesight right after Jesus met with him. He could have been told this by any number of Christians during those first days after his conversion. We would not be surprised if Paul, the former Pharisee, would have asked pretty pointed questions about Jesus life, death and resurrection. In those early days, he would surely have investigated the events of Easter morning. Three years after his conversion, Paul spent fifteen days with Peter and met Jesus brother James as well. We can imagine what Peter must have told Paul about that first meeting with Jesus after Peter had denied him. We can also imagine what James must have told Paul about his first meeting with his brother after the resurrection. Also, Paul often stayed in Antioch, which was a center for Christian ministry in the early days of the church. Almost certainly some of those 500 believers who had witnessed Jesus in his resurrection body visited the church in Antioch and Paul certainly would have heard them speak and would have talked to them about what they experienced. We know that he visited Jerusalem at least once and probably twice before he wrote this letter to the Corinthians in 55 CE. That means that Paul would have had multiple opportunities to hear from other people still living in Jerusalem who had seen Jesus risen from the dead. What makes Pauls statement important for faith is that it is based on two very different facts; 1) the Hebrew Scriptures predicted it; 2) hundreds of eyewitnesses saw it. We will look at the evidence in the Hebrew Scriptures in our next section, but the information about the eyewitnesses is especially impressive, since none of those people are around any longer. Paul was telling everyone, Here is my gospel: Jesus died and after three days rose from the dead. The Hebrew Scriptures told us all along it was going to happen and it did. I know it did because I have met dozens of people who saw him after the resurrection, including three men who knew Jesus intimately. There is absolutely no question about it! Jesus is alive. Notice that Paul tells us in verse 11 something we have already seen in Galatianshe is preaching the same message that the apostles are preaching. In verse 3 he reminds his readers that he received it from others and in verse 11 he Page 19 of 112

assures them that it is the same message that the others all preach. We know that many accuse Paul of changing Christianity from the teachings of Jesus to something completely different. We also know that some people claim that Paul knew nothing about Jesus life. This chapter proves those theories to be entirely false. 1 Corinthians 15:1-11 establishes as a fact that Paul claimed that his gospel was the same gospel preached by the original apostles from the earliest days of the church. When Did Paul Preach His Gospel? According to Paul, he was preaching his gospel during the same years that Peter, James and John were preaching the gospel. We are almost certain that Paul wrote 1 Corinthians about 55 CE, which was 25 years after Jesus died and rose from the dead. We know that Peter, James and John were still alive at this point and were actively involved in ministry. There were almost 500 witnesses to Jesus resurrection still alive and preaching at that point. We also know that Paul claimed to preach the same message that all of them were preaching and have seen that if Paul was lying, he would sooner or later have been exposed. Think about the most drastic event that has ever happened in your life. In my life, my most prominent boyhood memory was the assassination of American President John F. Kennedy in 1963. My most prominent adult memories would be the births of my three children, the wedding of my oldest daughter and the death of my wifes father. You would not be able to convince me that these events are unreal because they are etched deeply into my memory. Certainly nothing was more profoundly etched into Peters mind than that moment when Jesus came to him, two days after Peter had publically denied that he knew Jesus (John 18:15-27). How could any moment in his life stand out more drastically than seeing the nail scars on the risen Lords hands? Certainly the same impact must have been true for Jesus brother James, who along with his other brothers and sisters had tried to drag Jesus away from his public teaching ministry because he thought Jesus was out of his mind. Wherever James was hiding on that Sunday after the crucifixion, we can be sure he never expected for Jesus to walk into the room. The reality of these encounters must have etched themselves into the minds of these eyewitnesses like acid cutting into steel, never to be lost. For twenty-five years, these eyewitnesses all had been preaching their stories about meeting the resurrected Jesus face to face and Paul had heard many of them. Paul as well preached their stories, as we see here in 1 Corinthians 15. It is simply inconceivable for Paul to have written 1 Corinthians 15:1-11, singling out all of these eyewitnesses by name unless his gospel really was the same as theirs. A little more than ten years after Paul wrote 1 Corinthians 15, he would Page 20 of 112

be chained in a prison awaiting his death sentence. Jesus brother James would already be dead, having been executed for his proclamation of the resurrection in 62 CE. Peter would soon follow Paul to death, possibly even the same year. Most of Jesus original twelve disciples would suffer the same fate. None of them, however, would deny what they claimed to have seen in 30 CE, because it was the most remarkable event of their entire livesJesus Christ was risen from the dead. I mentioned at the beginning of this section that Paul is the least understood Christian of the first century. Because we have more letters from him than everyone else combined, we think of him as independent from the apostles and other leaders of Christianity. Here we have seen that Paul knew several of the earliest apostles, preached the same gospel they preached, was considered by them to be joined together in the gospel, and that at least some of these other witnesses visited and preached at churches where Paul had preached. FACT: The earliest Christians, including men who had been Jesus disciples, believed that Jesus had been crucified and that they themselves were eyewitnesses to the resurrection of Jesus, whom they claimed rose three days after his death. This simple fact is enough for me to believe that Jesus is the Son of God who rose from the dead.

Statement # 2 Jesus was a Jew who lived and died in Palestine somewhere around 4BC to AD 30 (the dates may not be exact). This will be a short chapter, because virtually every professional historian believes that Jesus was a real person. Even without historians, we have already proven that just by reading what Paul wrote about meeting James, the brother of Jesus. The fact that Paul talks about Peter and John, the Twelve, the apostles, and over 500 witnesses proves to any historian that Jesus was a real person, because these statements were written while almost all of those people were still alive and were very like to visit someday the very churches to whom Paul was writing. Evidence Outside of the New Testament How Likely Is It to Be Famous Enough to Be Known by Historians? People do not realize how difficult it is for ancient people or events to make it onto the pages of a history book. A good example would be the Hittite people. Although the Old Testament mentions them over fifty times, until the second half of the nineteenth century, historians did not know of one scrap of Hittite archeological evidence. This led many historians to assume that the Hittite were mythological peoples and that the Bible was wrong about them. As time went on, however, historians began discovering evidence that the Hittites were a powerful nation, as powerful as Egypt.8 One would naturally think that historians would have known all about a nation which had as much influence as the Hittites had on ancient history, but they knew nothing. It is even less likely that historians would know about thousands and thousands of people whose lives might have a great impact on their culture at the time, but as the years went on would disappear from memory. Part of the reason is that writing was not common in the first century. Each book was hand written and then hand copied. Someone might live an important life, but there was little chance that someone would write down what the man did. It is even less likely that someone would write down the events of a persons life if that person lived far away from the center of political and philosophical life. The name and actions of a great man in the city of Rome might possibly make it into somebodys history (but possibly not); the name and actions of a great man in a far off province that nobody cared about would never even be mentioned in polite conversation, let alone be written down. If historians did not know that an entire powerful nation like the Hittites

Walter A. Elwell and Barry J. Beitzel, Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House, 1988), 980. Page 21 of 112 Page 22 of 112

existed and if it is unlikely that ancient writers would record the deeds of a great man even in Rome, then the likelihood of ancient writers saying anything about Jesus is close to impossible. Jesus ministry began 26 CE and was finished by 30 CE. Furthermore, Jesus certainly did not overthrow the government, command an army, or start a war. Making it even more unlikely that anyone would write about him is the fact that during those three short years, Jesus did ninety-five percent of his ministry in villages populated by poor people, not writers of history. Several critics claim that no historian writes about Jesus during his lifetime, implying by this that therefore the evidence is unreliable. The problem with that statement is that Jesus was only in public for three years and even that was in obscure villages in a remote province. What Do Historians Say About the Secular Evidence? Generally, historians accept Jesus lived between 4 BCE and 30 CE and that he was crucified. Gary Habermas says about the general historical consensus: Surprisingly few scholars have asserted that Jesus never existed or have attempted to cast total doubts on his life and ministry.9 Paul Maier, the Russell S. Seibert Professor of Ancient History at Western Michigan University said in an interview, Anybody who tries to use the argument that Jesus of Nazareth never existed [as a verifiable historical figure] is simply flaunting his or her ignorance. There is no serious question in the mind of any serious scholar, anywhere in the world that there certainly was a historical personality named Jesus of Nazareth. Now you can argue if he was the Son of God or not, argue about the supernatural aspects of his life, but in terms of the historical character of Jesus, all the evidence is in favour.10 Edwin Yamauchi, Professor of History at Miami University responded to a question about how much we would know about Jesus if we did not have the New Testament or Christian writers. We would know that first, Jesus was a Jewish teacher; second, many people believed that he performed healings and exorcisms; third, some people believed he was the Messiah; fourth, he was rejected by the Jewish leaders; fifth, he was crucified under Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius; sixth, despite this shameful death, his followers, who believed he was still alive, spread beyond Palestine so that there were multitudes of them in Rome by A.D. 64; and seventh, all kinds of people from the cities and

countrysidemen and women, slave and freeworshiped him as God.11 An anti-Christian agnostic New Testament scholar, Bart Erhman, wrote about the historicity of Jesus, One of the striking and, to many people, surprising facts about the first century is that we dont have any Roman records, of any kind, that attest to the existence of Jesus. We have no birth certificate, no references to his words or deeds, no accounts of his trial, no descriptions of his deathno reference to him whatsoever in any way, shape, or form. Jesuss name is not even mentioned in any Roman source of the first century. This does not mean, as is now being claimed with alarming regularity, that Jesus never existed. He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees, based on clear and certain evidence. But as with the vast majority of all persons who lived and died in the first century, he does not appear in the records of the Roman people.12 A Few Examples of Ancient Historical Evidence about Jesus Josephus: Josephus was a Jewish historian born around 37-38 CE and died about 100 CE. Although historians take his many statements cautiously, since he is known to exaggerate and to present himself and his people in a better light than perhaps they deserve, he is nevertheless one of the most important sources historians have for knowledge about first century Jewish history. He write a helpful description of John the Baptist and his fate which fits with what the gospels have to say about it. Did he mention Jesus? Yes, actually he did in two places, but the quotation is controversial because it is so explicit. Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful worksa teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; (64) and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he

Gary Habermas, The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ (Joplin, MO: College Press. 1996), p. 46.
10

11

Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ: A Journalists Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus (Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan, 1998), p. 87.
12

Paul Meier, interview, http://www.faithinterface.com.au/apologetics/the-historicity-of-jesus-paul-l-maier

Ehrman, Bart D. (February 2011). Forged: Writing in the Name of GodWhy the Bibles Authors Are Not Who We Think They Are. (EPUB).(First Edition. EPub ed.), p. 285.

Page 23 of 112

Page 24 of 112

appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.13 [(Josephus: Antiquities of the Jews: (XVIII 3.3. (63))] When Christians read this, they immediately consider this to be the strongest non-biblical evidence for Jesus one could find, and in a sense it is strong secular proof. The problem is that few historians believe it because it is simply too good to be true. Every single copy we have of Josephus has this statement in it and there is no textual manuscript evidence that some Christian tampered with the original statement, but scholars reject it or suggest that only a part of it was actually written by Josephus. Josephus also mentions James, the brother of Jesus in another place in Antiquities of the Jews (20:200). Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned; 14 There is nothing in this quotation which seems unhistorical either, so here are two good supports for the historicity of Jesus. Tacitus: Tacitus was a Roman historian who was born between A.D. 52-54. He wrote this comment about the Emperor Nero: But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the Bounties that the prince could bestow, nor all the atonements Which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero From the infamy of being believed to have ordered the Conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the rumor, he Falsely charged with the guilt, and punished Christians, who were Hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief Originated, but through the

city of Rome also, where all things Hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their Center and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first Made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an Immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of Firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. This at least tells us that Tacitus knew about what had happened to Jesus under Pontius Pilate. We cannot know where he learned about this, but as a Roman historian he at least did not deny the possibility that Pontius Pilate would have done this. Pliny the Younger: in 110 CE, Pliny, a governor in Bithynia, wrote a letter to the Emperor Trajan, asking for advice about what to do with Christians. He wrote this about them: They affirmed the whole of their guilt, or their error, was, that they met on a stated day before it was light, and addressed a form of prayer to Christ, as to a divinity, binding themselves by a solemn oath, not for the purposes of any wicked design, but never to commit any fraud, theft, or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble, to eat in common a harmless meal. The interesting part of this quote is the fact that only 80 years after Jesus died and rose again, people were already praying to Jesus as to God. This is not about Jesus, but it does tell us at least that he was seen as divine in Bithynia, which should not surprise us since is a common reality in Pauls letters as well. Is the Small Amount of Evidence a Problem? The evidence is not as small as it first might appear. Once we take into account the Christians writings which are both in the Bible and outside of the Bible, then we might want to think differently about the problem at hand. We have an ocean of Christian writings from early on. We have eyewitness accounts with amazing manuscript evidence for their authenticity. We have the astonishingly early accounts of Paul, writing twenty to thirty five years after the events happened, in close relationships with Jesus closest disciples. And then we also have a handful of non-Christian witnesses to early Christianity. Professional historians, when they examine the evidence, agree that Jesus was a real historical person. Obviously few of them believe that Jesus rose from the dead or is the Son of God. They do believe, however, that the early Christians fervently believed those things about Jesus. Fact: From secular history we know that Jesus was a real Jew who lived in Palestine and died by crucifixion. His followers believed that he came back Page 26 of 112

13

Flavius Josephus and William Whiston, The Works of Josephus : Complete and Unabridged (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996).
14

Flavius Josephus and William Whiston, The Works of Josephus : Complete and Unabridged (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996). Page 25 of 112

from the dead and they worship him as God.

Statement #3 The Old Testament is a very ancient book and historians currently possess ancient copies of much of it which were copied at least 100 years before Jesus was born. No one doubts that the Old Testament is a very ancient book. In this chapter we are not going to discuss how or when the Old Testament was originally written and passed on, even though this is an important subject for historians and students of the Bible. Our study here instead specifically focuses on the ancient portions of the Hebrew Old Testament which scholars are confident were copied before the birth of Jesus. Statement #1 claims that there are ancient copies of the Old Testament; this means we must understand the Dead Sea Scrolls, which are the most ancient copies of the Hebrew Bible.15 How Do We Know That Our Old Testaments Were Copied Before 4 BCE? Christians generally do not know much about the different ancient manuscripts for either Old or New Testament study. I have put all of that information in the Appendices so that we can stay on track here. Our question for this book does not need to believe that our current bibles are the same as Moses bible, but is much simpler. Did the Scriptures before 4 BCE (the suggested year that Jesus was born) have the same teachings and prophecies as the Bibles we have today? What would we find if we compared the teachings and prophecies in Hebrew Scriptures before 4 BCE with our own Bibles? Bibles Before 1947 Masoretic Text Group: A couple of simple explanations would help answer that question. First of all, before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947, bible translators used several different sources when they translated the Old Testament. First and foremost, translators depended upon Hebrew manuscripts which were copied by Jewish scholars, scholars who began their work in the 6th century.16 The texts that they produced are called the Masoretic text. Emanuel Tov, Professor in the Department of Bible at Hebrew University of Jerusalem, writes this about the Masoretic text. The name Masoretic text refers to a group of manuscripts (the

15

Historians also possess several fragments of the Septuagint from before Christ and the Nash Papyrus, but these do not help much in showing the nature of the Old Testament before the time of Jesus Christ.
16

Masoretic text." Encyclopdia Britannica. Encyclopdia Britannica Online Academic Edition. Encyclopdia Britannica Inc., 2012. Web. 24 Feb. 2012

Page 27 of 112

Page 28 of 112

M group) that are closely related to one another. Many of the elements of these manuscripts, including their final form, were determined in the early Middle Ages, but they continue a much earlier tradition. The name Masoretic Text was given to this group because of the apparatus of the Masorah17 attached to it. This apparatus, which was added to the consonantal base, developed from earlier traditions in the 7th to the 11th centuriesthe main developments occurring in the beginning of the 10th century with the activity of the Ben Asher family in Tiberias.18 There is not simply one Masoretic text, but many of them. Nevertheless they all come from the same ancient textual tradition. Over three thousand of these carefully copied Masoretic manuscripts exist today, none of which were produced earlier than the ninth century. Translators have based the grand majority of their work upon the best Masoretic texts. Septuagint: In addition to the Masoretic text, however, pre-1947 translators also made use of the Septuagint, an ancient Greek translation of the Old Testament. The Septuagint usually is close to the Masoretic text but not always. When translators had a question about a passage from the Masoretic text that did not seem to make sense, they consulted the Septuagint, which sometimes gave them helpful insights. When we read the New Testament quotations of the Old Testament, most of the time they are using the Septuagint as opposed to an ancestor of the Masoretic text. This explains why New Testament quotations are often different from the Old Testament source. They are using a slightly different version of the Old Testament.19 Before 1947, scholars also consulted ancient Latin and Syriac translations for help on answering questions about what the original text might have said. Samaritan Pentateuch: Along with these two groups of sources, pre-1947 translators also refer to the Samaritan Pentateuch, which has many similarities to the Masoretic texts, but also some differences. These Hebrew documents (the earliest manuscript is from the thirteenth century) cover only the first five books

of the Old Testament. Furthermore, even though we can find in some of the Dead Sea Scrolls patterns which are quite similar to what we find in the Samaritan Pentateuch, there is no way of knowing whether the copies we have today have a direct line of descent from ancient early copies.20 Adding up all of these resources, scholars depended mainly on the group of Masoretic texts for their translation work. They consulted the Septuagint, Samaritan Pentateuch, and a couple of other ancient translations. Until 1947, there was no way any historian could be sure that the biblical text of the Masorites or Septuagint was reliable. Perhaps most importantly, there was no way anyone could know that the history, teachings and prophecies of the Old Testament pre-dated Christianity. The Dead Sea Scrolls All of this changed with the discovery in 1947 of the Dead Sea Scrolls in the Judean desert. The Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered between 1947-1956 in the desert area near the Dead Sea. Among all of the caves and other sites in the Judean desert scholars have amassed 25,000 fragments of writings. Timothy Lim writes: Some of them include substantial portions of the originally undamaged text (e.g. the Temple Scroll); others one or more columns of writings. At the one extreme are scrolls that are nothing more than individual, tiny pieces or fragments. There are some 25,000 fragments and the figure cannot be more precise, because the counting depends upon the definition of a fragment.21 Piecing together those fragments as well the larger portions, scholars have identified about 240 manuscripts from Hebrew Old Testament books.22 Except for the book of Esther, historians have found portions or fragments from every other book of the Old Testament. The biblical copies date from approximately

20

Roberts, Bleddyn J. "The Old Testament: Manuscripts, Text and Versions." The West from the Fathers to the Reformation. Ed. G. W. H. Lampe. Cambridge University Press, 1969. Cambridge Histories Online. Cambridge University Press. 25 February 2012 DOI:10.1017/CHOL9780521042550.002, p. 24.
21

17

The Masorah are tiny symbols which help readers to know what the vowel sounds were in the Hebrew text. The original Hebrew written words had only consonants.
18

Lim, TH 2005, Dead Sea Scrolls : A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University Press, eBook Collection (EBSCOhost), EBSCOhost, viewed 24 February 2012, pg. 33.
22

Emanuel Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, Fortress Press, Third Edition, 2012, p. 24. Please consult the appendices for explanations concerning ancient manuscripts. Peter W. Flint, The Significance of the Biblical Dead Sea Scrolls, Southwestern Journal of Theology: Volume 53, Number 1, Fall 2010, pg. 16

19

Page 29 of 112

Page 30 of 112

250 BCE to 100 CE.23 Within this Judean desert group of manuscripts24 we now have a complete copy of Isaiah from before 100 BCE known as lQIsa, plus important portions of many books. Did the People Before 4 BCE Use a Different Bible From Ours? While there are hundreds of discussions about text types and other academic concerns, every single historian agrees that the Dead Sea Scrolls prove conclusively that the Old Testament we have translated from the Masoretic group of texts is the same Old Testament that existed before 4 BCE!25 There are differences between the various Dead Sea manuscripts and the 10th century and later Masoretic manuscripts, just as there are many differences among the various Dead Sea Scrolls themselves.26 Nevertheless, the differences never change the prophecies and teachings of the Old Testament. None of those difference in any way affect our Statement #1; in fact, they uphold it.27 Some of the differences among the Septuagint, Dead Sea Scrolls and the Masoretic group of texts are important to understand. The books of Jeremiah and Job are shorter in some of the older manuscripts and there are several variants which help us better understand difficult readings in the Masoretic group of texts. There are also many other small differences when we compare the Septuagint, Dead Sea Scrolls and Masoretic texts.28 Nevertheless, the prophecies, teachings, histories, prayerseverything in our Old Testamentare all there in the Dead Sea Scrolls as well.

What Do Scholars Say? No informed historian, by the way, disagrees with this, even though scholarly and important debates on other issues continue to rage and will for years to come. When you read a translation of a Dead Sea Scroll book, you feel right at home with it and would almost never notice a variation here or there. It is a simple thing to read Isaiah in the translated Masoretic Text and the Dead Sea Scroll side by side (see, for example, http://dss.collections.imj.org.il/chapters_pg). If you go to this website (and you should), look for the italicized words on the left hand column, since everything in italics is a variations between the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Masoretic group of texts. You will quickly realize that all of the discussion about variations are important to scholars but not really a concern to readers.29 The conclusion is undeniable; we can know what the Old Testament taught before 4 BCE, because the Old Testament simply has not changed in any serious way. The teachings, prophecies, psalms and proverbs were the same back then as they are now. Some Scholarly Assurances That Our Bibles Are the Same as the Pre-4 BCE Bibles The discoveries at Qumran, however, proved them wrong, by showing that the Masoretic text went back several more centuries into antiquity and had been accurately copied and transmitted. Although there are some differences in spelling and grammar between the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Masoretic text, the differences have not warranted any major changes in the substance of the OT. Yet they have helped biblical scholars gain a clearer understanding of the text.30 The differences (in Isaiah) between the Qumran text and the Masoretic Text (MT), the Hebrew text preserved from medieval manuscripts, separated in date by a thousand years, amounted to thirteen significant variants and a host of insignificant

23

Lim, TH 2005, Dead Sea Scrolls : A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University Press, eBook Collection (EBSCOhost), EBSCOhost, viewed 24 February 2012.
24

I refer to these as Judean Desert portions and fragments because since the initial Dead Sea Scroll discovery, historians have found several other very important scrolls and fragments. See "biblical literature." Encyclopdia Britannica. Encyclopdia Britannica Online Academic Edition. Encyclopdia Britannica Inc., 2012. Web. 24 Feb. 2012
25

Masoretic text." Encyclopdia Britannica. Encyclopdia Britannica Online Academic Edition. Encyclopdia Britannica Inc., 2012. Web. 24 Feb. 2012;
26

Please consult the appendices about understanding early manuscripts.

29

27

Talmon, Shemaryahu. "The Old Testament Text." From the Beginnings to Jerome. Eds. P. R. Ackroyd and C. F. Evans. Cambridge University Press, 1970. Cambridge Histories Online. Cambridge University Press. 24 February 2012 DOI:10.1017/CHOL9780521074186.008 p. 162.
28

The Israel Museum, The Dead Sea Scrolls, The English Translation of the Book of Isaiah (http://dss.collections.imj.org.il/chapters_pg).
30

Again, please consult the appendices about early manuscripts.

Walter A. Elwell and Barry J. Beitzel, Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House, 1988), 600. Page 32 of 112

Page 31 of 112

spelling differences, which have proved a gold mine for the study of first-century B.C. Palestinian Hebrew. This illustrated the care with which the text of Isaiah had been transmitted over the centuries31 Whatever differences may have existed between the community at Qumran and the mainstream of Jews from which they separated, it is certain that both used common biblical texts. The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls is thus a witness to the antiquity and accurate transmission of the biblical text.32 It should, however, be stressed that these errors and textual divergences between the versions materially affect the intrinsic message only in relatively few instances. Nevertheless this may occur. Some examples of variants significant from a theological or ideo-historical angle may in fact be found. In most instances the differences are of a linguistic or a grammatical nature, which resulted either from the unpremeditated impact of the linguistic peculiarities of successive generations of copyists, or from their intentional attempts to adjust the wording of scripture to changing concepts of linguistic and stylistic norms.33 What Does All of This Mean for Simple Faith? Maybe this information we just covered does not seem very simple at all, but we originally set out to show that the Old Testament we have today dates from before 4 BCE. You now know what those ancient copies were (the Dead Sea Scrolls). Furthermore, you know that scholars describe lots of variations and textual traditions which have been revealed by the Dead Sea Scrolls, but they also strongly affirm that our Old Testament has not changed in the actual history,

prophecies, etc. There are variations but even in the cases of Jeremiah and Job where the size of the book is smaller, it does not change the important content of the Old Testament. So... in the next chapter we are about to talk about what the Old Testament writers taught about a person (sometimes called the Messiah) who was coming in the future. We now know that whatever was written about the coming of this Messiah, it was definitely written before BCE 4, the generally accepted birth date of Jesus. If we discover passages in the Old Testament which sound as if they are describing Jesus, we know that those passages were not written after Jesus came but before. This is not simply a matter of faith but of historical fact, backed up with hundreds of manuscript fragments and accepted by virtually every historian in the world. FACT: The Old Testament we have today is substantially the same as the Old Testament which existed before 4 BCE. _________________________________________________________________ _

Statement #4 There is a very strong theme in the Old Testament which focuses on a future person who is sometimes called the Messiah. Many different passages in the Old Testament describe this person as a human being, as God, Savior, worldwide ruler reigning in Jerusalem for eternity, suffering servant who would die and then rise again, sacrifice who would bear all of the sins of the world in his body, source of blessing for the nations of the earth. The idea of someone coming in the future who is going to make things right stands at the center of the teachings of the Old Testament. In the last chapter, we looked outside the Bible to manuscripts and historians to understand how ancient our copies of the Old Testament are, but anyone with a Bible and some free time could investigate whether Statement #2 is fact. There are different ways to show this, but I think the direct approach would be the best. The One Who Will Crush the Serpent

31

Paul J. Achtemeier, Publishers Harper & Row and Society of Biblical Literature, Harper's Bible Dictionary, 1st ed. (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985), 917.
32

Walter A. Elwell and Philip Wesley Comfort, Tyndale Bible Dictionary, Tyndale reference library (Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001), 181.
33

Talmon, Shemaryahu. "The Old Testament Text." From the Beginnings to Jerome. Eds. P. R. Ackroyd and C. F. Evans. Cambridge University Press, 1970. Cambridge Histories Online. Cambridge University Press. 24 February 2012 DOI:10.1017/CHOL9780521074186.008

Page 33 of 112

Page 34 of 112

This theme, someone is coming in the future who is going to make things right, starts at the very beginning of the Old Testament, in Genesis 3. In this story, the first man and the first woman have been deceived by a talking serpent and are about to be punished. Before God pronounces their punishment, he first confronts the serpent. Then the LORD God said to the serpent: Because you have done this, you are cursed more than any livestock and more than any wild animal. You will move on your belly and eat dust all the days of your life. I will put hostility between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed. He will strike your head, and you will strike his heel. (Genesis 3:1415, HCSB) God punishes the snake by warning him that the womans seed, i.e., her descendant, would strike the head of the snake. The key here for our purposes is that this seed of the woman is someone in the future, someone who has not yet come. His impact? To strike the head of the one who deceived the woman into sinning against God. The One Through Whom All the Families of the Earth Will Be Blessed When God sends Abraham to the mountains of Moriah, he commands him to bring his son Isaac as a whole burnt offering sacrifice. There in the mountains, just as Abraham is about to run a knife through his son, the Angel of the Lord calls out to stop him. Abraham stops and the Angel of the Lord says to him, Then the Angel of the LORD called to Abraham a second time from heaven and said, By Myself I have sworn, this is the LORDs declaration: Because you have done this thing and have not withheld your only son, I will indeed bless you and make your offspring as numerous as the stars of the sky and the sand on the seashore. Your offspring will possess the gates of their enemies. And all the nations of the earth will be blessed by your offspring because you have obeyed My command. (Genesis 22:1518, HCSB) In this case, God will bless all of the families of the earth through Abrahams descendant. It is possible, of course, that God here means descendants since

that is what it is in the verse before. Nevertheless, when New Testament Jew Paul looked at it, he interpreted it to mean one person.1 The One Will Come Through the Tribe of Judah Abrahams son Isaac fathers Jacob, who fathers twelve sons. On Jacobs deathbed, he pronounces this blessing on his son, Judah. Judah is a young lion my son, you return from the kill. He crouches; he lies down like a lion or a lionesswho dares to rouse him? The scepter will not depart from Judah or the staff from between his feet until He whose right it is comes and the obedience of the peoples belongs to Him. He ties his donkey to a vine, and the colt of his donkey to the choice vine. He washes his clothes in wine and his robes in the blood of grapes. His eyes are darker than wine, and his teeth are whiter than milk. (Genesis 49:912, HCSB) This is about someone in the future who will come and will receive the obedience of the people. Some versions say, Until Shiloh comes,2 but nobody really knows what that means. The version we are using here, the Holman Christian Standard Bible says, until he whose right it is comes... They take this from the Septuagint and it makes much more sense. In either case, it is talking about someone in the future who will rule the peoples of the world. The One Who Will Come Will Be a Great Ruler I see him, but not now; I perceive him, but not near. A star will come from Jacob, and a scepter will arise from Israel. He will smash the forehead of Moab and strike down all the Shethites. Edom will become a possession; Seir will become a possession of its enemies, but Israel will be triumphant. One who comes

Now the Scripture saw in advance that God would justify the Gentiles by faith and told the good news ahead of time to Abraham, saying, All the nations will be blessed through you. (Galatians 3:8, HCSB)
2

The scepter shall not depart from Judah, Nor the rulers staff from between his feet, Until Shiloh comes, And to him shall be the obedience of the peoples. (Genesis 49:10, NASB95)

Page 35 of 112

Page 36 of 112

from Jacob will rule; he will destroy the citys survivors. (Numbers 24:1719, HCSB) This prophecy comes from Balaam, a pagan priest hired to curse the Hebrews when they were in the wilderness. This person could, of course, be King David, but it is another in a building line of promises about someone coming in the future. Most importantly, however, we must note that this person will be a ruler who destroys Israels enemies. The Coming Prophet The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own brothers. You must listen to him. This is what you requested from the LORD your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly when you said, Let us not continue to hear the voice of the LORD our God or see this great fire any longer, so that we will not die! Then the LORD said to me, They have spoken well. I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers. I will put My words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him. I will hold accountable whoever does not listen to My words that he speaks in My name. (Deuteronomy 18:1519, HCSB) Moses speaks this promise right at the end of his long life with the Hebrew people. He assures them that God will raise up a Jew (notice that it is from among your own brothers) who will be like Moses. This coming one (notice again the constant theme about one who is coming) will be much more than a foreteller of the future but will lead the Jews in the way Moses did, who brought them out of slavery in Egypt and gave them the Law. God says that he will put his words into this coming prophets mouth and he will hold accountable whoever does not listen to this coming one. We have no record of a prophet coming who was like Moses. No prophet dared suggest that he was. The House of David Will Rule Forever The LORD declares to you: The LORD Himself will make a house for you. When your time comes and you rest with your Page 37 of 112

fathers, I will raise up after you your descendant, who will come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. He will build a house for My name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be a father to him, and he will be a son to Me. When he does wrong, I will discipline him with a human rod and with blows from others. But My faithful love will never leave him as I removed it from Saul; I removed him from your way. Your house and kingdom will endure before Me forever, and your throne will be established forever. (2 Samuel 7:1116, HCSB) This prophecy is about Solomon, but certainly in the end it has to be about the unending rule of Davids descendants. This promise is an absolute promise that regardless of what happens (my faithful love will never leave him as I removed it from Saul...) Davids line will rule on the throne. This promise, of course, is impossible, because no nation is going to last forever and no kingly line is going to outlast the earth and the heavens. This promise, however, is picked up often throughout the rest of the Old Testament. God Refers to the One Who Is Coming as His Son Why do the nations rebel and the peoples plot in vain? The kings of the earth take their stand, and the rulers conspire together against the LORD and His Anointed One: Let us tear off their chains and free ourselves from their restraints. The One enthroned in heaven laughs; the Lord ridicules them. Then He speaks to them in His anger and terrifies them in His wrath: I have consecrated My King on Zion, My holy mountain. I will declare the LORDs decree: He said to Me, You are My Son; today I have become Your Father. Ask of Me, and I will make the nations Your inheritance and the ends of the earth Your possession. You will break them with a rod of iron; You will shatter them like pottery. So now, kings, be wise; receive instruction, you judges of the earth. Serve the LORD with reverential awe and rejoice with trembling. Pay homage to the Son or He will be angry and you will perish in your rebellion, for His anger may ignite at any moment. All those who take refuge in Him are happy. (Psalm 2:112, HCSB) Page 38 of 112

God can certainly call a human being his son without it implying deity, but this particular Psalm describes this one who is coming as one who will possess the ends of the earth. This could simply be poetic exaggeration (it is poetry, after all), but it seems to be more than that. The coming one will have a universal rule. The Coming One Will Be a Branch from King David Below is a simple list of passages which describe the coming one as a branch coming from David. The days are coming this is the LORDs declaration when I will raise up a Righteous Branch of David. He will reign wisely as king and administer justice and righteousness in the land. In His days Judah will be saved, and Israel will dwell securely. This is what He will be named: Yahweh Our Righteousness. (Jeremiah 23:56, HCSB) Look, the days are coming this is the LORDs declaration when I will fulfill the good promises that I have spoken concerning the house of Israel and the house of Judah. In those days and at that time I will cause a Righteous Branch to sprout up for David, and He will administer justice and righteousness in the land. In those days Judah will be saved, and Jerusalem will dwell securely, and this is what she will be named: Yahweh Our Righteousness. (Jeremiah 33:1416, HCSB) Then a shoot will grow from the stump of Jesse, and a branch from his roots will bear fruit. The Spirit of the LORD will rest on Him a Spirit of wisdom and understanding, a Spirit of counsel and strength, a Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD. His delight will be in the fear of the LORD. He will not judge by what He sees with His eyes, He will not execute justice by what He hears with His ears, but He will judge the poor righteously and execute justice for the oppressed of the land. He will strike the land with discipline from His mouth, and He will kill the wicked with a command from His lips. Righteousness will be a belt around His loins; faithfulness will be a belt around His

waist. The wolf will live with the lamb, and the leopard will lie down with the goat. The calf, the young lion, and the fatling will be together, and a child will lead them. The cow and the bear will graze, their young ones will lie down together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox. An infant will play beside the cobras pit, and a toddler will put his hand into a snakes den. None will harm or destroy another on My entire holy mountain, for the land will be as full of the knowledge of the LORD as the sea is filled with water. On that day the root of Jesse will stand as a banner for the peoples. The nations will seek Him, and His resting place will be glorious. (Isaiah 11:110, HCSB) This is what the Lord GOD says: I will take a sprig from the lofty top of the cedar and plant it. I will pluck a tender sprig from its topmost shoots, and I will plant it on a high towering mountain. I will plant it on Israels high mountain so that it may bear branches, produce fruit, and become a majestic cedar. Birds of every kind will nest under it, taking shelter in the shade of its branches. Then all the trees of the field will know that I am Yahweh. I bring down the tall tree, and make the low tree tall. I cause the green tree to wither and make the withered tree thrive. I, Yahweh, have spoken and I will do it. (Ezekiel 17:2224, HCSB) These promises about the one who is coming describe the kind of rule he will have. He will be righteous, fair, faithful, wise, and judge wisely. He will also rule powerfully over the whole earth. In addition, he will bring peace and security specifically to the Jews. The Spirit of God will rest upon him as well. These passages are just a few of many more which talk in similar ways about the coming one. The Coming One Will Be Born in Bethlehem Bethlehem Ephrathah, you are small among the clans of Judah; One will come from you to be ruler over Israel for Me. His origin is from antiquity, from eternity. Therefore, He will abandon them until the time when she who is in labor has given birth; then the rest of His brothers will return to the people of

Page 39 of 112

Page 40 of 112

Israel. He will stand and shepherd them in the strength of Yahweh, in the majestic name of Yahweh His God. They will live securely, for then His greatness will extend to the ends of the earth. He will be their peace. When Assyria invades our land, when it marches against our fortresses, we will raise against it seven shepherds, even eight leaders of men. (Micah 5:25, HCSB) The Coming One Will Be Born a Child Yet Be Mighty God Nevertheless, the gloom of the distressed land will not be like that of the former times when He humbled the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali. But in the future He will bring honor to the Way of the Sea, to the land east of the Jordan, and to Galilee of the nations. The people walking in darkness have seen a great light; a light has dawned on those living in the land of darkness. You have enlarged the nation and increased its joy. The people have rejoiced before You as they rejoice at harvest time and as they rejoice when dividing spoils. For You have shattered their oppressive yoke and the rod on their shoulders, the staff of their oppressor, just as You did on the day of Midian. For the trampling boot of battle and the bloodied garments of war will be burned as fuel for the fire. For a child will be born for us, a son will be given to us, and the government will be on His shoulders. He will be named Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. The dominion will be vast, and its prosperity will never end. He will reign on the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish and sustain it with justice and righteousness from now on and forever. The zeal of the LORD of Hosts will accomplish this. (Isaiah 9:17, HCSB) This remarkable passage tells us first of all that light will come to the area of Galilee. It then describes the coming one in unmistakable terms. He will be born as a child who is given to them. The government will rest on his shoulders. He will have four names: Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.

No prophet would ever give the names Mighty God and Eternal Father to any human being. In fact, it would be blasphemous even to consider doing this, but this is exactly what Isaiah wrote and what God says will happen. Furthermore, he will rule on Davids throne (showing us that he is the same one promised in so many other passages) and will reign eternally! The Coming One Will Be Gods Servant Starting Isaiah 42, we have four remarkable passages about this coming one who is labeled Gods servant. Each one of these passages is clearly connected to what Isaiah and the rest of the Old Testament has already told usthe coming one will be King, will come from Judah and David, will be powerful, will be righteous, will bringing in wonderful prosperity especially for Israel. The four Servant Songs as they are often called, bring us new information about this coming one. Servant Song #1: Come in Quietness, A Light to the Nations This is My Servant; I strengthen Him, this is My Chosen One; I delight in Him. I have put My Spirit on Him; He will bring justice to the nations. He will not cry out or shout or make His voice heard in the streets. He will not break a bruised reed, and He will not put out a smoldering wick; He will faithfully bring justice. He will not grow weak or be discouraged until He has established justice on earth. The islands will wait for His instruction. This is what God, Yahweh, says who created the heavens and stretched them out, who spread out the earth and what comes from it, who gives breath to the people on it and life to those who walk on it I, Yahweh, have called You for a righteous purpose, and I will hold You by Your hand. I will keep You and appoint You to be a covenant for the people and a light to the nations, in order to open blind eyes, to bring out prisoners from the dungeon, and those sitting in darkness from the prison house. (Isaiah 42:17, HCSB) Servant Song #2: A Light to the Nations, Abhorred by his People Coastlands, listen to me; distant peoples, pay attention. The LORD called me before I was born. He named me while I was in my mothers womb. He made my words like a sharp sword; He hid me in the shadow of His hand. He made me like a sharpened Page 42 of 112

Page 41 of 112

arrow; He hid me in His quiver. He said to me, You are My Servant, Israel; I will be glorified in him. But I myself said: I have labored in vain, I have spent my strength for nothing and futility; yet my vindication is with the LORD, and my reward is with my God. And now, says the LORD, who formed me from the womb to be His Servant, to bring Jacob back to Him so that Israel might be gathered to Him; for I am honored in the sight of the LORD, and my God is my strength He says, It is not enough for you to be My Servant raising up the tribes of Jacob and restoring the protected ones of Israel. I will also make you a light for the nations, to be My salvation to the ends of the earth. This is what the LORD, the Redeemer of Israel, his Holy One, says to one who is despised, to one abhorred by people, to a servant of rulers: Kings will see and stand up, and princes will bow down, because of the LORD, who is faithful, the Holy One of Israel and He has chosen you . (Isaiah 49:17, HCSB) Servant Song #3: The Coming One Will Be Beaten The Lord GOD has given Me the tongue of those who are instructed to know how to sustain the weary with a word. He awakens Me each morning; He awakens My ear to listen like those being instructed. The Lord GOD has opened My ear, and I was not rebellious; I did not turn back. I gave My back to those who beat Me, and My cheeks to those who tore out My beard. I did not hide My face from scorn and spitting. The Lord GOD will help Me; therefore I have not been humiliated; therefore I have set My face like flint, and I know I will not be put to shame. The One who vindicates Me is near; who will contend with Me? Let us confront each other. Who has a case against Me? Let him come near Me! In truth, the Lord GOD will help Me; who will condemn Me? Indeed, all of them will wear out like a garment; a moth will devour them. (Isaiah 50:49, HCSB) This unexpected turn in promises about the coming one tells us that he would be beaten, his beard would be torn and he would be spat upon.

Servant Song #4: The Coming One Will Die for the Sins of the People In this passage, each sentence tells us something important about this coming one. Isaiah 52:1353:12 (HCSB)
Exalted
13

See My Servant will act wisely; He will be raised and lifted up and greatly exalted.
14

Disfigured

Just as many were appalled at You His appearance was so disfigured that He did not look like a man and His form did not resemble a human being
15

Sprinkle many nations No one believed Nothing impressive

so He will sprinkle many nations. Kings will shut their mouths because of Him For they will see what had not been told them and they will understand what they had not heard.
1

Who has believed what we have heard? And who has the arm of the LORD been revealed to?
2

He grew up before Him like a young plant and like a root out of dry ground. He didnt have an impressive form or majesty that we should look at Him no appearance that we should desire Him.
3

Despised and rejected Bore our sickness and pain but we saw him as struck down by God

He was despised and rejected by men a man of suffering who knew what sickness was. He was like someone people turned away from; He was despised and we didnt value Him.
4

Yet He Himself bore our sicknesses and He carried our pains; but we in turn regarded Him stricken struck down by God and afflicted.

Page 43 of 112

Page 44 of 112

Pierce, crushed, punished for our transgressi ons and healing He was punished because of our sin He did not defend himself Put to death because of the peoples rebellion Grave with wicked and rich man in death The Lord crushed him, but he comes back to life. He will be satisfied with his knowledge and will justify many and carry their sins

But He was pierced because of our transgressions crushed because of our iniquities; punishment for our peace was on Him and we are healed by His wounds.

In the end exalted but bore the sins of many

12

Therefore I will give Him the many as a portion, and He will receive the mighty as spoil, because He submitted Himself to death, and was counted among the rebels; yet He bore the sin of many and interceded for the rebels.

We all went astray like sheep; we all have turned to our own way; and the LORD has punished Him for the iniquity of us all.

There are so many remarkable aspects of this passage, but I will mention only five: 1) The servant is rejected by the people; 2) The servant is beaten by the people; 3) The servant dies; 4) The servant comes back to life and is exalted; 5) The servant endures all of this to bear the sins of the people.

He was oppressed and afflicted yet He did not open His mouth. Like a lamb led to the slaughter and like a sheep silent before her shearers He did not open His mouth.
8

He was taken away because of oppression and judgment; and who considered His fate? For He was cut off from the land of the living; He was struck because of my peoples rebellion.

Daniel 9:24-27 Predicting the Year the Coming One Would Arrive There is a clear passage in the book of Daniel that tells us when the coming one which be revealed to the world. This passage is so astonishing that one hardly knows why it is so unknown among Christians everywhere. This prophecy tells us precisely when the Messiah would be revealed to the world. 24 Seventy weeks are decreed about your people and your holy city to bring the rebellion to an end, to put a stop to sin, to wipe away iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most holy place. 25 Know and understand this: From the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince will be seven weeks and 62 weeks. It will be rebuilt with a plaza and a moat, but in difficult times. 26 After those 62 weeks the Messiah will be cut off and will have nothing. The people of the coming prince will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come with a flood, and until the end there will be war; desolations are decreed. (Daniel 9:2426 (HCSB)) Daniel 9:25-26 makes a bold prediction. First, it predicts that someone would give a command to restore and rebuild Jerusalem. Then it says that after 483 years, the Messiah would come. He would then be killed and all of this would happen to put and end to sin and bring in ever lasting righteousness. There are a couple of features to this prophecy that we should understand. First of all, it is partially a prophecy that Jerusalem would be rebuilt over a period of 49 years. This rebuilding process had to happen because Jerusalem had been terribly destroyed by Babylon in 587 BCE. The people were taken way Page 46 of 112

They made His grave with the wicked and with a rich man at His death although He had done no violence and had not spoken deceitfully.
10

Yet the LORD was pleased to crush Him severely. When You make Him a restitution offering He will see His seed He will prolong His days and by His hand the LORDs pleasure will be accomplished.
11

He will see it out of His anguish and He will be satisfied with His knowledge. My righteous Servant will justify many and He will carry their iniquities.

Page 45 of 112

from the land and few were left to care for the crushed walls and temple in Jerusalem. This is known as the exile period, when the Jews lived far away from Israel. Daniel 9:26: From the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem... 458 BCE, Ezra, an official for Jewish affairs in the Persian court, was given permission to lead an expedition from Persia to Jerusalem. The King, Artaxerxes, gave this command: You may do whatever seems best to you and your brothers with the rest of the silver and gold, according to the will of your God. You must deliver to the God of Jerusalem all the articles given to you for the service of the house of your God. You may use the royal treasury to pay for anything else needed for the house of your God. So, in 458 BC, Ezra let a delegation of Jews to Jerusalem to begin the process of restoring the Temple and the city. They were not very successful until Nehemiah arrived two years later. ...... until Messiah the Prince will be seven weeks and 62 weeks 26 CE is when the Messiah would come! Seven week and 62 weeks = 483 years (7+62=69) When it says seven weeks and 62 weeks it is actually talking about weeks of years. The bible organized not only days and weeks (7 days a week, 52 weeks a year), it also organized into years. Moses specifically commanded the Jews to mark off their years by sevens, so that after 6 years, farmers would allow their fields to lie unfarmed during the seventh year. This is taught in Leviticus 25:1-8 and Exodus 23:10-11.3 So when Daniel talks about 7 weeks, he is dividing out the years the way God divided them.
31

Here in Daniel 9:25, we read that Messiah the Prince will be seven weeks and 62 weeks, he means 49 years and 434 years (7*7 & 62 * 7). Add the 49 and the 434 and you come up with 483 years. 483 from the time the command went out in 458 BCE, the Messiah would come. Here is an astonishing prediction of when the Messiah would come! If you do the simple mathematics and take into account that there is no year 0, if you count 483 years (i.e., 62+7 groups of 7 years) from 458 BCE you arrive at 26 CE. It will be rebuilt with a plaza and a moat, but in difficult times. 458-409 BCE is the period where the entire city of Jerusalem is being rebuilt, but that was a struggle every step of the way. 9:26 After those 62 weeks the Messiah will be cut off and will have nothing... Sometime after 26 A.D., the Messiah will be killed and have nothing. The phrase cut off often means to be put to death. Whenever it is used about people being cut off, it is always describes an execution as opposed to a natural death. When it says that the Messiah will have nothing, it means that the Messiah would be executed and he would die without anything (no power, no authority in this world, no honor, no wealth, no influence). This prophecy tells us when the Messiah would come (26 CE) and what would happen to him (he will be executed). Most scholars believe that Jesus began his ministry 26 CE and all scholars believe that Jesus was executed. Finally, Daniel even tells us why God was going to allow the Messiah to be executed sometime after 26 CE. Seventy weeks are decreed about your people and your holy city to bring the rebellion to an end, to put a stop to sin, to wipe away iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most holy place. Daniel 9:24 When Daniel tells us why the Messiah would die, it sounds so similar to the reasons given by Isaiah. Daniel 9:24 to bring rebellion to an end to put a stop to sin 52:12-53:12. 53:4 Yet He Himself bore our sicknesses and He carried our pains 53:5 the punishment for our peace was on Him and we are healed by His wounds Page 48 of 112

The Lord said to Moses on Mount Sinai, 2Speak to the Israelites and say to them: When you enter the land I am going to give you, the land itself must observe a sabbath to the Lord. 3For six years sow your fields, and for six years prune your vineyards and gather their crops. 4But in the seventh year the land is to have a sabbath of rest, a sabbath to the Lord. Do not sow your fields or prune your vineyards. 5Do not reap what grows of itself or harvest the grapes of your untended vines. The land is to have a year of rest. 6Whatever the land yields during the sabbath year will be food for youfor yourself, your manservant and maidservant, and the hired worker and temporary resident who live among you, 7as well as for your livestock and the wild animals in your land. Whatever the land produces may be eaten. 8 Count off seven sabbaths of yearsseven times seven yearsso that the seven sabbaths of years amount to a period of forty-nine years. [Leviticus 25:1-8; also commanded in Exodus 23:10-11; and mentioned in Nehemiah 10:31]

Page 47 of 112

to bring in everlasting righteousness

53:6 LORD has punished Him for the iniquity of us all.

Too Much Information At this point, you need to step back and look over the long list of prophecies listed in this section. Would you describe this evidence as too much information to ignore? So far, we have shown that virtually every historian will agree that our current Old Testament is sufficiently the same as the Old Testament used before 4 BCE. We have shown that virtually every historian agrees that Jesus was born somewhere around 4 BCE and that he died probably by crucifixion 30 BCE. We have done a survey of Old Testament prophecies about the coming one and have discovered that not only do they describe his character and his coming, but they even describe in vivid detail his rejection and death and resurrection, even telling us when he would appear on the scene. Furthermore, these prophecies tell us why the Messiah had to die and rise again. All of these prophecies in the Old Testament are facts. If someone should say to you, Oh, thats not what they mean! you would simply sit down and look over each one of these prophecies carefully and honestly. Maybe one or two of them could be interpreted differently, but not ten or twelve! And certainly not prophecies which accurately predict when Jesus would come and what would happen to him at his crucifixion. And these are only the clearest prophecies. There are many more within the pages of the Old Testament. It would be enough to stop our studies at this point, since we really have all of the facts we need to take steps of simple faith. Honestly, it would not matter what attack someone might bring against your faith, these passages can give you the confidence you need to stand. The following chapters are important for your faith, however, because those with simple faith needs to figure out how this Messiah Jesus wants them to live in this world. FACT: The Old Testament gives many prophecies which predict the birth, actual year of ministry, life, death, and resurrection of the Messiah, some of it in remarkable detail. What we know about Jesus life from secular history is enough to know for certain that Jesus is this Messiah predicted by the prophets. What we know from Pauls writings makes it absolutely undeniable that Jesus is this Messiah.

Statement #5 The four Gospels present Jesus teaching that he has come to begin a new eternal kingdom (called the kingdom of God or heaven) which will eventually be fully experienced in a recreated Heavens and Earth, although now it is only experienced in Jesus the Messiah through the work of the Holy Spirit. We have a book in our university library on the kingdom of God that is thicker than a dictionary, profoundly written and full of insight, yet that book scratches only the surface of what Jesus proclaimed during his earthly ministry. What you are about to read will tell you only that according to the four gospels, Jesus talked more the kingdom of God than any other subjects put together and will describe five characteristics of Jesus teachings about the kingdom. So much more could be said; our purpose here is not to explain the kingdom but to lay the groundwork for simple faith. Pauls Teachings about the Kingdom of God Before we turn to Jesus, lets look at Paul, the man whom all historians agree is an early Christian writer. What you read below is a matter of history and not just theology. First we will quote from three of those books which all historians agree are authentically written by Paul. We will then quote from other books that in varying degrees are accepted as written by Paul. If we want to know what early Christians talked about and believed thirty years after Jesus death and resurrection, we need only read these letters from Paul. Pauls Focus: The Messiah: First of all, Paul specifically use the word kingdom only fourteen times in all of his letters. Instead of focusing our attention on the kingdom, he builds his theology on the Messiah, often talking about what it means to be in the Messiah. In our English translations, we read this as in Christ, which comes from the Greek word for Messiah. Sadly, we assume this is Jesus last name but it is anything but a name at all. It is title, but even more than a title. It is the constant realization that all of Gods promises and purposesthe very ones we read about in our section about Old Testament propheciesall of these come to their realization in the Messiah. Whenever Paul talks about in the Messiah, (in our Bibles in Christ, a massive theme in his writings) he is actually describing the history of the Bible beginning with Genesis. He is painting the plan of God to crush the snakes head, to bless all of the families of the earth, to bring a child whose name would be mighty God and would rule on the throne of David forever. If you have the time, you should glance over our section on Old Testament prophecies about the coming of the Messiah and think through exactly what Paul meant when he said in the Messiah.

Page 49 of 112

Page 50 of 112

Thinking about those prophecies (and there are so many others we did not have time to examine), one immediately is struck with the fact that this Messiah is a universal king. Here is just one of many such passages: Then a shoot will grow from the stump of Jesse, and a branch from his roots will bear fruit. The Spirit of the LORD will rest on Him a Spirit of wisdom and understanding, a Spirit of counsel and strength, a Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD. His delight will be in the fear of the LORD. He will not judge by what He sees with His eyes, He will not execute justice by what He hears with His ears, but He will judge the poor righteously and execute justice for the oppressed of the land. He will strike the land with discipline from His mouth, and He will kill the wicked with a command from His lips. Righteousness will be a belt around His loins; faithfulness will be a belt around His waist. The wolf will live with the lamb, and the leopard will lie down with the goat. The calf, the young lion, and the fatling will be together, and a child will lead them. The cow and the bear will graze, their young ones will lie down together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox. An infant will play beside the cobras pit, and a toddler will put his hand into a snakes den. None will harm or destroy another on My entire holy mountain, for the land will be as full of the knowledge of the LORD as the sea is filled with water. On that day the root of Jesse will stand as a banner for the peoples. The nations will seek Him, and His resting place will be glorious. (Isaiah 11:110, HCSB) Paul certainly was very familiar with all of these prophecies. Therefore, when Paul talks about Jesus the Messiah he is including in that word all that the Old Testament promised about the Messiah, that he would eternally and universally reign on the throne of David, as well as the fact that he would bring in everlasting righteousness and peace. It would be impossible for a first century Jew to think of the Messiah without primarily thinking of his kingship over the whole earth. To be in the Messiah is to be united to the universal King. If Paul mentions the Kingdom of God only fourteen times officially, he mentions the King every time he uses the word Messiah, a concept which is without a doubt the key to understanding Pauls theology. The Kingdom Is Future: We can see this when we look at the fourteen passages which use the phrase the kingdom of God. First of all, it is something which is coming in the future. For example, Paul writes, But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since death came through a Page 51 of 112

man, the resurrection of the dead also comes through a man. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ, the firstfruits; afterward, at His coming, those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to God the Father, when He abolishes all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign until He puts all His enemies under His feet. The last enemy to be abolished is death. For God has put everything under His feet. But when it says everything is put under Him, it is obvious that He who puts everything under Him is the exception. And when everything is subject to Christ, then the Son Himself will also be subject to the One who subjected everything to Him, so that God may be all in all. (1 Corinthians 15:2028, HCSB) Remember, when Paul writes Christ will overcome all spiritual rulers, authorities, and powers... he is saying, The Messiah will overcome all spiritual rulers, authorities, and powers.... Paul gives us a time line for this kingdom. First Christ will possess the kingdom as he overcomes all rulers and then he will hand it over to God the Father. We read in several passages about the future kingdom. Paul writes that it is something which believers will inherit in the future and the immoral will not inherit. Now the works of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, moral impurity, promiscuity, idolatry, sorcery, hatreds, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, selfish ambitions, dissensions, factions, envy, drunkenness, carousing, and anything similar. I tell you about these things in advanceas I told you beforethat those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. (Galatians 5:1921, HCSB) Dont you know that the unrighteous will not inherit Gods kingdom? Do not be deceived: No sexually immoral people, idolaters, adulterers, or anyone practicing homosexuality, no thieves, greedy people, drunkards, verbally abusive people, or swindlers will inherit Gods kingdom. And some of you used to be like this. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (1 Corinthians 6:911, HCSB) For know and recognize this: Every sexually immoral or impure or greedy person, who is an idolater, does not have an inheritance in the kingdom of the Messiah and of God. Let no Page 52 of 112

one deceive you with empty arguments, for Gods wrath is coming on the disobedient because of these things. Therefore, do not become their partners. (Ephesians 5:57, HCSB) Paul describes this future kingdom of God as coming when Jesus returns in his glory. It is a clear evidence of Gods righteous judgment that you will be counted worthy of Gods kingdom, for which you also are suffering, since it is righteous for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you and to reward with rest you who are afflicted, along with us. This will take place at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with His powerful angels, taking vengeance with flaming fire on those who dont know God and on those who dont obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. (2 Thessalonians 1:58, HCSB) The Thessalonians will be counted worthy in the future, it seems, and that declaration will happen when Jesus brings his vengeance on those who do not know God. Paul explains most clearly the future nature of the kingdom of God in 1 Corinthians 15, a chapter devoted to the coming resurrection of all believers. He writes: The first man was from the earth and made of dust; the second man is from heaven. Like the man made of dust, so are those who are made of dust; like the heavenly man, so are those who are heavenly. And just as we have borne the image of the man made of dust, we will also bear the image of the heavenly man. Brothers, I tell you this: Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, and corruption cannot inherit incorruption. Listen! I am telling you a mystery: We will not all fall asleep, but we will all be changed, in a moment, in the blink of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we will be changed. (1 Corinthians 15:4752, HCSB) Existence in the future kingdom of God is not like existence in this world today. Flesh and blood have no part in the kingdom which is coming. Paul says that we will all be changed from our fleshly existence to a new kind of physical reality. What Paul calls the future kingdom, Isaiah calls the new heaven and new earthFor I will create a new heaven and a new earth; the past events will not be remembered or come to mind. (Isaiah 65:17, HCSB)
1

The Kingdom Is Present and Has Ethical Demands: Right alongside these very clear future passages, Paul also tells his readers that the kingdom of God is already at work. Therefore, do not let your good be slandered, for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit. (Romans 14:1617, HCSB) This sounds like the kingdom of God is already happening, something which Paul expected to make a difference in the lives of believers. If Paul were saying that these Roman Christians should not worry about food and drink because in the future they would not worry about it, he almost certainly have said Therefore, do not let your good be slandered, for the kingdom of God will not be eating and drinking... This means that the kingdom is supposed to make a difference in the way we live our lives now, even before it comes in the future. Paul actually refers to kingdom when he warns the Corinthians that he may exercise the kingdoms powers in disciplining them. But I will come to you soon, if the Lord wills, and I will know not the talk but the power of those who are inflated with pride. For the kingdom of God is not a matter of talk but of power. What do you want? Should I come to you with a rod, or in love and a spirit of gentleness? (1 Corinthians 4:1921, HCSB) Regardless of what else this passage means, one thing is for certainthe kingdom is already at work. It has power associated with it. Colossians 1:11-13 explains more clearly what it means presently to be in the kingdom of God.1 May you be strengthened with all power, according to His glorious might, for all endurance and patience, with joy giving thanks to the Father, who has enabled you to share in the saints inheritance in the light. He has rescued us from the domain of darkness and transferred us into the kingdom of the Son He loves. (Colossians 1:1113, HCSB) Paul describes the Colossians as sharing in the saints inheritance in the light. The word saints here means every person who is united with the Messiah, i.e., every believer.2 These believers have been taken out of Satans kingdom and transferred into the kingdom of Gods Son. We learn here that we have to get
Historians debate whether Paul actually wrote Colossians. I myself have no questions about it and many, many scholars would agree. Even though our general plan is to use only those books which are universally accepted as written by Paul, this passage is helpful in understanding what Paul means by the kingdom of God.
2

Paul says this clearly in 1 Corinthians: To Gods church at Corinth, to those who are sanctified in Christ Jesus and called as saints, with all those in every place who call on the name of Jesus Christ our Lordboth their Lord and ours. (1 Corinthians 1:2, HCSB)

Page 53 of 112

Page 54 of 112

out of the domain of darkness, something which God does for us. Then God himself must transfer us into his Sons kingdom. Summary of Pauls Teachings: Paul tells us that the kingdom is coming in the future and is the future inheritance of those who are united with the Messiah. The Messiah will bring all rulers under his feet and then will present the kingdom to God the Father. Even now, however, those who are united with the Messiah are already transferred out of the domain of darkness and already placed into the kingdom of Gods Son. The kingdom presently affects how we are living now, bringing righteousness, joy and peace and even power. Jesus Teachings about the Kingdom of God While Paul mentions the kingdom only fourteen times, the gospels mention the kingdom continually3 and show this as the center of Jesus teachings. As you read through each point, remember that Jesus hearers were awaiting the Messiahs coming as king over all of the earth. When Jesus preached that the kingdom of God had come near, his hearers would immediately connect this with the Messiah. Because of this, Jesus teachings both build upon this expectation and also correct their drastic misunderstanding about how God was going about bringing the kingdom to Israel. I am only going to show five different ways that Jesus discusses the kingdom of God as a brief introduction to what he says throughout the gospels. 1) Kingdom Was Jesus Main Message: The gospel writers describe Jesus ministry as preaching the kingdom of God. Jesus was going all over Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the good news of the kingdom, and healing every disease and sickness among the people. (Matthew 4:23, HCSB) Then Jesus went to all the towns and villages, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the good news of the kingdom, and healing every disease and every sickness. (Matthew 9:35, HCSB) Soon afterward He was traveling from one town and village to another, preaching and telling the good news of the kingdom of God. The Twelve were with Him, (Luke 8:1, HCSB) After He had suffered, He also presented Himself alive to them by many convincing proofs, appearing to them during 40 days and speaking about the kingdom of God. (Acts 1:3, HCSB)

Even if the gospel writers did not tell us about this special focus, we would know it from Jesus many teachings on the kingdom. Yet the fact that the gospel writers summarize Jesus message as the good news of kingdom of God makes it crystal clear that everything else that Jesus taught was somehow wrapped up in his teachings about the kingdom of God. 2) Present Kingdom: Jesus made it plain that in some very important way his presence on earth was presence of the kingdom of God. For example, Jesus exposed the emptiness of those claims that he was casting out demons by Satans powers by saying, If I drive out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come to you. (Matthew 12:28, HCSB) The kingdom had come to them because Jesus was casting out demons by the Spirit of God. Jesus tells his hearers regularly that the kingdom of God had come near, or was at hand. The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has come near. Repent and believe in the good news! (Mark 1:15, HCSB) This was also the message that he gave to his disciples to preach during Jesus earthly ministry: Instead, go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. As you go, announce this: The kingdom of heaven has come near. Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those with skin diseases, drive out demons. You have received free of charge; give free of charge. (Matthew 10:68, HCSB) 3) Future Kingdom: Just as Paul talked about entering the kingdom of God in the future, Jesus also discusses this in the gospels. Not everyone who says to Me, Lord, Lord! will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of My Father in heaven. On that day many will say to Me, Lord, Lord, didnt we prophesy in Your name, drive out demons in Your name, and do many miracles in Your name? (Matthew 7:2122, HCSB) I assure you, He said, unless you are converted and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this childthis one is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 18:34, HCSB) Jesus replied, I assure you: Unless someone is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. But how can anyone be born when he is old? Nicodemus asked Him. Can he enter his mothers womb a second time and be born? Jesus answered, I assure you: Unless someone is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. Whatever is born of the flesh is flesh, and whatever is born of the Spirit is spirit. (John 3:36, HCSB) Page 56 of 112

Matthew directly mentions the kingdom over 50 times, Mark almost 20 times, Luke over 40 times, John only 3 times. Indirectly, however, Jesus continually discusses the kingdom of God.

Page 55 of 112

If Jesus listeners knew the Old Testament messianic prophecies (and they did know them for certain), then they would understand Jesus here to be describing the Messiahs kingdom described by the psalmists and the Old Testament prophets. In fact, historians tell us that in the first century, Jews had eager expectations that the Messiah was coming soon and would set up his glorious kingdom in Israel. Jesus words about entering the kingdom would make perfect sense to many of them, since in at least some of their minds only those who were worthy would be able to enjoy the blessings of the Messiahs reign of peace and glory. Jesus original hearers would not think of the kingdom of God as an invisible kingdom on earth nor would they think of it as heaven. For them, the Messiah was coming to Jerusalem to set up his throne in glory and power. In the last days the mountain of the LORDs house will be established at the top of the mountains and will be raised above the hills. Peoples will stream to it, and many nations will come and say, Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob. He will teach us about His ways so we may walk in His paths. For instruction will go out of Zion and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. He will settle disputes among many peoples and provide arbitration for strong nations that are far away. They will beat their swords into plows, and their spears into pruning knives. Nation will not take up the sword against nation, and they will never again train for war. (Micah 4:13, HCSB) For a child will be born for us, a son will be given to us, and the government will be on His shoulders. He will be named Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. The dominion will be vast, and its prosperity will never end. He will reign on the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish and sustain it with justice and righteousness from now on and forever. The zeal of the LORD of Hosts will accomplish this. (Isaiah 9:67, HCSB) The Jews who had learned such passages fully expected the Messiah to set up a glorious kingdom. Thus, Jesus teachings about entering into the kingdom in the future made perfect sense. 4) Hidden and Growing Kingdom: Jesus taught that the kingdom was going to begin almost invisibly and would grown until it filled the entire earth. One could only imagine that those who first heard Jesus found this aspect of his teaching impossible to understand.

He presented another parable to them: The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed that a man took and sowed in his field. Its the smallest of all the seeds, but when grown, its taller than the vegetables and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the sky come and nest in its branches. (Matthew 13:3132, HCSB) At first, this description of the kingdom sounds different than the glorious reign of the Messiah promised by the prophets. After all, the prophets predicted that the Messiah would reign as a mighty universal king. Jesus description of the mustard seed, however, is similar to a remarkable passage in Daniel. My king, as you were watching, a colossal statue appeared. That statue, tall and dazzling, was standing in front of you, and its appearance was terrifying. The head of the statue was pure gold, its chest and arms were silver, its stomach and thighs were bronze, its legs were iron, and its feet were partly iron and partly fired clay. As you were watching, a stone broke off without a hand touching it, struck the statue on its feet of iron and fired clay, and crushed them. Then the iron, the fired clay, the bronze, the silver, and the gold were shattered and became like chaff from the summer threshing floors. The wind carried them away, and not a trace of them could be found. But the stone that struck the statue became a great mountain and filled the whole earth. This was the dream; now we will tell the king its interpretation. Your Majesty, you are king of kings. The God of heaven has given you sovereignty, power, strength, and glory. Wherever people liveor wild animals, or birds of the airHe has handed them over to you and made you ruler over them all. You are the head of gold. After you, there will arise another kingdom, inferior to yours, and then another, a third kingdom, of bronze, which will rule the whole earth. A fourth kingdom will be as strong as iron; for iron crushes and shatters everything, and like iron that smashes, it will crush and smash all the others. You saw the feet and toes, partly of a potters fired clay and partly of ironit will be a divided kingdom, though some of the strength of iron will be in it. You saw the iron mixed with clay, and that the toes of the feet were partly iron and partly fired claypart of the kingdom will be strong, and part will be brittle. You saw the iron mixed with claythe peoples will mix with one another but will not hold together, just as iron does not mix with fired clay. Page 58 of 112

Page 57 of 112

In the days of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed, and this kingdom will not be left to another people. It will crush all these kingdoms and bring them to an end, but will itself endure forever. You saw a stone break off from the mountain without a hand touching it, and it crushed the iron, bronze, fired clay, silver, and gold. The great God has told the king what will happen in the future. The dream is true, and its interpretation certain. (Daniel 2:3145, HCSB) Although a mustard seed and a stone usually have little in common, in this case they do. The tiny mustard seed grows into a tree bigger than anything else in the garden. In the same way, the rock crushes the great statue and becomes a mountain which filled the whole earth. Both stories specifically mention Gods kingdom which begins small but ends up large. This suggests that Daniel and Jesus are describing the same thing. Another story gives a similar idea. He told them another parable: The kingdom of heaven is like yeast that a woman took and mixed into 50 pounds of flour until it spread through all of it. (Matthew 13:33, HCSB) The kingdom almost certainly grows through the preaching of the good news of the kingdom. The proclamation of the good news about the kingdom would begin on a small scale, but by the end would cover the entire world. Jesus spoke of the worldwide preaching of the kingdom as being one sign which will happen before the end of the world as we know it. But the one who endures to the end will be delivered. This good news of the kingdom will be proclaimed in all the world as a testimony to all nations. And then the end will come. (Matthew 24:1314, HCSB) 5) Kingdom Attitudes and Actions: On a practical level, those with simple faith must guide their lives by the kingdom of God. Perhaps one may not understand all of the depths of Jesus teachings about the kingdom, and may be a bit confused about Gods purposes and plans for the kingdom in the present and future. Even so, according to Jesus, every follower of Jesus must live for the sake of the kingdom of God. In some cases, our heartfelt longings for the future kingdom joys drive us on to face the hardships of this life. The poor in spirit are blessed, for the kingdom of heaven is theirs. (Matthew 5:3, HCSB) Those who are persecuted for righteousness are blessed, for the kingdom of heaven is theirs. (Matthew 5:10, HCSB) Many times, Jesus wants his followers to seek for the kingdom of God rather than for what the world might offer. But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things will be provided for you. (Matthew 6:33, HCSB)

Jesus sometimes urges us to sacrifice all in order to gain entrance into the kingdom of God, because the treasures of the kingdom far surpass anything this world could offer. The kingdom of heaven is like treasure, buried in a field, that a man found and reburied. Then in his joy he goes and sells everything he has and buys that field. Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant in search of fine pearls. When he found one priceless pearl, he went and sold everything he had, and bought it. (Matthew 13:4446, HCSB) Just as the gospels portray Jesus as giving himself entirely for the sake of the kingdom, he calls his followers to do the same. But Jesus said to him, No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God. (Luke 9:62, HCSB) And the kingdom life was bringing a new kind of right and wrong. In the pre-kingdom world of Israel, one dealt with what was right and wrong more than anything, and eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. The judges are to make a careful investigation, and if the witness turns out to be a liar who has falsely accused his brother, you must do to him as he intended to do to his brother. You must purge the evil from you. Then everyone else will hear and be afraid, and they will never again do anything evil like this among you. You must not show pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, and foot for foot. (Deuteronomy 19:1821, HCSB) All things, however, were as new in the kingdom as was the one himself who proclaimed it. You have heard that it was said, An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. But I tell you, dont resist an evildoer. On the contrary, if anyone slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. As for the one who wants to sue you and take away your shirt, let him have your coat as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to the one who asks you, and dont turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you. You have heard that it was said, Love your neighbor and hate your enemy. But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. For He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward will you have? Dont even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing out of the ordinary? Dont

Page 59 of 112

Page 60 of 112

even the Gentiles do the same? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect. (Matthew 5:3848, HCSB) This new kingdom living went hand in hand with the ancient messianic prophecies about the coming king of the Jews. For centuries Jews yearned for the Messiah to deliver them from their groaning under slavery to Greeks and tyrants, plagues and the hardships of life. Jesus came proclaiming good news that the kingdom of God was finally near. His Jewish hearers already knew what the prophets predicted, that the new kingdom would bring to the world justice, peace, prosperity, victory over enemies, and remarkable joy. Possibly his hearers realized that those prophets had also predicted that ethical life in the very kingdom would be exactly like the kind of living Jesus was now teaching everywhere he went.4

Ezekiel wrote that in the future God would give his people a new kind of heart:
And I will give them one heart and put a new spirit within them; I will remove their heart of stone from their bodies and give them a heart of flesh, so they may follow My statutes, keep My ordinances, and practice them. Then they will be My people, and I will be their God. (Ezekiel 11:1920, HCSB) I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will remove your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. I will place My Spirit within you and cause you to follow My statutes and carefully observe My ordinances. Then you will live in the land that I gave your fathers; you will be My people, and I will be your God. (Ezekiel 36:2628, HCSB)

When we read the blessings of the kingdom of God in Matthew 5:3-10, we can see this same emphasis on peace and transforming character. In fact, Jesus is proclaiming to his hearers that the ethical life they have heard in the prophets is now upon them! Those who belong to the kingdom live are already experiencing the first tastes of what the kingdom was bringinguniversal peace. The poor in spirit are blessed, for the kingdom of heaven is theirs. Those who mourn are blessed, for they will be comforted. The gentle are blessed, for they will inherit the earth. Those who hunger and thirst for righteousness are blessed, for they will be filled. The merciful are blessed, for they will be shown mercy. The pure in heart are blessed, for they will see God. The peacemakers are blessed, for they will be called sons of God. Those who are persecuted for righteousness are blessed, for the kingdom of heaven is theirs. (Matthew 5:310, HCSB) Here Jesus describes the blessings of the membership in the kingdom. The second half of each blessing sounds like the Old Testament promises. The kingdom of heaven would be theirs. They would be comforted. They will inherit the earth. They will be filled, shown mercy, be called sons of God and see God. This fits nicely with what the Old Testament prophets predicted. The first half of every blessing, however, sounds quite different. People would have the blessing of being poor in spirit. They would have the blessing of mourning. They would have the blessing of being gentle and merciful. They would hunger and thirst for righteousness and would be pure in heart. This is the unexpected catch, a catch would have caught all of those expectant Jews off guardthe kingdom was coming in stages. First, the Messiahs followers would live kingdom ethics and love as they proclaimed everywhere the good news of the kingdom of God. For the sake of the kingdom, they would face persecution, hardship and even martyrdom, but this was to be expected. Just as the Messiah himself was taking up a cross, so also his followers would be taking up that same cross for the sake of those who had not yet received the message of the kingdom with joy. At some point, when the message of the kingdom had gone throughout the whole earth and every ethnic group had heard the good news, then the end would come. The second half of the

Other prophets also spoke about this transformation of the heart.

I will give them a heart to know Me, that I am Yahweh. They will be My people, and I will be their God because they will return to Me with all their heart. (Jeremiah 24:7, HCSB) For I will then restore pure speech to the peoples so that all of them may call on the name of Yahweh and serve Him with a single purpose. (Zephaniah 3:9, HCSB)

The prophets promised that universal peace would come to the earth. None will harm or destroy another on My entire holy mountain, for the land will be as full of the knowledge of the LORD as the sea is filled with water. On that day the root of Jesse will stand as a banner for the peoples. The nations will seek Him, and His resting place will be glorious. (Isaiah 11:910, HCSB) The coming of the Messiah would end war and destruction.
In the last days the mountain of the LORDs house will be established at the top of the mountains and will be raised above the hills. All nations will stream to it, and many peoples will come and say, Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob. He will teach us about His ways so that we may walk in His paths. For instruction will go out of Zion and the

word of the LORD from Jerusalem. He will settle disputes among the nations and provide arbitration for many peoples. They will turn their swords into plows and their spears into pruning knives. Nations will not take up the sword against other nations, and they will never again train for war. (Isaiah 2:24)

Page 61 of 112

Page 62 of 112

blessings would come later. First would be the blessings of suffering, persecution, poverty of spirit, and mourning. Summary of Jesus and Pauls Teachings on the Kingdom of God Both Jesus and Paul talk about the as a future reality that will be entered by those who are ready for the kingdom. Because Jesus Jewish listeners had so much background in the Old Testament prophets, they were expecting a new and glorious messianic age of peace. Jesus promises that age will come in the future. Yet both Jesus and Paul proclaimed a present day kingdom. Both Jesus and Paul call on believers to live according to the kingdom, even though its glories have not yet dawned on the human race. The future kingdom will be righteousness, peace and mercy, and therefore those who belong to kingdom now are to live that way. Their goal is to preach the kingdom to the ends of the earth, to live out the kingdom as a testimony to Jesus, to sow the seeds of righteousness and peace even though all people surrounding them may abuse and reject them. No historian would deny the centrality of Jesus teachings on the kingdom of God in the gospels.5 What is interesting is how closely those teachings mirror what Paul himself also taught about the kingdom. Since we have seen the almost indisputable evidence that Paul knew at least two of Jesus appointed disciples (Peter and John) as well as Jesus brother, we can say with confidence that the kingdom of God was the central message of the earliest Christians. Paul, even though he does not use this phraseology, still strongly emphasizes the same things through his constant theme of in the Messiah. It would be impossible to talk about the Jewish Messiah in the first century without also recognizing the kingdom he brought. Therefore, when Paul talks about what the believer possesses in Christ, he is describing life in the Messiah and thus life in the kingdom. Why Is This Important to Simple Faith? We have now progressed up to the end of Statement #5 and have already powerfully established the facts that Paul clearly believed in the historical Jesus and had intimate contact with Peter, one of Jesus closest disciples, as well as contact with John and the brother of Jesus, James, all of whom were eyewitnesses. We have seen that Paul considered his message about Jesus life, death and resurrection to be the same message that these men preached, a claim which almost certainly had to be true. We have also seen that professional historians universally agree that Jesus was a real historical person who lived in Palestine and was crucified somewhere around 4 BCE to 30 CE. We added to
5

this information the shockingly explicit and abundant evidence from the Old Testament prophetic predictions concerning the Messiah. Keep Pauls early claims about Jesus death and resurrection in your mind. Add to them that Jesus was a real historical figure. Add to that the undeniable fact that the Old Testament Scriptures were written at least 100 years before Jesus was born and then add up all that the Old Testament Scriptures wrote about the Messiah. If you add up these four statements, you come to the conclusion that Jesus was indeed that Messiah predicted by the Old Testament prophets. This is enough information to conclude that Jesus is what Paul and the other early Christians claimed him to bethe fulfillment of the prophecies about the promised Messiah. The prophets predicted he would be the universal King, the crucified Savior, and the Son of God. They predicted that he would be executed by his own people and then would come back to life, exactly what Paul and the other early Christians predicted. This, then is the purpose of this section on the Kingdom of God. If the prophecies prove that Jesus was the Messiah, what did he teach? He taught about the kingdom of God. We can read this in the four gospels and we can read it in Paul. Few, if any, historians would deny that Jesus central message was the Kingdom of God. This is a simple fact of history. What do we do with these facts? If Jesus is the Messiah, then we want to know what these facts mean for life here and now. The answer has to be found in Jesus and Pauls teachings about the kingdom of God (adding to this Pauls teaching of in the Messiah). Since Pauls witness to what the earliest Christians believed comes from within 20-35 years of Jesus life, since he was closely related to Jesus followers, and since his kingdom teachings parallel those teachings found in the four gospels, we must assume that the message we read in the gospels is the same message Jesus himself preached. If all we had were these five claims, we would have enough to know what to believe and how to live. In other words, this is all we need for simple faith. Everything following this is additional encouragement to that simple faith. FACT: Both Paul and the four gospels portray the kingdom of God as Jesus central message. This kingdom should be understood in light of the many Old Testament prophecies which promised the Messiah would reign as king over a universal kingdom of peace and righteousness. As Jesus and Paul present this kingdom, it is a future hope as well as a present reality. Jesus taught that the kingdom of God should dramatically transform how they would live their lives.

That is not saying, however, that every historian would agree that every teaching about the kingdom that we find in the gospels is authentically from Jesus. Yet certainly no credible historian denies the fact that the kingdom of God was his central proclamation.

Page 63 of 112

Page 64 of 112

Statement #6 The books and letters of the New Testament were written within 70 years of the death of Jesus Christ. This is the third of four statements which require us to go outside of the Bible to prove, but, again, the statement is accepted as true by virtually every professional historian in the world, with the exception of some historians whose religion forces them to deny it. These professional historians may not accept that what the New Testament teaches is accurate, nevertheless they universally recognize that the New Testament books were written before A.D. 100. Are the Four Gospels Reliable? Of all questions we will tackle, this is the trickiest, because many historians would argue that the four gospels are not sufficiently historically reliable. In all of our other sections, we start with something almost all historians accept and then work from there. In this case, however, historians assume that major portions of the four gospels are legendary, i.e., come from folk stories, additions, miracle stories about Jesus which were not actually true. Now, we do not need the four gospels to establish the basics of our simple faith, because we have plenty enough prophecies and historical evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that Jesus is the Messiah. Furthermore, we have Pauls letters to tell us what the earliest church believed about the kingdom of God. It would certainly be helpful, however, to know whether the four gospels we read in our bibles are trustworthy accounts of the life and teachings of Jesus. After all, we want to know if Jesus actually taught the Lords prayer, the Sermon on the Mount, the parables about the kingdom, and many other critical subjects. If historians are certain that our four gospels are not historically reliable, why should we trust them? The way to approach this question is from a historians vantage point, so we need to wonder why historians claim that the gospels are historically unreliable. There are six basic assumptions which lead historians to reject the gospels. 1. All four gospels point to Old Testament prophecies which were fulfilled by Jesus of Nazareth. Since historians believe that it is impossible that anyone could predict the future, therefore they believe that none of the Old Testament prophecies could possibly be fulfilled. Therefore they believe that Christians after Jesus died created the stories which point to miraculous fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies.

2. The gospels end with the resurrection of Jesus Christ, which historians regard as an impossible event. If the resurrection is impossible, then the historical reliability of the gospels is obviously also impossible. 3. All four gospels are written by people who were entirely convinced that Jesus is the Son of God. Historians claim that this conviction led the gospel writers to create a fictional history which is based on their faith, rather than on what really happened. They believe that the gospel writers faith made it impossible for them to write true history. 4. The gospel writers describe Jesus performing many different miracles, as well as describing angelic appearances to the shepherds, Zechariah, Mary and Joseph. Since historians automatically regard miracles as impossible, therefore the miracles in the gospels are impossible and these gospels are not historically reliable. 5. In the gospels, Jesus predicts the destruction of Jerusalem, an event which happened between A.D. 66-70. Since historians believe that it is impossible to predict the future, therefore they are convinced that Christians wrote these words after Jerusalem was destroyed. 6. We have examples of folk legends about other people (people like Hercules, a Greek hero) which grew up over time but are clearly historically unreliable. We do not have any documents written by Jesus himself therefore we have no definite proof that even the teachings of Jesus are historically reliable. There are some facts which historians accept. For example, almost all creditable historians unanimously agree that Jesus Christ was a real historical person who was a wandering teacher and was crucified by the Romans, probably at A.D. 30. They also accept the fact that early followers of Jesus believed that Jesus rose from the dead in some form or another. They are forced to accept the fact because of the strong historical evidence of Pauls capital letters (Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians and Galatians) which show a strong belief in the resurrection of Jesus about 18-26 years after his death in A.D. 30. Author Gary Habermas did an exhaustive study of what historians write about Jesus resurrection and came to the conclusion that although these historians deny the resurrection, they almost universally acknowledge that the earliest Christians believed that Jesus had actually risen from the dead in some form or another. Of course, most historians agree that a resurrection is impossible, therefore they seek to explain how Christians could have invented this (what they call) misguided understanding about Jesus.

Page 65 of 112

Page 66 of 112

Here is the methodology historians are applying to studies about the reliability of the four gospels. Historians reject the possibility of miracles and therefore reject the miracle stories. They reject the possibility of future predictions and therefore reject the future predictions made by the prophets and made by Jesus himself. They reject the possibility that angels exist and therefore assume that anywhere angels appear in the story it is just a myth. They reject the possibility of a resurrection and therefore they reject the entire climax of all four gospels. They reject the possibility that Jesus is the Son of God and therefore reject all of his teachings which claim that he is the Son of God. Once they have made these decisions about what is actually possible, there is not much left of the gospels they could accept. If the four gospels had no claims that Jesus was the Messiah and Gods Son, and no claims that he performed miracles, fulfilled prophecies and rose from the dead, then historians would consider his life and teachings to be the most clearly documented and completely reliable accounts of any ancient historical figure. The gospels record the eyewitness testimony of the earliest Christians and their content was carefully examined by hundreds and hundreds of others, many of whom were intimately involved with Jesus when he was on earth. The close interconnectedness of these eyewitnesses with one another and with the apostles would give us a golden assurance that we have accurate documents. Not only do we have so many witnesses, but we also have an enormous number of incredibly early manuscripts of the gospels. Historians reject the teachings and histories only because they assume that prophecies, miraculous stories and claims to deity are impossible. Without these assumptions, they would certainly consider these gospels to be reliable accounts. Is It True that Miracles Are Impossible? Without even looking at the gospels, however, we have read in Paul that Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. We know that Paul writes these things within 18-26 years of Jesus death and resurrection. Paul discusses his close relationship with Peter and claims that his ministry was approved by the apostles Peter, James and John, a relationship which connects him with the earliest witnesses of Jesus. We have read Pauls claim that during his days hundreds of eyewitnesses, including the original eleven apostles, were testifying that they had seen Jesus after he had risen from the dead. This suggests that Pauls beliefs about Jesus fulfillment of the prophecies comes from the very earliest days of the church. Paul refers to some of the same prophecies that we have found, powerful prophecies which predicted that the Messiah would be put to death to bear the sins of humanity and bring sinners into a right relationship with God and would come back to life. The earliest Christians, including Paul, preached that these very events actually happened Page 67 of 112

just as the Old Testament said they would. These prophecies are certainly sufficient proof that it is not only possible that miracles can happen, but specifically that God miraculously revealed the proof to many different Old Testament prophets that the Messiah would horribly treated, would die and then return to life. We have prophecies that reveal details about his death and a prophecy which tells us the year his ministry would begin. We have many, many other prophecies as well. Therefore, it must be possible for God to reveal the future. After all, the Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled, for we know that Jesus truly was crucified and that the earliest Christians believed that he rose from the dead. It happened according to the time schedule which was revealed in the prophecy in Daniel 9. Furthermore, the manner of his death so clearly fulfilled the clear predictions of Isaiah 52-53, that we can be sure that God actually did prepare the way for the coming of the Messiah which shocking accuracy. This means that the first historical assumption (that it is impossible to predict the future) is inaccurate. We know from Paul that hundreds of the earliest Christians preached that they were eyewitnesses to Christs resurrection. The Old Testament prophets also predicted that the Messiah would return back to life (see the section on Old Testament prophecies). Since the prophets miraculously foretold his death and there were so many eyewitnesses to the resurrection, we must also conclude that it is possible that Jesus actually did rise from the dead. This means that the second historical assumption (that resurrection from the dead is impossible) is also false. What about the fact that the gospel writers claimed that Jesus is the Son of God? The Old Testament prophecies not only predict that the Messiah would die unjustly and then rise from the dead, but they also foretold that the Messiah would be Gods Son. This also is Pauls message, and Paul was working alongside Jesus earliest and most respected disciples. If the prophets and Paul and those very first disciples were right about the first two predictions, it is not reasonable to doubt them about this declaration. This means that the third historical assumption (that it is impossible for someone to be Gods Son) also is inaccurate. Obviously, our conclusions about the assumptions of historians are not going to convince any historian who stands by his or her conviction that miracles are impossible. Anyone who denies miracles must find other ways to explain the four gospels. It is a difficult problem for the historian because the time period between when the events happened and the final gospel was written is so short. After all, these gospels were certainly completed while many of those five hundred eyewitnesses were still alive. There is such a broad spectrum of agreementthe earliest apostles, Paul, the writers of the gospels, the writers of the other letters. Remember, without the claims to deity and stories of the Page 68 of 112

miraculous, historians would consider the gospels to be the most accurate biographies ever produced in the ancient world. This makes the historians rejection of the gospels to be terribly closed-minded. It seems pretty obvious that a miracle did happen, and therefore there is no reasonable basis for rejecting the gospels. When Were the Gospels Written? This brings us to an interesting question: When were the four gospels written? We are confident that all four were written before the end of the first century. We have lots of reasons for believing this. The early fragment of John which dates from right around A.D. 105 or so makes it clear that Johns Gospel was written before A.D. 100. Daniel Wallace has recently announced discovered of a fragment from Marks Gospel which was copied before A.D. 100, which places that gospel firmly in the first century as well. In addition, early Christian writers from the end of the first century and the beginning of the second century quote from Lukes gospel (although Luke and they may be quoting from a common source). Historians have portions of Matthews gospel which some believe were copied very early, possibly in the first century, but certainly in the second century. All of this leads almost all historians to agree that the four gospels were written in the first century. For our purposes, it is important to realize that Lukes gospel was almost certainly written before A.D. 65-67, the dates usually given for Pauls death and the beginning of the destruction of Jerusalem. Although historians would disagree with this dating because of their presupposition that Jesus could not have prophesied that the Romans were going to destroy Jerusalem, the many Old Testament prophecies prove that predictive prophesy is possible. Once we accept this, then we have strong historical evidence that Luke must have written his gospel both before Jerusalem was destroyed and before Paul died. Our reasons for this are the facts that the book of Acts, which was also written by Luke, ends incompletely. Acts largely tells the story of Pauls conversion and missionary journeys throughout the ancient world. The book ends with Pauls arrest and imprisonment, a story which covers seven and a half chapters of the book (not to mention Pauls journey to Jerusalem, which emphasizes Pauls coming imprisonment). Paul eventually winds up in Rome, awaiting trial before Caesar. The last two verses say this, Then he stayed two whole years in his own rented house. And he welcomed all who visited him, proclaiming the kingdom of God and teaching the things concerning the Lord Jesus Christ with full boldness and without hindrance. (Acts 28:3031, HCSB) Early church tradition tells us that Paul was released from prison and traveled west to Spain before returning to Rome to be imprisoned again. Very strong historical evidence suggests that Paul died in Rome before A.D. 67-68, Page 69 of 112

but Luke does not mention either of these facts. He never tells us about Pauls trial, Pauls furthest travels (which would fit very well into Lukes overall outline for Acts, which shows the progress of the gospel to the ends of the earth), or Pauls death. In addition, the most traumatic event in biblical history happened between A.D. 66-70, i.e., the destruction of Jerusalem. This event entirely transformed Judaism and must have had a major impact on Christianity in Palestine. For Luke to write Acts without giving even the smallest mention of this event is unthinkable. Combining Lukes silence about Pauls trial, release, re-arrest and death with Lukes silence about the destruction of Jerusalem makes an unshakeable case that Luke wrote his gospel before Paul was released from prison or at least before he died, which was around the same time the Jewish rebellion began in A.D. 66. Paul was probably released between A.D. 62-63, and which is probably the latest date for Lukes gospel to have been written, or possibly (but less likely) no later than A.D. 64-67 when Paul died.6 Added with the destruction of Jerusalem, and A.D. 66 is the latest realistic date for the book of Acts. This is especially important, since Luke makes it clear in Acts 1:1 that he had already written and published his gospel before he wrote Acts. This means that the Gospel of Luke must have been completed even earlier than A.D. 66. The only reason anyone would deny this on historical grounds would be the fact that in Lukes gospel Jesus predicts that Jerusalem would be destroyed (also predicted, by the way, in Daniel 9). As soon as we accept predictive prophecy as possible, then we are forced to realize that Lukes gospel was written before A.D. 65. In addition, Paul in 1 Timothy 5:18 quotes from Lukes gospel. For the Scripture says: Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain, and, the worker is worthy of his wages. (1 Timothy 5:18, HCSB) The fact that Paul calls this quotation Scripture suggests that he is quoting from something which is written as opposed to an oral tradition. Since Paul probably wrote 1 Timothy after his release from prison (i.e., after A.D. 62), this suggests that Lukes gospel had already been written by then.7 So, it is very likely that Lukes gospel was written by A.D. 62 or so.
6

If Lukes gospel was written before Paul died, then it is possible, he might not have mentioned Pauls release and further activities in order to protect Paul from possible persecution by the Roman authorities, who might not be pleased to know he was traveling west with the gospel. Once Paul died (between A.D. 64-67), however, there would be no need to protect Paul. Lukes readers would want to know the final fate of the main character of the book of Acts.
7

Many historians deny that Paul wrote 1 Timothy, but there is no reasonable historical ground for their view.

Page 70 of 112

This brings us to what Luke himself wrote about his gospel in Luke 1. Many have undertaken to compile a narrative about the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as the original eyewitnesses and servants of the word handed them down to us. It also seemed good to me, since I have carefully investigated everything from the very first, to write to you in an orderly sequence, most honorable Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things about which you have been instructed. (Luke 1:14, HCSB) From a historians point of view, this is a treasure trove of insights into Lukes sources. First of all, Luke tells us here that by the time he wrote this gospel (sometime before A.D. 62), many others had already compiled narratives about the life of Jesus. Surely, these other narratives to which Luke is referring at least include Matthew and Mark8 and possibly even Johns gospel. In addition, Luke writes about the original eyewitnesses and servants of the word (almost certainly talking about the apostles and other eyewitnesses) who handed down these events to us. The word for handed down ( paradidomi in the Greek, the original language) means to pass on to another what one knows, of oral or written tradition, to hand down, pass on, transmit, relate, teach.9 This clearly means that in some sort of official way the apostles and other eyewitnesses had carefully passed on to the earliest Christians Jesus teachings as well as stories about his life. If Luke wrote his gospel before A.D. 62, then almost all of these original eyewitnesses were still alive. In A.D. 42, Herod had executed James, the brother of Zebedee, something which Luke mentions in Acts 12:2. We know from the Jewish historian Josephus that Jesus half-brother James was executed in A.D. 62 (which Luke does not mention, another hint that Acts was written before A.D.63). This means that Luke wrote his gospel when hundreds of eyewitnesses were actively preaching about what they had seen only thirty or so years before when Jesus of Nazareth was ministering in Palestine. Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 15 (written A.D. 56), Then He appeared to over 500 brothers at one time; most of them are still alive, but some have fallen asleep. (1

Almost all historians agree that Luke was written after Matthew and Mark. See D. A. Carson and Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, Second Edition (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2005), 103.
9

William Arndt, Frederick W. Danker and Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 762.

Corinthians 15:6, HCSB) Thus, Luke wrote his gospel just a few years after Paul wrote that 500 witnesses of Christs resurrection were still alive. Peter, James, John, Andrew, Philip, Thomas and the other disciples of Jesus were actively preaching their eyewitness testimony to the life and teachings of Jesus. Christians all over the ancient world were reading accounts of Christs life which had been already been compiled (including Matthew and Mark). In addition, Christians all over the ancient world were memorizing accounts of Jesus life and teaching which had been handed down by the apostles. In an atmosphere like this, these living eyewitnesses touring through the ancient world as they preached their messages and the many written and oral gospels distributed throughout the churches all served as both guides and guards to what Luke wrote in his gospel. As guides, Luke had an enormous storeroom of information he could use in composing his account of Jesus life. He makes it clear that he investigated everything carefully, as any good historian would do. If he was writing scarcely thirty years after the resurrection, he would have little problem finding plenty of good information from eyewitnesses. In addition, he could consult those gospel accounts which had already been written down. Finally, he could consult the memorized gospel stories which were preached in every church and in many cities of the ancient world. These eyewitnesses, however, not only served as good historical sources. They also naturally guarded what Luke would write. With so many eyewitnesses still alive, as soon as it was published (if not before) Lukes gospel would have been subjected to careful examination by those who had actually seen and heard Jesus. After all, these eyewitnesses had been present for these messages and events and had been preaching about them for thirty years. They would not allow Luke to change the events to fit his own purposes. They would not allow Luke to add teachings that they personally knew did not come from Jesus mouth. Furthermore, and critically important to our historical understanding, these original eyewitnesses were not living in one central location, but were spread all throughout the ancient world. Almost certainly, wherever they went, Christians flocked to hear what these men and women had witnessed about Jesus life and teachings with their own eyes and ears. Since Christianity spread throughout Asia Minor, Greece, Macedonia, Italy, North Africa, Persia and India, the stories were scattered too far and wide. For the true stories about Jesus life and teachings to have been altered by supposed false story tellers, i.e. people who supposedly created fairy tales about Jesus which did not really happen (which is what historians usually claim is the source of the miracle stories in the gospels) is hard to believe. If these gospels had been written fifty years after the eyewitnesses were dead, of course, this scenario might be possible. But the

Page 71 of 112

Page 72 of 112

grand majority of eyewitnesses were still actively preaching stories and teachings of Jesus. Furthermore, Paul tells his readers to consult the eyewitnesses to find the true gospel which he preached and every other Christian preached. In other words, some twenty-six years after Jesus death and resurrection, the messages proclaimed by these eyewitnesses had already become the lifeblood of the earliest Christians. If Luke changed anything when he wrote his gospel during these very years, these eyewitnesses would have immediately condemned his gospel as false and the earliest Christians would have abandoned Lukes gospel and warned everyone else to respond in the same way.10 Thus, the presence of these eyewitnesses guarded Lukes gospel from drifting into error. The same process would have been true as well for Matthew and Mark, which were almost certainly finished before Lukes gospel and to which Luke probably is referring in Luke 1:1-3.11 These three writers had little to no opportunity to create false stories with so many eyewitnesses still alive. The early date of these three gospels, the living presence of eyewitnesses, the excellent sources for the gospels all give us confidence that our gospels are accurate sources for the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. Once we accept the possibility of miracles, predictive prophecy and the resurrection of the dead, we realize that our gospels are clearly the most reliable and best attested ancient biographies ever written. This, in turn, gives us ample reason to believe that we can know what Jesus did and taught during his life on earth and we can therefore apply this to our lives with great confidence. This brings us to the Gospel of John. Here we have a different situation. We do not have a definite date for this gospel. There is strong evidence that John was written before 70 A.D. We have no church traditions telling us exactly when John wrote his gospel, except that it was the last gospel written. Our best guess is that John had to be written before the Letter of Barnabas, written as early as A.D. 70 or so, because Barnabas quotes from John 6:51. Since Clement, whose letter was written about A.D. 92, also quotes from John's Gospel, we can guess that John's Gospel was written sometime before A.D. 70.

There are clues within Johns gospel as well which may tell us that John wrote this before A.D. 70. For example, John says in 5:2, By the Sheep Gate in Jerusalem there is a pool, called Bethesda in Hebrew, which has five colonnades. (John 5:2, HCSB) This is quite a surprising statement, since the Sheep Gate and pool were destroyed by the Romans in A.D. 70 when they conquered the city of Jerusalem. It is possible that this verb is actually should be translated as a past tense, although it is more likely that it is present tense (there is some debate about this among good scholars). Regardless of these passages, however, we have more evidence. There is a scrap of papyrus called P52, which is usually dated somewhere around 125 A.D. This is a small portion of the Gospel of John. The fact that this scrap exists from such an early date is a strong argument that the gospel had already been written and distributed as far away as Egypt, where it was found. Not every historian agrees, but most agree that P52 proves that Johns Gospel was completed before the first century was completed. Thus, for Johns Gospel we have three very independent sources of historical information. First we have the quotations in the Letter of Barnabas, which was possibly written as early as A.D. 70. We have Clements letter, which was written in A.D. 92. Finally, we have P52, the papyrus scrap copied between the years 100-150, but possibly around 125. Put these three witnesses together and we can say with confidence that Johns Gospel was written before 100 A.D. and possibly before 70 A.D. What about the Other Letters? Things are a bit more complicated with the rest of the New Testament. First of all, those who actually believe the Bible to be true are confident that every book was written before 100 A.D. I personally am convinced that each book is what it says it is, since otherwise the early Christians would have rejected false books immediately. We have already discussed the four letters of Paul known as the Capital Letters (Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians and Galatians). Most historians would agree that the rest of the Pauline letters (the letters which are signed by Paul)12 were all written no latter than 100 A.D. Many of these historians, however, claim that Paul did not write all of these letters (although many, many historians accept that Paul did write all of them). There is an early papyrus, P46, which includes most of Pauls letters. Most historians date this papyrus to about 150 A.D., which would be a pretty strong evidence that each of Pauls letters were written long before that date.

10

For an explanation of the impact these eyewitnesses must have had in the first century, please consult Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony (Grand Rapids, Michigan, William B. Eerdmans, 2006).
11

Because it is more difficult to date Johns gospel (but clearly before the end of the first century, since we have a scrap of Johns gospel from early in the second century), we would need to look at other evidence. Johns gospel is also historical. For this argument of simple faith, however, it is enough to show that Matthew, Mark and Luke are clearly reliable sources of Jesus history and teachings.

12

In all Bibles, the books from Romans through Titus all begin with the words, Paul, an apostle... These are known, therefore, as the Pauline Letters.

Page 73 of 112

Page 74 of 112

Many historians do not believe that Peter wrote 1 Peter and most do not believe that Peter wrote 2 Peter. Even though historians argue this, they usually believe both were written in the first century, although some argue either one or the other (or both) were written after 100 A.D. If Peter wrote these two letters (the letters both begin with the name Peter or Simon Peter), then they were written before 67 A.D., when the Romans executed Peter. Many historians are not convinced about the letters of James and Jude either. It is hard to imagine, however, that the earliest Christians would have accepted these books if they were false. The book of Hebrews was almost certainly written before 70 A.D. (the year the temple was destroyed), since the book keeps on talking about the temple as if it still is in existence. It is almost impossible to imagine this book being written after the temples destruction and not mentioning it! Not every historian agrees with this argument. 1, 2 & 3 John almost certainly were written before 100 A.D. We do not have enough historical evidence, however, to say for certain. We do have an early copy of a piece of the book of Revelation (P98) that is dated to the second century, i.e., sometime between 100-200 A.D. That suggests that Revelation was probably written by 100 A.D. At first, the evidence here might confuse us, but that should not happen. The most important witnesses to our faith would be the four Capital Letters of Paul and the gospels. All historians would be confident that all of the Pauline letters were completed before 100 A.D. and the four Capital Letters were written not later than 58 A.D. This date is when the majority of eyewitnesses to Jesus life and teachings were still very much alive and preaching. These witnesses were also, therefore, alive when the three Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) were written (before 68 A.D. and almost certainly earlier than that!). It is impossible to imagine that the eyewitnesses would have allowed these gospels to have been published and copied unless they were indeed true stories and teachings of Jesus. We can be sure that when the gospel of John was written (no later than 100 A.D. and probably earlier!), the living eyewitnesses and those who were their disciples would have examined this gospel carefully as well. Our conclusion is simple: we can be confident that our gospels give us an accurate picture of Jesus life and teachings. We can also be sure that the gospels we have today are the same gospels that were written during the middle of the first century. Of our other sources, we can be confident that the collection of Pauls letters we have today were all written before 100 A.D. and that at least four of them were written before 60 A.D. Fact: The books and letters of the New Testament were written within 70 years of the death of Jesus Christ. Page 75 of 112
13

Statement #7 Scholars have enough ancient New Testament manuscripts that they are able with confidence to say that the original four gospels and the original letters are almost entirely (and probably entirely) the same gospels and letters that we have in our Bibles today. Not every historian knows a lot about ancient New Testament manuscripts, but any historian who is an expert in these areas will agree that the Gospels and letters we have today in our New Testaments are pretty much the same as they were when they were originally written in the first century. More important than that, however, is the fact that even if there were serious differences (but we can confidently say that there are not serious differences), the original manuscripts without any doubt taught the basic facts about Jesus life, death and resurrection. Even if historians reject the miracles in Jesus story, they would agree that the gospels we have are pretty much the same as they were from the beginning. Textual Criticism Textual criticism is the work historians do to decide what the original author or authors of a letter or book actually wrote. The most difficult part about understanding textual criticism is that Christians often feel threatened by it, because they do not understand what textual criticism is all about. When they read about it, they might assume that textual critics are trying to destroy our faith in the truthfulness of the Bible. That, however, is not true at all. Textual critics do not attack the truthfulness of the Bible. They instead try to figure out if the copies of the Bible that we have today are identical to the original letters and gospels. Textual critics sift through the mountains of evidence in order to determine what each one of the original Greek letters and gospels said when they were first written. These historians, therefore, are enormously important to our quest to establish simple faith. Here are some simple facts about textual criticism. Historians get their information to make decisions about the original verses of the Bible from many different sources. First of all, historians study ancient Greek manuscripts. The most important of these are the papyri which are scattered throughout the world in various museums and universities. In 1898, Grenfell and Hunt discovered ancient rubbish heaps for the city of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. Among the many pieces of manuscripts, they found 35 pieces of New Testament books.13 In the 1930's, a man named Chester Beatty and the University of Michigan purchased three priceless manuscripts from a dealer in Egypt (most of Pauls writings, the

Philip Wesley Comfort and David P. Barrett, The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House, 2001), p. 17.

Page 76 of 112

four gospels and Acts, and a portion of Revelation).14 Since then, historians have uncovered a total of around eighty manuscripts which were copied within the first 300 years of Christianity. Secondly, we have a large number of ancient Greek copies of the New Testament which were produced after Roman Emperor Constantine declared that Christianity was a legal religion in the Roman Empire (initially in 313 as a joint declaration of Constantine and Licinius and then as a universal decree in A.D. 323). Once Christianity became a legal religion, the number of manuscripts dramatically increased to over 5,000. In addition, historians have ancient translations of the Bible in other languages. Historians use these translations to help them understand what kinds of texts existed from the earliest days of the churches. When we compare all of these manuscripts, we discover that no two manuscripts perfectly agree! In other words, there are at least some mistakes in every single New Testament manuscript we currently possess. Why Are There So Many Differences? The best way to explain the differences among the manuscripts is to understand how they were produced to begin with. Lets take Pauls first letter to the Christians in Corinth. Step 1: Paul writes the letter. The first step would start when Paul decided to write a letter. In the case of the Corinthians, he had heard that there were problems in the city and decided to write about that. In addition, the people of that city had sent to Paul a letter with specific questions and he chose to answer these as well. Paul probably dictated his letter to an amanuensis (i.e., a letter writer), who wrote it down as Paul spoke. It is possible that Paul had his amanuensis copy that letter before it was sent so that he could have a copy as well. Then they waited to find a Christian who was planning on visiting Corinth, since there was no mail service for common people. Step 2: The Corinthians receive, read and pass around the letter. Once the Christian traveler arrived with the letter, we can be pretty sure that the church leaders passed it among themselves. They then carried the letter to the various house churches (there was no one central church, but probably a number of small groups of believers who gathered in various houses throughout the city) and had the letter read in each gathering place (a similar thing happened in

Thessalonika I adjure you by the Lord to have this letter read to all the brethren. (1 Thessalonians 5:27, NASB95)). Step 3: Making copies. Probably immediately, at least some Christians copied down Pauls letter in order to study it or use it to resolve church disputes (and there were most certainly disputes going on in that particular church). They would almost certainly have wanted a copy for each house church and probably others would want it as well. It would not have taken long before Pauls letter had been copied ten or fifteen times in the city of Corinth. These were not official copies, of course. They were mostly personal or house church copies. There was not such a thing as an official copy, in any case. Step 3: Sharing copies. Since Corinth was a busy center for trade, we can be sure that sooner or later (probably sooner), Christians would have visited Corinth and would have searched out and found Christian fellowships in the city. We can also be sure that they would have eagerly read Pauls letter, especially in light of the many and varied subjects he deals with in the letter. Almost certainly some, if not many, of those traveling Christians would have purchased papyrus and would have made their own copy of the letter to bring back with them to their own home cities. It is not entirely likely that they would have copied the original letter, but might have simply copied one of the ten to fifteen or so copies which were scattered throughout the city. When these travelers continued their journeys, we can be confident that they would have shown Pauls Corinthian letter to every Christian gathering they visited along the way. At least some (probably most or all) of those congregations would have ended up copying that letter. Thus, by the time a few years had passed, there would have been literally thousands of copies of Pauls first letter to the Corinthians, copies which quickly spread throughout much of the Roman Empire. Paul mentions this idea of sharing his letters in Colossians ( When this letter has been read among you, have it read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and see that you also read the letter from Laodicea. (Colossians 4:16, HCSB)) Step 4: Collecting Different Letters. It would not take that long for churches to collect several (if not all) of Pauls letters this way. Making and sharing copies almost guaranteed that even within Pauls lifetime, most local congregations would have many of his letters as a collection. Peter seems to suggest this in 2 Peter 3:15-16. Also, regard the patience of our Lord as an opportunity for salvation, just as our dear brother Paul has written to you according to the wisdom given to him. 16 He speaks about these things in all his letters in which there are some matters that are hard to understand. The Page 78 of 112

14

Ibid.

Page 77 of 112

untaught and unstable twist them to their own destruction, as they also do with the rest of the Scriptures. (2 Peter 3:1516, HCSB) If the Apostle Peter wrote this letter (which I think he did), then we have a very early witness to the fact that people were reading at least several of Pauls letters. Even those who doubt that Peter did write this letter, must admit that it witnesses to the early collection of Pauls letters. Who copied these letters and carried them to various cities and towns? They were regular Christian people. We would expect, therefore, for these regular Christians to copy the way they might copy any piece of writing. The kinds of mistakes you might expect in writing down a long letter would certainly happen. They might skip lines, spell certain words differently, correct grammar that they found improper, or accidentally (or possibly on purpose) write down sentences in ways different from what Paul had originally written. Now, once these people made their copies and carried them afar, other people read what they had done and made their own copies, including the errors. Those mistakes often ended up being copied by others. When the copies of those copies were again written down, the original mistakes spread to many different cities and villages throughout the Roman Empire. Of course, we might assume that the earlier the manuscript, the fewer mistakes it might contain, and that is generally, but not always, true. In reality, if a sloppy person copied a letter in a sloppy manner, then even if it were early it might still be less reliable than a carefully copied letter. Over time, of course, a particular copied letter might have been the originator of hundreds, even thousands of later copies. Of course, once Christianity became legal and it was now lawful to copy and distribute the letters of Paul, there could be several copies of the same letter of Paul in the same place, but coming from a different early copy. At this point, those who made copies were able to choose which variations they considered to be more reliable. They would recognize a generally sloppy version and would probably prefer a better copy. Textual Types This explains why historians have discovered different patterns or types of copies. Rather than explain each type, we only need to understand that for one thousand eight hundred years, scholars mostly were familiar with one family of copies which are called Byzantine. The Byzantine copies were found mostly in the eastern half of the Roman empire. Why do we have so many of the Byzantine text types? The simplest explanation is that Christians in the Western half of the Roman read their Bibles in Latin, the language of Rome, whereas Christians in the Eastern half read their Bibles in Greek. In fact, we often call the Eastern Church the Greek Orthodox church for this very reason!

Since the Latin speaking churches did not need Greek Bibles, they did not copy them very often, whereas the Greek speaking churches in the East regularly needed Greek copies. Therefore, the majority of ancient manuscripts we have come from the Eastern Greek-speaking churches. These manuscripts generally are Byzantine, and show the same kinds of copying errors among them. The most ancient manuscripts are much more reliable than the Byzantine manuscripts. No one text is perfect, however. How, then, can we figure out what Paul actually wrote in his original letter to the Corinthians? When historians examine a verse to find out what the original author actually wrote, they look at the differences among various ancient copies of that verse and try to figure out why those variations are there. Almost always, it is simple to discover what led the copyist to write a word or phrase incorrectly. Most of the time the errors are simple spelling or grammatical mistakes. Sometimes a copyist might have unconsciously copied a passage in one gospel (say, the Gospel of Mark) using the exact words of the Gospel of Matthew (which might differ a bit), perhaps just assuming that they were the same in both gospels. Sometimes, historians are pretty sure that some of these copyists in such a situation changed the words on purpose, but other times it could have been a simple mental mistake. Then How Can We Be Sure? That is a good question. We can be sure what a verse actually said by comparing it to other copies of the same verse. If we had only one ancient copy of a verse, most of the time we might wonder if our ancient copy was correct, but we would have no way to check it. If we had two ancient copies, of course, then we would have more information available to help us make a decision. If we had ten copies, however, we would be much better off, because we would have a much better idea of what factors might have led the various copyists to choose the spellings and words they chose to write. In reality, however, we have literally hundreds of ancient copies! By comparing those copies, we are much more likely to figure out which words are errors and which words were written by the original author. There are basic rules for historians to decide which is the most likely correct and original verse. Most decisions are easily arrived at using those rules. There are some verses which are difficult to guess beyond a shadow of a doubt. Should this make us nervous? Not at all! These rules are logical, but they also come after years of practical experience. Rules for Textual Criticism Adapted from Epp and Fee, Studies in the Theory and Method of New Testament Textual Criticism (1993, pages 157-8) Page 80 of 112

Page 79 of 112

1. We should generally prefer older readings, manuscripts, or groups. ("The shorter the interval between the time of the autograph and the end of the period of transmission in question, the stronger the presumption that earlier date implies greater purity of text.") (2.59; cf. 2.5-6, 31) 2. We should not care about how many different manuscripts have a particular reading. Instead, we should be concerned about the quality of the different manuscripts. Two excellent manuscripts are more reliable than 100 poor manuscripts (2.44) 3. If a reading seems to be joining two simple, alternative readings, we can assume that it is later than the two different readings which are found in other manuscripts. If a manuscript never joins together alternative readings, we can assume it is especially valuable. (2.49-50). 4. The reading is to be preferred that makes the best sense, that is, that best conforms to the grammar and is most congruous with the purport of the rest of the sentence and of the larger context. (2.20) 5. If a reading is typical of the usual style of the author and to that author's material in other passages, it is more likely. (2.20) 6. If a reading explains why other readings exist, that reading is probably the correct reading. For example, if we can guess why reading #2 added or subtracted from reading #1 and if this guess makes sense, it is a good idea to choose reading #1 (2.22-23) 7. When a reading sounds better (grammar, pleasing words, etc.), but seems to have less meaning, then it is probably not as reliable. A reading which does not sound as good, but has more meaning is possibly more reliable. (2.27, 29) 8. If a reading seems to be fixing something that appears to be a problem in an earlier text, it is less likely to be reliable. The reading is less likely to be original that shows a habit of trying to smooth away difficulties (another way of stating that the harder reading is preferable). (2.28) 9. If a manuscript usually has better readings, it is more trustworthy. If it is an older manuscript (2.32-33), that is even better. If such a manuscript habitually contains reading that prove themselves antecedent to mixture and independent of external contamination by other, inferior texts (2.150-51). The same principles apply to groups of manuscripts (2.260-61). Page 81 of 112

Some rules are more important than others. Also, some textual scholars are better than others, because sometimes studying the manuscripts is a bit like detective work. The historian has to keep these various rules in his or her mind, carefully think through the various different readings of a verse, consider the authors style, and make a decision. Sometimes historians have prejudices which would lead them to a reading which is not as good as another reading. There are so many textual critics, however, that when they look at a textual critics decisions about a verse, they will carefully examine the evidence themselves. Sometimes, a particularly respected scholar might convince people not to examine the evidence as carefully as they ought to examine it. Fortunately, however, there are many deeply committed Christians who are textual critics and they work hard to find out what the original verse actually said. Preliminary Questions and Answers by James Arlandson http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/02/new_testament_manuscripts_the. html Used by permission. This article is the first in a four-part series on New Testament textual criticism. It provides the basics on this science and art, answering such questions as these: Did scribes make errors as they copied down holy Writ? If so, what kind of errors are they? Why wouldnt God protect his Word from such errors? Whats the goal of the science and art of textual criticism? Should we even engage in criticism of the Bible? Isnt that blasphemous? Should I trust the New Testament? These questions and more are explored in a basic Question and Answer format, for ease of understanding. This article is written by a nonspecialist and is intended for the laity. The entire series assumes the basic Christian doctrine of inspiration. The original authors of the New Testament were inspired. But we no longer have their very original manuscripts. Rather, they were transmitted by scribes and copyists who took their work seriously, but were not inspired as the original authors were. They made typical errors that all scribes and copyists do before the age of copy machines, word processors, and spell checks. Textual criticism attempts to recover the originals, as much as humanly possible. Have textual critics succeeded? By any reckoning, we have 95% of the inspired words, and some scholars place the number as high as 99% (see Part

Page 82 of 112

Three and Question One). Where any uncertainties remain, they do not overturn New Testament doctrine, which is supported by other verses. That is a remarkable achievement for any text coming out of the Greco-Roman world. Web readers need to know this, so they can be reassured about their Bible when they hear its critics misleading the public about the complete trustworthiness of Scripture. The New Testament (and the Old Testament) is a highly accurate, reliable, and faithful record of the words and ideas of the original authors, as inspired by God. This article (and the entire series) is about the nonoriginal manuscripts. Let's educate ourselves about them so we won't be caught unprepared when the needlessly and heedlessly harsh critics appear in the media. 1. What is the original language of the New Testament? Since the question and answer is so fundamental, I have repeated them in the other parts in this series. It was written in common Greek of the first century, in a vocabulary and sentence structure that most people could understand. This is especially true of the four Gospels. Christianity is a missionary religion, so it had to use the language that everyone knew in the cities in the first century. And that language was Greek. Not much later, as Christianity expanded farther, scribes translated the Greek New Testament into other languages. It must be emphasized that ancient Greek (even koin or common Greek of the New Testament) is a remarkably precise and nuanced language. It was conditioned, after all, by the two greatest philosopher who ever lived: Plato and Aristotle, not to mention other great geniuses in the Greek-speaking world, such as Sophocles and Euripides. The New Testament authors, though not indebted to them directly, drew from this deep source, ancient Greek. 3. What do MS, MSS and NT mean? The abbreviations stand for manuscript (singular), manuscripts (plural) and New Testament, respectively. Hereafter, I will use them. 4. What does variant mean? It means a range of readings or words or phrases or clauses that could be inserted into a verse. It is any difference in two or more MSS in a verse from the NT. This textual critic says: The details of which texts are composed (letters, words) are readings, and, accordingly, all readings that differ from the accepted text as central are usually variant readings or variants.

The term . . . refers to the existence of a deviation between the accepted text and another text. (Wegner p. 309) 5. Why is it necessary to do textual criticism? Necessity goes to need, and there is a definite need to do this. The NT was written by scribes before the age of printing presses, computers, word processing programs, email attachments, and faxes. If twenty persons, sitting in far different places and without communicating with each other, were to copy by hand all of the four Gospels from an exemplar (a MS from which a copy is made), it is one hundred percent certain that they would make errors. They might spell their for there or form instead of from or write answer for answered. How do we establish the correct readings? The process would be tedious, but it could be done by collating the twenty handwritten MSS (note the word Latin word for hand in manuscript). Collation is the comparison of one manuscript against a known printed text for the sake of producing a list of the differences (Comfort, Encountering, p. 381). Most of the errors are accidental, such as spelling and omitting words and jumping from one line to another one below or above, as the copyists mind wanders or he gets distracted. However, now lets take away the exemplar of the four Gospels. We could produce the original or autograph by coming up with a list of differences. It is extremely rare to have two or more copyists making the same error in the same place and in the same way. Therefore, most of the twenty MSS would lead us to the autograph. However, this brief example is highly simplified because it too neatly assumes one generation and one exemplar. The NT MSS were written over centuries and from different exemplars that range in quality. In fact, each book of the NT has its own history and audience at the beginning. It was only gradually, but early, that the whole NT as we know it was put together. But the example illustrates the essence of the task and goal of textual criticism: sorting out MSS and eliminating errors so we can find the original wording. 7. What does autograph mean? In short, it means the original MS. But according to a standard and longer definition, it means: The authored manuscript, whether penned by the author, dictated by him, or endorsed by him. By comparison, the original manuscript is the archetypal exemplar from which other manuscripts were made for publication and distribution. This could be one-and-the-same with the autograph but not necessarily so, especially if editing occurred between the time of the authors

Page 83 of 112

Page 84 of 112

composition and publication. None of the original manuscripts of any book of the Bible are extant [exists and known] (Comfort, Encountering, p. 380). As noted in that excerpt, these originals no longer exist; otherwise, we would not need to do textual criticism. 8. Whats the goal of textual criticism, in the first place? This textual critic offers a clear purpose or goal: The purpose of textual criticism, classically defined, is to recover the original wording of an ancient text, no longer extant [existing and known] in its original form, by means of examining the extant manuscript copies and then applying the canons [rules] of the discipline for determining the wording most likely original. (Comfort, Encountering, p. 289) Other textual critics say virtually the same thing. (See the excerpts in Question Two). 9. So what kind of scribal errors are there, anyway? The vast majority of errors are accidental. Here are some examples that have been classified and labeled. Mistaken letters is the confusion of similar letters such as I for j. Homophony substitutes a similar sounding words as in there for their. Haplography omits a letter or word usually due to a similar letter or word in context as in occurrence written incorrectly as ocurrence. Dittography means that a letter or word has been written twice rather than once such as latter written as later. Metathesis is the reversal in order of two letters or words as in dog for god. Homoioteleuton is an omission caused by two words or phrases that end similarly. For example, in 1 John 2:23 in a MS or two the clause he who confesses the Son has been accidentally omitted because originally it was sandwiched in between the same clause appearing twice, has the father. The scribe skipped down to the similar two ending clauses and omitted the middle clause.

But are there some deliberate changes? Yes, but they amount to comparatively few and are not always difficult to correct. ! Changes in spelling or grammar. In Matthew 1:7-8 the name Asaph has been corrected in some MSS to Asa, the king of Judah, in conformity to 1 Kings 15:9-14. Clearing up difficulties. According to some MSS, in Mark 1:2-3 the composite quotation from Malachi 3:1 and Isaiah 40:3 is attributed only to Isaiah the prophet. But some later copyists changed it to the prophets to clear up any confusion. Are there theological changes? Yes, and they also amount to comparatively few. Some scribes, motivated out of zeal or their need to protect doctrine, added or substituted or altered words, phrases, and clauses. Here is an example. In Luke 2:41, 43 the words his parents have been changed in a few and late MSS to Joseph and Mary (verse 41) or Joseph and his mother, possibly to safeguard the doctrine of the virgin birth. (Wegner, pp. 53-54) That is, according to some scribes, saying that Joseph was a parent of Jesus may imply that Joseph was the biological father of Jesus. But the scribes improvement was unnecessary. It is possible to be a parent outside of physical procreation. However, these zealous improvements do not negatively impact Christian doctrine because other passages in fact support a given doctrine. Other verses, for example, support the doctrine of the virgin Birth. Indeed, it is these undisputed verses supporting doctrine that inform the zealous scribe to fudge the text in the first place. The scribe needs a textual starting point before he slips in his improvements, long before theologians developed and crystallized theology, derived directly from the Bible. All of these examples are adapted from Wegner, pp. 44-55, and Metzger and Ehrman, pp. 250-71. 10. How is textual criticism done? Broadly speaking, the technique and art of textual criticism is divided into two main approaches: examining the external and internal evidence. The external approach studies the MSS themselves. How early or late are they? Where do they come from? How do they compare with known reliable ones? Do any of them depend on another, or not? Can they be put into families, as in a genealogy? What scribal style are they written in? Is the style early or late? Can it be used to pinpoint the date of other MSS?

Page 85 of 112

Page 86 of 112

Generally, the earlier and more numerous the MSS, the better, but the dating is not a fixed rule. Sometimes it may be assumed that a later MS (eighth or ninth century) may come directly from a reliable and early, but unknown, MS. The internal approach evaluates the MSSs words on the page and all the variants. It answers such questions as these: Are there spelling or grammatical characteristics that would favor one reading over the others? Does the author commonly use words, phrases, or clauses a certain way? Are there clearly accidental errors (see Question, Nine, above)? Is there an identifiable reason that a copyist would change a word or phrase? What is the overall theology of a NT author (Wegner, pp. 238-39)? 11. How many scribal errors are there? Are there hundreds of thousands? That number is misleading, because even the smallest spelling variant is counted. To use an example in English, a variant may be ed after a word (answered) or without an ed (answer). In Greek the word order of a sentence is much more flexible than in English. So if the word order changes in even the slightest way without changing the meaning (see Question Fifteen below, and Part Three, Question One), then this too is counted as a variant. Such trivial differences are counted in the grand total. Plus, there are several million pages of manuscripts. If there are 500,000 variants (and that number is too high), then that would be much less than one variant per page, on average. Thus, saying that there are hundreds of thousands of variants turns the huge number of pages into a vice, when the huge number is in fact a virtue of NT MSS. Critics want us to believe that even more MS pages would make the NT less reliable, but that is wrongheaded. So what is the total of more significant variants? It amounts to a surprisingly small percentage of the entire NT. Most modern textual critics can agree on the bulk of the text (some 95 percent of it perhaps). It is the remaining 5 per cent or so where disputes occur and differing conclusions may be found. These discrepancies are the cause for most of the variants to be seen in the footnotes of our translations (Elliott and Moir, p. 8). Also, some scholars put the number as high as 99% (see Part Three, Question One). We nonspecialists do not have to debate over trivial variants. For us, the Scripture is 9599% established. No other text coming out of the Greco-Roman world comes even close to this startling outcome, but a very, very far distant second. This is significant because textual critics focus on a very small number of variants. This also means that after the five or so or one percent of variants have been worked through, we have essentially the Word of God in our hands (See Sir Frederick Kenyons verdict in Question Seventeen, below). Page 87 of 112

These variants do not overturn or negate Christian doctrine. If one word or clause is being scrutinized in one verse, then the entire sweep of the New Testament supports basic doctrine, such as the deity of Christ (see Question Fifteen, below). We need, therefore, to get a perspective. No one should doubt the Bibles reliability in terms of the MS attestation. 12. How many MSS are there? The official listing (as of 2006) of the several important categories of Greek New Testament manuscripts can be summarized as follows: Official List of MSS as of 2006 Papyri...118 Majuscule MSS...317 Minuscule MSS...2877 Lectionary MSS...2433 Total...5745 Source: Papyri Hat tip: Komoszewski, Sawyer, and Wallace, p. 77. Papyrus means writing material made from reed plants, in this case MSS that survive in fragments, but significant ones. Majuscule (or uncials) denotes Greek MSS written in capital letters. Minuscule indicates Greek MSS written in cursive. And lectionary MSS mean books or lists of specific Biblical passages to be read (hence lectionary) in the churchs calendar. The MSS in the latter category need more detailed study, though the significant MSS have been used in textual criticism of the NT. Not mentioned here are the 20,000 or more different early versions, that is, translations, from original Greek into another language such as Latin, Ethiopic, Slavic, and Armenian. Different scholars come to slightly different totals, but this chart gives us a clear idea of how many manuscripts scholars have to sort through. After describing the poor showing of non-Christian MSS of ancient Roman authors, Metzger (and Ehrman, though this excerpt is found in the third edition without him) draws this conclusion about the richness and variety of the NT MSS:

Page 88 of 112

In contrast with these figures [about non-Christian Roman writers], the textual critic of the New Testament is embarrassed by the wealth of material. Furthermore, the work of many ancient authors has been preserved only in manuscripts that date from the Middle Ages (sometimes the late Middle Ages), far removed from the time at which they lived and wrote. On the contrary, the time between the composition of the books of the New Testament and the earliest extant [existing] copies is relatively brief . . . several papyrus manuscripts of portions of the New Testament are extant that were copied within a century or so after the composition of the original documents. (Metzger and Ehrman, p. 51) It should be pointed out that a footnote to this excerpt says that most of the papyri are relatively fragmentary and the great majority of other MSS contain only the four Gospels or only the Epistles. However, these MSS may still be used to cross-check the others. It is much better to have many MSS than few, as in the case of the GrecoRoman non-Christian MSS. Further, the quotations of the NT in the writings of the church fathers have not yet been factored into the calculations. Though this fertile area is undergoing detailed study, Metzger (and Ehrman, though this excerpt is found in the third edition without him) estimates: Indeed, so extensive are these citations that if all other sources for our knowledge of the text of the New Testament were destroyed, they would be sufficient alone for the reconstruction of practically the entire New Testament. (p. 126) The quotations from the Church Fathers are significant in attesting to the reliability of the NT that we have in our possession. Basic Facts on Producing New Testament Manuscripts This section answers questions about the material and process of making the pages of a document, along with the scribal art of writing. What were the scribes utensils? How was a papyrus sheet or page made? What is parchment? Why wouldnt God protect his Word from such complications? Should I trust the New Testament? These questions and more are explored in a basic Question and Answer format, for ease of understanding. The article is written by a nonspecialist and is intended for the laity. 1. What is the original language of the New Testament? Since the question and answer is so fundamental, I have repeated them in the other parts in this series. It was written in common Greek of the first century, in a vocabulary and sentence structure that most people could understand. This is especially true of the four Gospels. Christianity is a Page 89 of 112

missionary religion, so it had to use the language that everyone knew in the cities in the first century. And that language was Greek. Not much later, as Christianity expanded farther, scribes translated the Greek New Testament into other languages. 2. What is a papyrus manuscript, and where does it come from? A papyrus manuscript comes from a reed plant. We get our word paper from the word papyrus. The plural of papyrus is papyri. Scribes in the ancient Mediterranean world, where Christianity first spread, used it as the material on which to write a variety of documents, ranging from personal letters to notes of legal minutes in a court proceeding. In our case, scribes used it to copy down the New Testament. Bruce M. Metzger ranks as a top textual critic of the New Testament, and in the fourth edition of his book Bart D. Ehrman joins him. They give a description of the plant from which papyrus manuscripts are made. Papyrus is an aquatic plant that grows most successfully in the still shallow marshlands (see Job 8:11, Can papyrus grow where there is no marsh?). Its broad roots stretches horizontally under the mud, and from this rise several strong stalks, triangular in cross section; short brown leaves protect the base. Papyrus is by far the tallest of the botanical Cyperus papyrus, growing to a height of 12 or 15 feet. At its top the stalk splits into a mass of strands (the umbel), and at the end of those the plant produces small brown flowers. The stalk of the papyrus plant has a tough green rind that contains an ivory white pith, which carries water and sustenance from the root to the flowering head. (Metzger and Ehrman. p. 4) The plant produces a natural adhesive as it is pressed together. Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, two of the most prominent New Testament textual critics of any generation, tell us where papyrus comes from. In the early period New Testament texts were written on papyrus, as was all the literature of the time. This writing material was produced primarily (though not exclusively) in Egypt. (Aland and Aland, p. 75) 3. How was the reed plant turned into papyrus? Aland and Aland say that the plant could grow to a height of six meters (longer than 12 or 15 feet, as stated by Metzger and Ehrman in the previous answer). Then Aland and Aland describe how the papyrus went from a plant to writing material.

Page 90 of 112

Its thick stem was divided into sections and sharp tools were used to cut it lengthwise into wafer-thin strips. These strips were laid side by side to form a single layer with the fibers of the pith running parallel, and on top of it a second layer was placed with the fibers running at right angles to the first. The two layers were then moistened, pressed together, and smoothed down. Finally, any projecting fibers were trimmed off and the papyrus sheet was cut to a desired size. (p. 75) 4. What is parchment? Parchment is treated animal hide on which scribes wrote their texts, such as the Bible. The term parchment comes from the Greek word for the city Pergamum, which was noted for its fine quality of this product (Greenlee, p. 11). (Note: They would prepare the animal skin so that it could be written on. The skin had two different sides, the soft side and the less soft side.) 5. What is vellum? This is also made of treated animal hide, calfskin, properly. It had a finer quality than parchment. But the two terms parchment and vellum are used interchangeably today. 6. How was this material turned into sheets for manuscripts? The process required careful work. The hide (theoretically of any animal, but usually of a goat or sheep) first had the hair and flesh removed by a solution of lime mordant, and was then trimmed to size, polished, and smoothed with chalk and pumice stone to prepare the surface for use. (Aland and Aland, p. 76) 7. How was the parchment sheet prepared for writing on it? The lines had to be drawn on the sheet (the lines were ready-made with a papyrus sheet because the fibers guided the scribe to write in straight lines). Drawing the lines on parchment was done by a metal stylus. The line was drawn on the hair side, so that it still appears there as a depression and on the flesh side as a slight ridge (guide line for the columns in manuscripts were marked in the same way). The difference between the hair side and the flesh side posed a difficulty with parchment manuscripts, because the one side was darker in color and the other lighter. A conventional solution was found by arranging the four-sheet quire (which became

standard) so that the hair side faced the hair side and the flesh side faced the flesh side. (Aland and Aland, p. 77) 8. What is a quire? It was four sheets of paper (or papyrus or parchment) folded once and stitched at the fold. Scribes would use several quires to make up an entire codex, an early form of the book as we know it (Comfort, Encountering, pp. 389-390). 9. How many animals were needed? Many sheep or goats were needed to produce about 200-250 folios or a leaf or a page for a codex manuscript. One sheep or goat could provide only two folios [a leaf, which when folded, provided four pages, front and back, twice], i.e., only four folios of the finished manuscript, the size of which would be determined by the size of the animals. A manuscript containing a group of New Testament writings in the average format (about 200-250 folios of about 25 x 19 cm) required the hides of at least fifty to sixty sheep or goats. This would mean quite a good size flock. Manuscripts would often need to be larger to accommodate more than a single group of writing, and this would require a greater number of hides. (Aland and Aland, p. 77) 10. How expensive was the preparation and copying? A manuscript of only a part of an original writing could cost a small fortune. For a large manuscript (Codex Sinaiticus was originally at least 43 x 38 cm in size) or one particularly fine quality of parchment, the expense would have multiplied. In fact, a manuscript of the New Testament represented a small fortune because the preparation of the parchment was only the first step. Once it had been prepared there was still the writing of the text to be done . . . Clearly the manuscript must have been commissioned by persons of the upper classes who could afford to ignore the expense. (Aland and Aland, p. 77) Often, the church commissioned the codex of parts or the entire New Testament. Emperor Diocletian (ruled AD 284-305), who persecuted the church terribly, set the wages for scribes copying secular manuscripts:

Page 91 of 112

Page 92 of 112

At the rate of 25 denarii for 100 lines in writing of the first quality and 20 denarii for the same number of lines in writing of the second quality (what the difference was between the two qualities is not mentioned) . . . the cost of producing one complete Bible, such as Codex Sinaiticus, would have come to about 30,000 denarii, a sizeable sum notwithstanding steadily rising inflation. (Metzger and Ehrman, p. 26) For the four Gospels, these are the wages in round numbers of the Roman denarius: 600 for Matthew 600 for Mark 800 for Luke 300 for John The following precise figures are found in several ancient manuscripts of the four Gospels, respectively: 2,560, 1,616, 2,750, and 2,024 (Metzger and Ehrman, p. 26) . What was a denarius? The Roman denarius was the standard currency in the empire, and an average worker, agricultural or urban, earned one denarius per day, as long as the work did not run out or was not seasonal at best In no way could an average Christian afford a parchment New Testament, not to mention one Gospel. He might be able to afford a small epistle, if he scrimped and saved money, but the cost of daily living would typically prove too high. This is why reading the Scriptures in church was essential throughout church history. Christians today should be grateful that they can afford Bibles, even many translations. 11. What were the writing utensils and other materials like? Stylus This was used for wax tablets. It was made of metal, ivory, or bone. A writer pressed down lightly on the tablet, making impressions. As noted in Question Seven, it could be used to draw lines on a prepared parchment. The stylus had a point on one end for writing, and a knob on the other end for correcting errors. Reed pen Page 93 of 112

It is probable that both New Testament manuscripts and other documents were written with reed pens. To make a reed pen, the reed stalk was dried, sharpened to a point on one end, and slit somewhat as a modern pen point is slit (Greenlee, pp. 1213). The pen had to be re-inked about every fourth or sixth letter (Metzger and Ehrman, p. 27, note 37). Other implements The scribe needed some additional implements: a knife for making a new pen, a whetstone for sharpening the knife, pumice stone for smoothing the parchment sheet and for sharpening the pen point, and a sponge for erasing and for wiping the pen point (Greenlee, p. 13). Ink Two of the most common kinds were ink made of lamp-black and gum dissolved in water, which produced very black writing; and ink made from nut-galls, which produced a fine rusty-brown color (Greenlee p. 13). A nut-gall is also called an oak gall, which is a curious ball-like tumor, about the size of a small marble, that grows mainly on the leaves or twigs of oak trees (Metzger and Ehrman, p. 10-11). Go online to the University of Michigan for a photo of a pen, an inkwell, and a papyrus from ancient Greco-Roman Egypt. Here is a photo of other writing material from the same site. 12. What did ancient books look like? There were two main forms. First, the roll or scroll: In the Greco-Roman world, literary works were customarily published in the format of a scroll, made of papyrus or parchment. The papyrus scroll was made by gluing together, side by side, separate sheets of papyrus and then winding the long strip around a roller, thus producing a volume (a word derived from the Latin volumen, something rolled up). (Metzger and Ehrman, p. 12) The length of a scroll works out nicely for the longer books of the New Testament. The length of the papyrus roll was limited by considerations of convenience of handling it; the normal Greek literary roll seldom exceeded 35 feet in length. Ancient authors therefore would divide a long literary work into several books, each of which would be accommodated in one roll. The two longest books in the New Testament, the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts, would have filled an ordinary roll of 31 or 32 feet in length. Doubtless, this is one of the reasons why Luke and Acts were issued Page 94 of 112

in two volumes. (Metzger and Ehrman, p. 12) The scroll was arranged in a series of columns, each about 2 or 3 inches wide. The scroll had its disadvantages, however. It was inconvenient to use, requiring two hands to roll it up or unwind it. Also, it was difficult to find a passage that the reader needed. Second, the codex: The codex is a leaf or page form of a book. It was made by folding a sheet of papyrus in the middle, and combining as many folded pages as needed, and then sewing together the folded ends. 13. Why did early Christians prefer the codex to the scroll? Christians found that this form had a number of advantages over the roll: (1) it permitted all four Gospels or all of the Epistles of Paul to be bound in one book, a format that was impossible so long as the roll was used; (2) it facilitated the consultation of proof texts; (3) it was better adapted to receiving writing on both sides of the page, thus keeping the cost of production down. (Metzger and Ehrman, p. 13) Metzger (and Ehrman, though the above excerpt and the following facts are found in the third edition without Ehrman) notes an economic advantage. The savings of the codex over the scroll was 44%. Combining the cost of the papyrus and the wages of the scribe would save about 26% (p. 14). 14. What was handwriting like? Uncial or majuscule This is Greek capital letters. Both papyri and parchment were written on with uncials. This is also known as book-hand style. It was written without spaces between words, so a reader had to be careful as he read a text out loud. Minuscule or cursive Cursive comes from Latin for running. It was smaller, and the letters tended to run together. This style came into its own in the ninth century and later. Metzger (and Ehrman, though this excerpt is found in Metzgers third edition without Ehrman) explains the differences between uncial and cursive, both in use and purpose. In antiquity, two styles of script for writing Greek were in general use: the book-hand and the cursive. Both have existed side by side; the book-hand is conservative, but the cursive can change very quickly, with Page 95 of 112

forms that tend to invade the book-hand. The cursive, or running, hand could be written rapidly and was employed for non-literary, everyday documents, such as letters, accounts, receipts, petitions, deeds, and the like . . . Literary works, however, were written in the more formal style of book-hand, which was characterized by more deliberate and carefully executed letters, each one separate from the othersomewhat like writing in capital letters . . . (p. 17) 15. Is there an advantage of one handwriting style over another? Again, we let Metzger (and Ehrman, though this excerpt is found in the third edition without him) speak as a premier specialist: The advantages of using minuscule script are obvious. Minuscule letters, as the name suggests, are smaller than majuscules, and thus writing is more compact. Hence, when the minuscule hand was used, less parchment was required and therefore the book was more economical. Furthermore, a literary work could be produced that was less bulky and therefore easier to handle than a larger manuscript. Moreover, it was possible to write minuscule letters more rapidly than majuscules, and consequently books could be produced more quickly and more cheaply (p. 20). 16. All of these processes seem so complicated. Why wouldnt God protect his Word? I have asked and answered this question in the other parts in this series. Christians believe that God works through history and humans. C. S. Lewis preliminary study on miracles is relevant. Once the inspired original manuscripts get assimilated into history, they undergo the effects of time: The moment [the newcomer, e.g. miracle] enters [Natures] realm, it obeys her laws. Miraculous wine will intoxicate, miraculous conception will lead to pregnancy, inspired books will suffer all the ordinary processes of textual corruption, miraculous bread will be digested. (Miracles: A Preliminary Study, p. 81) However, these errors have been purged out (and continue to be), with very few remainders. Why cant devout believers today conclude that God is in fact working through humans in the purging process? Isnt this a kind of divine protection that is worked out over time and history? 17. So whats the bottom line on all of this? Should I lose my confidence in the New Testament?

Page 96 of 112

I have also asked and answered this question in the other three articles of the fourpart series on New Testament manuscripts, but it is repeated here since it is critical both for seekers and the devout. Sir Frederick Kenyon (d. 1952), a premier New Testament textual critic of the first half of the twentieth century, is optimistic about the general result of all of the hard work done by many scholars. It is reassuring at the end to find that the general result of all these discoveries and all this study is to strengthen the proof of the authenticity of the Scriptures, and our conviction that we have in our hands, in substantial integrity, the veritable Word of God (qtd. in Wegner, p. 25). Kenyon worked in an earlier generation, and other manuscripts have been found since his time. However, nothing has cropped up that challenges in a substantive way the meaning and content of the New Testament. Still there are relatively few significant variants in the Bible, and among these variants there is very little difference in meaning and content (Wegner, p. 25). Christians should have gratitude, if I may intrude with my own opinion, for scholars putting in so much time and energy and for clarifying the New Testament. Somebody has to do this thankless yeomans work, done often behind the scenes, with no glamour. Therefore, far from losing your confidence, it should increase. See the final article in the series: The Manuscripts Tell the Story: the New Testament Is Reliable. It quotes the opinions of many specialists on New Testament textual criticism. They also are optimistic. This article has many links to other scholarship and sites. If the readers would like to click on them, they are encouraged to go to American Thinker, click on Archives, find James Arlandson, and then click on the article New Testament Manuscripts: the Right Stuff; or they may follow this URL: http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/02/new_testament_manuscripts_the _1.html The article hosted by biblicalstudies.org.uk has been updated in other areas. References Aland, Kurt and Barbara Aland. The Text of the New Testament: An Introduction to the Critical Editions and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism. 2nd ed. Trans. Erroll F. Rhodes. Eerdmans, 1989. Black, David Alan, New Testament Textual Criticism: a Concise Guide. Baker, 1994. Comfort, Philip Wesley. The Quest for the Original Text of the New Testament. Wipf and Stock (originally at Baker), 1992. Page 97 of 112

---. Encountering the Manuscripts: An Introduction to New Testament Paleography and Textual Criticism. Broadman and Holman, 2005. Elliott, Keith and Ian Moir. Manuscripts and the Text of the New Testament: An Introduction for English Readers. T & T Clark, 1995. Finegan, Jack. Encountering New Testament Manuscripts: A Working Introduction to Textual Criticism. Eerdmans, 1974. Greenlee, J. Harold. Introduction to New Testament Textual Criticism. Rev. ed. Hendrickson, 1995. Metzger, Bruce M. and Bart D. Ehrman. The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration. 4th ed. Oxford UP, 2005. Roberts, Colin H. Manuscript, Society and Belief in Early Christian Egypt. Published for the British Academy by the Oxford UP, 1979. --- and T. C. Skeat, The Birth of the Codex, published for the British Academy by the Oxford UP, 1983. Wegner, Paul D. A Students Guide to Textual Criticism of the Bible: Its History, Methods, and Results. InterVarsity, 2006. Glossary Holy Writ: I.e., the Bible blasphemous: Something which treats God so disrespectfully that God would judge the person who did this. inspiration: Gods work of making sure that the writers of the Bible did not make any errors and wrote His Word. Textual criticism: Historical work which tries to find out what the original gospels and letters actually said. This is done by studying ancient manuscripts. Greco-Roman world: The ancient area which was part of the Roman Empire, from Spain all the way to Persia. nonoriginal manuscripts: Ancient manuscripts which are copies and are not the actual paper upon which the original letters and gospel were written. MS, MSS and NT The abbreviations stand for manuscript (singular), manuscripts (plural) and New Testament, respectively. Variant: any difference in two or more MSS in a verse from the NT. readings: The words in a particular variant. For example, P49 might say, Jesus answered immediately whereas P66 might say, Jesus answered. The reading for P49 has the word, answered while the reading for p66 does not. Papyrus means writing material made from reed plants, in this case MSS that survive in fragments, but significant ones. Page 98 of 112

Majuscule (or uncials) denotes Greek MSS written in capital letters. Minuscule indicates Greek MSS written in cursive. lectionary MSS mean books or lists of specific Biblical passages to be read (hence lectionary) in the churchs calendar. External approach to examining manuscripts (MSS): studies the MSS themselves asking, How early or late are they? Where do they come from? Internal approach to examining manuscripts (MSS): studies the MSS's words on the page and all the variants, asking: Are there spelling or grammatical characteristics that would favor one reading over the others? Does the author commonly use words, phrases, or clauses a certain way? Are there clearly accidental errors? Laity: Regular readers who are not theologians or professors Exemplar: The actual original letter or gospel that the apostle actually wrote upon. Autograph: The actual original letter or gospel that the apostle actually wrote upon.

Fact: Scholars have enough ancient New Testament manuscripts that they are able with confidence to say that the original four gospels and the original letters are almost entirely (and probably entirely) the same gospels and letters that we have in our Bibles today. Statement #8 According to the Gospels, Jesus taught that sinners can only enter the kingdom of God by facing their sin and taking the first steps in turning from it (called repenting), putting faith in Jesus as Messiah and Lord, and following him. What Is the Kingdom of God/Heaven? We have already done a survey on Jesus (and Pauls) teachings on the kingdom of God. The easiest way to understand the kingdom of heaven is to look again at what Jesus says here in Mark 1:14-15. And after John had been taken into custody, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of God, and saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel. (Mark 1:14-15) The phrase at hand translates one Greek word which usually means something is physically near (as opposed to being near in time, although in a few places it does mean time). Jesus probably does not mean that the time for the kingdom of God is approaching (he had just said that, The time is fulfilled). Much more likely, Jesus is saying the kingdom of God is upon them physically. The word repent means to turn away from ones sin and to turn to Jesus Christ as ones Lord whom one will follow by faith. Page 99 of 112 Page 100 of 112

This statement tells us that the Kingdom of God is a real place, although not one we can touch or see. When the Jewish leaders accused Jesus of casting out demons by Beelzebuls power (i.e., Satan) he replied, And if I by Beelzebul cast out demons, by whom do your sons cast them out? Consequently they shall be your judges. But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. (Matthew 12:27-28) Why would casting demons out by the Spirit of God prove that Gods kingdom had come upon them? Jesus is proving to them that He is the Messiah, the King. The Old Testament prophecies predicted the Messiah would minister in the power of the Spirit of God (Isaiah 11:2; 42:1; 48:16; etc.). If Jesus is casting out demons and the Spirit of God rests on him, then he is the promised King. The kingdom of God is upon them. Wherever Jesus (the King of the Kingdom) is, there also is the new kind of kingdom. The kingdom is not like a feeling or an emotional experience. It is a place that people must enter, like entering a building or a new territory. Not everyone who says to Me, `Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven. (Matthew 7:21). Truly I say to you, unless you are converted and become like children, you shall not enter the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 18:3b; see also John 3:5; Mark 9:47; 10:15, 2325; Luke 18:17, 24-25). We do not enter the kingdom mentally or spiritually, but either we are in the kingdom or we are on the outside. How can we get into it? Jesus tells us that we must repent from our sin, turn to Jesus as Lord, and follow him by faith. The kingdom a mystery (Mark 4:11). Jesus told Nicodemus, Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. (John 3:3) People who have not been born a second time cannot see it, because it is a completely different kind of existence. Human beings are born into Adams world, the world of flesh and mortality. They function through human power, wisdom, effort and religion. Because of Adams sin, however, everyone who belongs to Adams world is condemned to eternal death. In order to be saved from Adams sin, we must leave Adams world. This means that following religious teachings is not enough. Each human being needs God to do a miracle in his or her life, a miracle which ends his or her membership in Adams race and starts a new membership in Christs kingdom. Christs kingdom does not belong to Adam nor is it a part of Adams world. Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting, that I might not be delivered up to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm. (John 18:36) Rulers have no authority over it, because it is a brand new country, as Paul says, For our citizenship is in heaven, from which also we eagerly wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ; who will transform the body of our humble state Page 101 of 112

into conformity with the body of His glory, by the exertion of the power that He has even to subject all things to Himself. (Philippians 3:20-21) Therefore, we must ask God to make us to become members of his kingdom. Being born into a Christian family does not place us in Christs kingdom. Only a miracle of God can make this happen, and we must choose to put our faith into Jesus Christ alone for this miracle to happen. If you could imagine an entirely new world co-existing with the present world, then you would have an idea of the kingdom of God. The new world would operate according to new rules, would involve a new way of existing and one would have to enter it in order to be a part of it. This is why Paul says, Therefore if any man is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come. (2 Corinthians 5;17) Peter says, . . . for you have been born again not of seed which is perishable but imperishable, that is, through the living and abiding word of God. (1 Peter 1:23) The kingdom of God is not only a kingdom for this present age of life, but also something which will continue in the future. In the present, two kingdomsthe kingdom of man and the kingdom of Godstand side by side. In the future, there will be only one kingdom, the new creation kingdom of God, which will stand alone. God will have done away with the other. The grand majority of Jesus teachings focus on the kingdom as we encounter it now. Think of the kingdom as a new country, a new world and a new kind of existence. We enter this kingdom through the Holy Spirit, who causes us to be born a second time. We live in the kingdom because we are new creations, who no longer belong to the old world. The kingdom has a new set of demands on us, because we are new kinds of people. How do we enter? Jesus told Nicodemus that he did not believe the earthly things Jesus taught and therefore he could not accept the heavenly reality of being born again and belonging to the kingdom. The pathway into the kingdom of God, therefore, is through facing the earthly thingsones sinfulness, ones helplessness of being saved, and Jesus as the Son of God. When a sinful person faces these things and then embraces Christ, that person leaves Adams world and enters into the kingdom of God. He or she becomes born again. Jesus here is announcing a new kingdom and a new kind of existence. The time is finally fulfilled. All that the prophets promised has arrived. The Messiah now brings Gods kingdom to Israel and offers its new citizens poverty in spirit, mourning and persecution. The rest of the sermon will build on these blessings, but the general idea is here. If you choose to enter it, expect a new kind of blessedness. It is a hard blessing, full of sacrifice and pain. Fact: According to the Gospels, Jesus taught that sinners can only enter the kingdom of God by facing their sin and taking the first steps in turning from it Page 102 of 112

(called repenting), putting faith in Jesus as Messiah and Lord, and following him.

Statement #9 In the Gospels, Jesus presents his teachings as the only reliable interpretation of the Old Testament and as Gods program for life in the kingdom of God now and in the future. Luke begins his gospel, Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word have handed them down to us... (Luke 1:1-2) Luke is describing the apostles when he mentions those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Its interesting that Luke suggests the apostles were servants of the word. When he says, the word here, he means the teachings and the stories of the life of Jesus as preached (i.e., handed down) by the apostles. These are the official stories and official teachings which belong to Jesus the Christ. Luke viewed the apostles preaching about Jesus teachings and life as the word of God, i.e., as Scripture. In Luke, Jesus makes two clear statements about true faith and the word. The first is in 8:21. And His mother and brothers came to Him, and they were unable to get to Him because of the crowd. And it was reported to Him, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, wishing to see You. But He answered and said to them, My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it. (Luke 8:19-21) His response surprises those of us living in the twenty-first century. Some might expect Jesus to say But He answered and said to them My mother and My brothers are those who are sensitive to the Spirit or My mother and My brothers are those who serve others or perhaps Those who believe in Me. Instead, they are those who hear Gods word and do it. Notice Jesus does not single out passion, spiritual insight, faith or fervor, but hearing and doing Gods word. In a similar situation some time later, Jesus has the same reply. And it came about while He said these things, one of the women in the crowd raised her voice, and said to Him, "Blessed is the womb that bore You, and the breasts at which You nursed. But He said, On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God, and observe it. (Luke 11:27-28) We cannot pick and choose what we accept and what we deny in Jesus words. Its all or nothing. The House Upon the Rock Page 103 of 112

Jesus finishes his Sermon on the Mount by saying this: Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine, and acts upon them, may be compared to a wise man, who built his house upon the rock. And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and burst against that house; and yet it did not fall, for it had been founded upon the rock. And everyone who hears these words of Mine, and does not act upon them, will be like a foolish man, who built his house upon the sand. And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and burst against that house; and it fell, and great was its fall." (Matthew 7:24-27) When Jesus says These words of mine, he almost certainly is referring both to the words of the Sermon on the Mount and to his words in general. Jesus here is not promising if you have a warm heart or deep feelings or great worship you will be safe in the time of flood. You must hear and act on Jesus words. Jesus presented many different kinds of commands and teachings and many of them radically challenge everything we do in life. Jesus here warns us that only those who build their lives on his teachings will be able to weather the final storms of life. The Word in Johns Gospel Sinners Cannot Hear the Word. Johns Gospel begins talking about the Word from the first verse (In the beginning was the Word... John 1:1). Through the rest of this gospel we read continually of how critical our response to Gods word is for our eternal salvation. For example, in John 5:24, Jesus says "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life. In John 5:38, he says, "And you do not have His word abiding in you, for you do not believe Him whom He sent. Jesus discourse in John 8 gives us the clearest explanation of Gods word in Jesus teaching. John 8 flows directly out of John 7, which takes place during the Feast of Booths or Tabernacles. John describes the peoples confusion about Jesus, wondering if he is the prophet or the Christ (John 7:40-41). In the midst of the festival, Jesus stood and cried out, saying, If any man is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink. He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, From his innermost being shall flow rivers of living water.(John 7:37-39) He then said to them, I am the light of the world, he who follows Me shall not walk in the darkness, but shall have the light of life. (John 8:12) The Pharisees challenged his teaching, but many people believed in him. (8:30) At this point, Jesus challenges his new so-called disciples. Jesus therefore was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, "If you abide in My word, then Page 104 of 112

you are truly disciples of Mine; and you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (8:31-32) The word abide here can mean to remain in something (i.e., not give up, not abandon it) or it can mean to make your home in something. Probably both meanings would work out to the same thing here. If these people remained in Jesus word, they must refuse to allow either personal or outside pressures to lead them to abandon what it commands. To remain in Gods word would be to continue to seek its direction, to submit to its truth, to trust in its revelation. Actually, this promise sounds very similar to the house built upon the rock. Surprisingly, when Jesus offers this encouragement to these new believers, they respond defensively, almost rudely. They answered Him, We are Abraham's offspring, and have never yet been enslaved to anyone; how is it that You say, You shall become free? (8:33) Jesus confronts them with a choice for true eternal freedom. Jesus answered them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin. And the slave does not remain in the house forever; the son does remain forever. If therefore the Son shall make you free, you shall be free indeed. I know that you are Abraham's offspring; yet you seek to kill Me, because My word has no place in you. I speak the things which I have seen with My Father; therefore you also do the things which you heard from your father." (John 8:34-38) We cannot become free of our sin, free of Satans power, free of the curse of death, free of this world until we receive Jesus words into our lives. We must seek what Jesus himself taught, understand it, do what it commands and share it with others if we expect to be free. Keeping Jesus Words We look at one final teaching from Jesus on his words. In John 14:23-24, Jesus says, "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him, and make Our abode with him. He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me. A friend of mine once counseled a young man who had decided actively to pursue homosexual relationships. My friend told him he was not saved nor was he a Christian if he did this. The young man angrily replied, You can be a Christian without believing everything in the Bible! Of course, in a sense the young man was correct, but in another sense, Im not so sure. Jesus does not here command us to be religious. Jesus here commands us to keep his words, making sure we understand to observe every single individual command as well as the entire teaching in general. If you love

Jesus, you will keep all of his words. You will take them seriously, listening to what they mean and acting on them by his enabling and direction. Why Is This So Important? We all need to grow in character, wisdom, ministry skills and the fruit of the Spirit. According to Jesus, the only pathway to growing is Gods word. This is wonderful news, because we dont need seminars and new self-help books to overcome our sin and struggles. We need to get into Gods word, deeply enough that we find those answers in its pages. Then we need to apply what it says to our daily living. We should be thankful we do not need to consult secular experts to understand how to mature in the Spirits fruit. Jesus commanded us to remain in his word that we might grow. We should be thankful for wisdom so deep we will never plumb its depth, yet so accessible a child can understand it and apply it. FACT: In the Gospels, Jesus presents his teachings as the only reliable interpretation of the Old Testament and as Gods program for life in the kingdom of God now and in the future. Statement #10 The writers of the New Testament consistently portrayed Jesus as the Messiah and the son of God and treat him as God. By this point, it should be obvious that the New Testament consistently teaches that Jesus is the Messiah. It is undeniable as well that the writers of the New Testament also present him as the Son of God. The easiest way to show this is simply to list a few verses that show the strong emphasis in the New Testament on Jesus as Messiah and as the Son of God. In this list below, we have selected one verse from every New Testament book to show how the New Testament in every book teaches the doctrine that Jesus is Yahweh, Gods only Son. But Jesus kept silent. Then the high priest said to Him, By the living God I place You under oath: tell us if You are the Messiah, the Son of God! 64 You have said it, Jesus told him. But I tell you, in the future you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Power and coming on the clouds of heaven. 65 Then the high priest tore his robes and said, He has blasphemed! Why do we still need witnesses? Look, now youve heard the blasphemy! (Matthew 26:6365, HCSB) The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. (Mark 1:1, HCSB)

Page 105 of 112

Page 106 of 112

 The angel replied to her: The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore, the holy One to be born will be called the Son of God. (Luke 1:35, HCSB) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 All things were created through Him, and apart from Him not one thing was created that has been created. (John 1:13, HCSB) Now for several days Saul was with the disciples who were at Damascus, 20 and immediately he began to proclaim Jesus in the synagogues, saying, He is the Son of God. 21 All those hearing him continued to be amazed, and were saying, Is this not he who in Jerusalem destroyed those who called on this name, and who had come here for the purpose of bringing them bound before the chief priests? 22 But Saul kept increasing in strength and confounding the Jews who lived at Damascus by proving that this Jesus is the Christ. (Acts 9:1922, NASB95) The ancestors are theirs, and from them, by physical descent, came the Messiah, who is God over all, praised forever. Amen. (Romans 9:5, HCSB) God is faithful, through whom you were called into fellowship with His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord. (1 Corinthians 1:9, NASB95) Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation, 19 namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation. (2 Corinthians 5:1819, NASB95) Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, (Galatians 1:3, NASB95) And He personally gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, 12 for the training of the saints in the work of ministry, to build up the body of Christ, 13 until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of Gods Son, growing into a mature man with a stature measured by Christs fullness. (Ephesians 4:1113, HCSB) Make your own attitude that of Christ Jesus, 6 who, existing in the form of God, did not consider equality with God as something to be used for His own advantage. (Philippians 2:56, HCSB) For everything was created by Him, in heaven and on earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities all things have been created through Him and for Him. 17 He is before all things, and by Him all things hold together. 18 He is also the head of the body, the church; He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He might come to have first place in everything. 19 For God was pleased to have all His fullness dwell in Him, 20 and through Him to reconcile everything to Himself by making peace through Page 107 of 112

the blood of His cross whether things on earth or things in heaven. (Colossians 1:1620, HCSB) For they themselves report about us what kind of a reception we had with you, and how you turned to God from idols to serve a living and true God, 10 and to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, that is Jesus, who rescues us from the wrath to come. (1 Thessalonians 1:910, NASB95) For after all it is only just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you, 7 and to give relief to you who are afflicted and to us as well when the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire, 8 dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. (2 Thessalonians 1:68, NASB95) And most certainly, the mystery of godliness is great: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated in the Spirit, seen by angels, preached among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory. (1 Timothy 3:16, HCSB) Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord or of me His prisoner, but join with me in suffering for the gospel according to the power of God, 9 who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity, 10 but now has been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel, (2 Timothy 1:810, NASB95) For the grace of God has appeared with salvation for all people, 12 instructing us to deny godlessness and worldly lusts and to live in a sensible, righteous, and godly way in the present age, 13 while we wait for the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ. 14 He gave Himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to cleanse for Himself a people for His own possession, eager to do good works. (Titus 2:1114, HCSB) Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. (Philemon 3, NASB95) God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, 2 in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. 3 And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become as much better than the angels, as He has inherited a more excellent name than they. 5 For to which of the angels did He ever say, Y OU ARE MY SON, TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU? And again, I WILL BE A FATHER TO HIM AND HE SHALL BE A SON TO ME? (Hebrews 1:15, NASB95) My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. (James 2:1, NASB95) Page 108 of 112

 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, who are chosen 2 according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in the fullest measure. 3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, (1 Peter 1:13, NASB95) Simeon Peter, a slave and an apostle of Jesus Christ: To those who have obtained a faith of equal privilege with ours through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ. (2 Peter 1:1, HCSB) Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of GodGod remains in him and he in God. (1 John 4:15, HCSB) Grace, mercy and peace will be with us, from God the Father and from Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, in truth and love. (2 John 3, NASB95) Now to Him who is able to keep you from stumbling, and to make you stand in the presence of His glory blameless with great joy, 25 to the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen. (Jude 2425, NASB95) Then He said to me, It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give to the one who thirsts from the spring of the water of life without cost. (Revelation 21:6, NASB95) Behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to render to every man according to what he has done. 13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end. (Revelation 22:1213, NASB95) We have seen that these New Testament letters and gospels were written in the first century, within the lifetimes of the original eyewitnesses of the life and teachings of Jesus Christ. We have also seen that textual historians have been able to know what those letters and gospels originally said when the apostles actually wrote them. There are a few places where textual critics are not entirely sure what the original words or phrases were. Even in those places, however, not one important teaching of Christianity is affected. We can, therefore, be confident that the letters and gospels we have are accurate pictures of what the earliest Christians believed about Jesus Christ, i.e., that he is God and that he is Gods only unique Son. Fact: The writers of the New Testament consistently portrayed Jesus as the Messiah and the son of God and treat him as God.

Conclusions Simple Faith How much evidence would you require to accept the claim that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who died for humanitys sin, rose from the dead and taught words which offer eternal life? Looking over the following ten claims: 1. Historians unanimously agree that between A.D. 49 66, a Jewish Christian named Paul wrote at least the New Testament letters Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, and Galatians. In those letters, Paul states that Jesus original disciples approved of Pauls message and had joined his ministry with theirs, and that the earliest Christians, including men who had been Jesus' disciples, believed that Jesus had been crucified and that they themselves were eyewitnesses to the resurrection of Jesus, who they claimed rose three days after his death. 2. Jesus was a Jew who lived and died in Palestine somewhere around 4BC to AD 30 (the dates may not be exact). 3. The Old Testament is a very ancient book and historians currently possess ancient copies of much of it which were copied at least 100 years before Jesus was born. 4. There is a very strong theme in the Old Testament which focuses on a future person who is sometimes called the Messiah. Many different passages in the Old Testament describe this person as a human being, as God, Savior, worldwide ruler reigning in Jerusalem for eternity, suffering servant who would die and then rise again, sacrifice who would bear all of the sins of the world in his body, source of blessing for the nations of the earth. 5. The four Gospels present Jesus teaching that he has come to begin a new eternal kingdom (called the kingdom of God or heaven) which will eventually be fully experienced in a recreated Heavens and Earth, although now it is only experienced in Jesus the Messiah through the work of the Holy Spirit. 6. The books and letters of the New Testament were written within 70 years of the death of Jesus Christ. 7. Scholars have enough ancient New Testament manuscripts that they are able with confidence to say that the original four gospels and the original letters are almost entirely (and probably entirely) the same gospels and letters that we have in our Bibles today. 8. According to the Gospels, Jesus taught that sinners can only enter the kingdom of God by facing their sin and taking the first steps in turning from it (called repenting), putting faith in Jesus as Messiah and Lord, and following him. Page 110 of 112

Page 109 of 112

9. In the Gospels, Jesus presents his teachings as the only reliable interpretation of the Old Testament and as Gods program for life in the kingdom of God now and in the future. 10.The writers of the New Testament consistently portrayed Jesus as the Messiah and Son of God and treat him as God. Although it may seem like there are only ten points here, in reality we find hundreds of compelling pieces of historical evidence in what we have written. Many, many prophecies (only a few were mentioned above) accurately predict the coming of Jesus Christ as Messiah. Early letters and gospels written by people who were either eyewitnesses or were living and working with eyewitnesses claim that Jesus taught that he was the Messiah and was bringing a new kingdom into the world. These original eyewitnesses also claimed within thirty years of the event that Jesus was crucified and rose from the dead. Their eyewitness testimony fits the Old Testament prophecies perfectly. Since many, many of these original eyewitnesses later died specifically at the hands of persecutors who wanted to silence their claims about the resurrected Jesus, we should accept their testimony. Who would falsely claim to have seen something, knowing by claiming this that they would be executed for it? Of course, the evidence is strong, but evidence by itself never convinced anyone. The Pharisees and Jewish leaders in Jerusalem did not believe (actually many Pharisees did end up believing) when they saw the evidence that Jesus was the Messiah. Jesus taught that people refuse to see his claims because they do not want to repent from their personal and hidden sin. Often, the strongest reason to reject the claims of Jesus is pride. That was the Pharisees problem. They thought they were good enough people without Jesus. They did not need a savior from sin. Western culture is invading the entire worldpride is its great power. Philosophy, science, finance and culture all are saying that we do not need God any longer. I suspect as well that the evidence presented above will not convince anyone who refuses to realize that God is opposed to the proud. It is the first sin that Eve committed (remember, the snake said to her, you will be like God) and the greatest sin of humankind. Believers, however, must not fall into that trap. Looking at the evidence above, we can say with confidence that our faith is based upon something real. We have so much historical evidence that we would actually have to close our eyes not to believe that Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies. Therefore we can say with confidence that Jesus is the Son of God who died for our sins and rose from the dead. It is frightening to think that someone would ignore the compelling evidence to believe in Jesus and reject eternal life. Far more than any other decision in life, this is the decision which will decide what happen to each person when Jesus returns to rule in his coming kingdom. Jesus himself made it very clear in many different Page 111 of 112

places that he will send into eternal punishment those who reject him or ignore him. We may not like this idea, but all four gospels record Jesus warning us about this very thing. The point is this: we must carefully consider if the evidence is true. What Simple Faith Is Not.... Simple faith does not answer every question; it does not even attempt to answer every question. Rather, simple faith tries to figure out what the key questions are and then chooses to make a decision based upon our answers to those questions. Our ten points above clearly answer the key issues we might have about faith. Based on this, you should the answer to the most important questions in the universe; Is there a God and what kind of being is that God? How can we know about that God? How should we relate to that God? Even if we have one thousand other questions which are still not answered, we know enough to make the most important decisions about how we should live our lives. The evidence shows that there is a God and he has communicated to us through prophecies and also through his Son, who clearly fulfilled those prophecies. Since we have so much accurate information about his life, teachings and mission, we can order our lives based upon this. If someone were to say, what about my other crucial questions? The answer would have to be this: What would happen if you chose to reject simple faith and decided to trust in something else? Would all of your question questions then be solved? If you embrace another answer, however, the simple reality would still remain; Hebrew prophets predicted amazing things about a coming Messiah and Jesus of Nazareth entirely fulfilled these predictions. Historical evidence shows that we have his teachings and life recorded in the New Testament. Historical evidence shows that many eyewitnesses confirm what the New Testament says about Jesus. In other words, even if you choose to trust in something else, what are you going to do with the simple facts about Jesus? It would seem that the ultimate questions for all humans must be about God, his existence, what he says, what he requires of humans, how we must relate to him. If the facts suggest a very real possibility that God is real and has spoken to humanity, it would be unwise to ignore that possibility. Therefore, do not reject the evidence without carefully thinking through what it means. It is your most important decision of life.

Page 112 of 112