Sam Shamoun
The historicity of the resurrection is firmly rooted in the reliability of
the New Testament documents. If it can be shown that the NT documents are
unreliable, then the case for the resurrection goes out the window. If, however,
it can be demonstrated that the NT documents are historically accurate and were
written down during the lifetime of the eyewitnesses to the life and
resurrection of Jesus, then the truth claim of Christianity is affirmed.
We will examine both the external and internal evidence and see where does it
lead us.
External Evidence
External evidence would include the number and dating of the available NT
manuscripts as well as archaeological evidence that serves to affirm or debunk
the early composition of the New Testament. The first will be the evidence
furnished by the MSS themselves.
Manuscript Evidence
We have today in our possession 5,300 known Greek manuscripts of the New
Testament, another 10,000 Latin Vulgates, and 9,300 other early versions (MSS),
giving us more than 24,000 manuscript copies of portions of the New Testament in
existence today! (taken from McDowell's Evidence That demands a Verdict, vol.1,
1972 pp. 40-48; and Time, January 23, 1995, pg.57). Though we do not have any
originals, with such a wealth of documentation at our disposal with which to
compare, we can delineate quite closely what those originals contained. No other
ancient writing of antiquity has as many MSS as the New Testament.
In fact, when we compare the works of antiquity with that of the NT
documents, we will then see how superior the New Testament really is in terms of
dating and number of MSS.
The Time Gap And The Number Of MSS:
Author Date Written Earliest Copy Time Span Copies (extent)
Secular Manuscripts:
Herodotus (History) 480 - 425 BC 900 AD 1,300 years 8
Thucydides (History) 460 - 400 BC 900 AD 1,300 years ?
Aristotle (Philosopher) 384 - 322 BC 1,100 AD 1,400 years 5
Caesar (History) 100 - 44 BC 900 AD 1,000 years 10
Pliny (History) 61 - 113 AD 850 AD 750 years 7
Suetonius (Roman History) 70 - 140 AD 950 AD 800 years ?
Tacitus (Greek History) 100 AD 1,100 AD 1,000 years 20
In comparison, we have copies of the NT which date approximately 15-20 years
after the authors of scripture originally penned the autographs.
Biblical Manuscripts: (note: these are individual manuscripts):
Magdalene Ms (Matthew 26) 1st century 50-60 AD coexistent (?)
John Rylands (John) 90 AD 130 AD 40 years
Bodmer Papyrus II (John) 90 AD 150-200 AD 60-110 years
Chester Beatty Papyri (NT) 1st cen. 200 AD 150 years
Diatessaron by Tatian (Gospels) 1st cen. 200 AD 150 years
Codex Vaticanus (Bible) 1st cen. 325-350 AD 275-300 years
Codex Sinaiticus (Bible) 1st cen. 350 AD 300 years
Codex Alexandrinus (Bible) 1st cen. 400 AD 350 years
Total New Testament manuscripts = 5,300 Greek MSS, 10,000 Latin Vulgates,
9,300 others = 24,000 copies. Total MSS compiled prior to 600 AD = 230. Some of
the most important MSS include:
The John Ryland Papyri:
Manuscript portions of the Gospel of John, located in the John Ryland Library
of Manchester, England and believed to be the oldest known fragment of the New
Testament, dated AD 130, within 40 years of the original.
Lukan Papyrus:
"The Lukan papyrus, situated in a library in Paris has been dated to the
late 1st century or early 2nd century, so it predates the John papyrus by 20-30
years (Time April 26, 1996, pg.8). But of more importance are the manuscript
findings of Mark and Matthew! New research which has now been uncovered by Dr.
Carsten Thiede, and is published in his newly released book on the subject, the
Jesus Papyrus mentions a fragment from the book of Mark found among the Qumran
scrolls (fragment 7Q5) showing that it was written sometime before 68 AD It is
important to remember that Christ died in 33 AD, so this manuscript could have
been written, at the latest, within 35 years of His death; possibly earlier, and
thus during the time that the eyewitnesses to that event were still
alive!"
Magdelene Manuscript:
"The most significant find, however, is a manuscript fragment from the book
of Matthew (chapt.26) called the Magdalene Manuscript which has been analyzed by
Dr. Carsten Thiede, and also written up in his book The Jesus Papyrus. Using a
sophisticated analysis of the handwriting of the fragment by employing a special
state-of-the-art microscope, he differentiated between 20 separate micrometer
layers of the papyrus, measuring the height and depth of the ink as well as the
angle of the stylus used by the scribe. After this analysis Thiede was able to
compare it with other papyri from that period; notably manuscripts found at
Qumran (dated to 58 AD), another at Herculaneum (dated prior to 79 AD), a
further one from the fortress of Masada (dated to between 73/74 AD), and finally
a papyrus from the Egyptian town of Oxyrynchus. The Magdalene Manuscript
fragments matches all four, and in fact is almost a twin to the papyrus found in
Oxyrynchus, which bears the date of 65/66 AD Thiede concludes that these papyrus
fragments of St. Matthew's Gospel were written no later than this date and
probably earlier. That suggests that we either have a portion of the original
gospel of Matthew, or an immediate copy, which was written while Matthew and the
other disciples, and eyewitnesses to the events were still alive. This would be
the oldest manuscript portion of our Bible in existence today, one which
co-exists with the original writers!"
"What is of even more importance is what it says. The Matthew 26 fragment
uses in its text nomina sacra (holy names) such as the diminutive "IS" for Jesus
and "KE" for Kurie or Lord (The Times, Saturday, December 24, 1994). This is
highly significant for our discussion today, because it suggests that the
godhead of Jesus was recognized centuries before it was accepted as official
church doctrine at the council of Nicea in 325 AD There is still ongoing
discussion concerning the exact dating of this manuscript. However, if the dates
prove to be correct then this document alone completely eradicates the criticism
leveled against the gospel accounts (such as the "Jesus Seminar") that the early
disciples knew nothing about Christ's divinity, and that this concept was a
later redaction imposed by the Christian community in the second century
(AD)."
(NOTE- The preceding citations can be found at the following web site:
http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/bib-qur/bibmanu.htm)
Other, more extensive, copies of the New Testament include the Chester Beatty
Papyri, containing major portions of the New Testament and dated early 3rd
century, the Bodmer Papyrus, dated late 2nd century, the Codex Sinaiticus, dated
AD 350, and the Codex Vaticanus, dated AD 325 - AD 350. Some of the codices
contain the entire New Testament. It can be seen that, as far as the time gap
between the original writing of the New Testament and the earliest extant
manuscripts, there is no work from the ancient world which can compare to the
New Testament. As Sir Frederic Kenyon, former Curator of the British Museum,
says
"The net result of this discovery [of the Chester Beatty Papyri] ... is, in
fact, to reduce the gap between the earlier manuscripts and the traditional
dates of the New Testament books so far that it becomes negligible in any
discussion of their authenticity. No other ancient book has anything like such
an early and plentiful testimony to its text." (Sir Frederic G. Kenyon, The
Bible and Modern Scholarship [London: John Murray, 1948], 20, as cited in
McDowell, Evidence That Demands A Verdict, p. 49)
Add to this list the possible discovery of several NT quotations found in
Qumran:
"Jose O'Callahan, a Spanish Jesuit paleographer, made headlines around the
world on March 18, 1972, when he identified a manuscript fragment from Qumran...
as a piece of the Gospel of Mark. The piece was from Cave 7. Fragments from this
cave had previously been dated between 50 B.C. and A.D. 50, hardly within the
time frame established for New Testament writings. Using accepted methods of
papyrology and paleography, O'Callahan compared sequences of letters with
existing documents and eventually identified nine fragments as belonging to one
Gospel, Acts, and a few Epistles. Some of these were dated slightly later than
50, but still extremely early...
Mark 4:28 7Q6 A.D. 50
Mark 6:48 7Q15 A.D?
Mark 6:52, 53 7Q5 A.D. 50
Mark 12:17 7Q7 A.D. 50
Acts 27:38 7Q6 A.D. 60+
Rom. 5:11, 12 7Q9 A.D 70+
1 Tim. 3:16; 4:1-3 7Q4 A.D. 70+
2 Peter 1:15 7Q10 A.D. 70+
James 1:23, 24 7Q8 A.D. 70+
"... Both friends and critics acknowledge that, if valid, O'Callahan's
conclusions will revolutionize New Testament theories. If even some of these
fragments are from New Testament, the implications for Christian apologetics are
enormous. Mark and Acts must have been written within the lifetimes of the
apostles and contemporaries of the events. There would be no time for
mythological embellishment of the records... They must be accepted as
historical... There would hardly be time for a predecessor series of Q
manuscripts... And since these manuscripts are not originals but copies, parts
of the New Testament would be shown to have been copied and disseminated during
the lives of the writers. No first-century date allows time for myths or legends
to creep into the stories about Jesus." (Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia of
Christian Apologetics [Baker Books, Grand Rapids; 1999], p. 530)
Hence, if further research confirms O'Callahan's theories this would
establish beyond any reasonable doubt the reliability of the New Testament. Even
without these discoveries, the evidence from the Patristic writings and MSS
overwhelmingly supports the authenticity and reliability of the biblical text.
Patristic writings also solidify the case for the preservation of the NT text
and its early composition, as well as the extensive usage of the New Testament,
especially that of the four Gospels:
"Of the four gospels alone there are 19,368 citations by the church
fathers from the late first century on. This includes 268 by Justin Martyr
(100-165), 1038 by Ireneaus (active in the late second century), 1017 by Clement
of Alexandria (ca. 155-ca. 220), 9231 by Origen (ca. 185-ca. 254), 3822 by
Tertullian (ca. 160s-ca. 220), 734 by Hippolytus (d. ca. 236) and 325 by
Eusebius (ca. 265-ca. 339...) Earlier, Clement of Rome cited Matthew, John, 1
Corinthians in 95 to 97. Ignatius referred to six Pauline Epistles in about
110, and between 110 and 150 Polycarp quoted from all four Gospels, Acts and
most of Paul's Epistles. Shepherd of Hermas (115-140) cited Matthew, Mark, Acts,
I Corinthians, and other books. Didache (120-150) referred to Matthew, Luke, 1
Corinthians, and other books. Papias, companion of Polycarp, who was a disciple
of the apostle John, quoted John. This argues powerfully that the Gospels were
in existence before the end of the first century, while some eyewitnesses
(including John) were still alive." (Norm Geisler, pp. 529-530)
Some critics have tried to debunk the NT documents due to the variant
readings that exist between the MSS. Geisler responds:
"There is widespread misunderstanding among critics about 'errors' in the
biblical manuscripts. Some have estimated there are about 200,000 of them. First
of all, these are not 'errors' but variant readings, the vast majority of which
are strictly grammatical. Second, these readings are spread throughout the more
than 5300 manuscripts, so that a variant spelling of one letter in one verse in
2000 manuscripts is counted as 2000 'errors.' Textual scholars Westcott and Hort
estimated that only one in sixty of these variants have significance. This would
leave a text 98.33 percent pure. Philip Schaff calculated that, of the 150,000
variants known in his day, only 400 changed the meaning of the passage, only
fifty were of real significance, and not even one affected 'an article of faith
or a precept of duty which is not abundantly sustained by other and undoubted
passages, or by the whole tenor of Scripture teaching' (Schaff, 177)
"Most other ancient books are not so well authenticated. New Testament
scholar Bruce Metzger estimated that the Mahabharata of Hinduism is copied with
only about 90 percent accuracy and Homer's Illiad with about 95 percent. By
comparison, HE ESTIMATED THE NEW TESTAMENT IS ABOUT 99.5 PERCENT..." Norman L.
Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics [Baker Books, Grand Rapids
MI; 1999], pp. 532-533)
B. F. Westcott and F.J.A. Hort, the editors of The New Testament in Original
Greek, also commented:
"If comparative trivialities such as changes of order, the insertion or
omission of the article with proper names, and the like are set aside, the works
in our opinion still subject to doubt can hardly mount to more than a thousandth
part of the whole New Testament." (B.F. Westcott, and F.J.A. Hort, eds., New
Testament in Original Greek, 1881, vol. II, 2.)
Sir Frederick Kenyon states:
"... no unbiased scholar would deny that the text that has come down to us
is substantially sound." (Kenyon, The Bible, as cited in McDowell, Evidence, p.
49)
Kenyon rightly concludes:
"It cannot be too strongly asserted that in substance the text of the Bible
is certain: Especially is this the case with the New Testament." (Sir Frederic
G. Kenyon, Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts [New York: Harper and Brothers,
1941], 23 as cited in McDowell, Evidence, p. 45)
F. F. Bruce comments:
The evidence for our New Testament writings is ever so much greater than
the evidence for many writings of classical author, the authenticity of which no
one dreams of questioning. And if the New Testament were a collection of
secular writings, their authenticity would generally be regarded as beyond all
doubt. (F.F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? 5th rev.
ed.[Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity Press, 1988], p. 15)
Archaeology And The NT
Independent archaeological research has solidified the authenticity and the
historical reliability of the New Testament. Some of the discoveries include:
Luke refers to Lysanias as being the tetrarch of Abilene at the beginning
of John the Baptist's ministry, circa 27 A. D. (Luke 3:1) Historians accused
Luke of being in error, noting that the only Lysanias known was the one killed
in 36 B. C. Now, however, an inscription found near Damascus refers to "Freedman
of Lysanias the tetrarch" and is dated from 14 and 29 A. D.
Paul, writing to the Romans, speaks of the city treasurer Erastus (Romans
16:23). A 1929 excavation in Corinth unearthed a pavement inscribed with these
words: ERASTVS PRO:AED:P:STRAVIT: ("Erastus, curator of public buildings, laid
this pavement at his own expense.")
Luke mentions a riot in the city of Ephesus which took place in a theater
(Acts 19:23). The theater has now been excavated and has a seating capacity of
25,000.
Acts 21 records an incident, which broke out between Paul and certain Jews
from Asia. These Jews accused Paul of defiling the Temple by allowing Trophimus,
a Gentile, to enter it. In 1871, Greek inscriptions were found, now housed in
Istanbul which read:
NO FOREIGNER MAY ENTER WITHIN THE BARRICADE WHICH SURROUNDS THE TEMPLE AND
ENCLOUSURE. ANYONE WHO IS CAUGHT DOING SO WILL HAVE HIMSELF TO THANK FOR HIS
ENSUING DEATH.
Luke addresses Gallio with the title Proconsul (Acts 18:12). A Delphi
inscription verifies this when it states, "As Lucius Junius Gallio, my friend,
and the Proconsul of Achaia..."
Luke calls Publicus, the chief man of Malta, "First man of the Island." (Acts
28:7) Inscriptions now found do confirm Publicus as the "First man". (1: pp.
110-111)
The five porticoes of the pool of Bethesda by the Sheep Gate and the pool of
Siloam mentioned in John 5:2 and 9:1-7 has now been unearthed.
The pavement (Gabbatha) of John 18:13 and Solomon's porch in the Temple
precincts (John 10:22-23), have been found.
Archaeologists have unearthed Jacob's well at Sychar. (John 4:5)
An inscription found in Ceasarea confirms Pilate's role as the prefect of
Judea during the time of Christ.
The discovery of a bone-box of a crucified man named Johanan from the first
century Palestine confirms the fact that nails were used to pierce the ankles of
the victims. Such was the case of Christ, of course, and this discovery is
significant in answering the skeptics who believed that the Romans used only
ropes to tie the victim's legs to the cross.
Finally, in 1990, the burial grounds of Caiaphas, the Jewish high priest, and
his family were uncovered. This is an undeniable fact that Caiaphas existed as a
true historical figure.
The significance of such extra-Biblical evidence is of such magnitude that
honest skeptics are now forced to agree that the Bible is historically accurate
and reliable. One such person was Sir William Ramsey, considered one of the
world's greatest archaeologists. He believed that the New Testament,
particularly the books of Luke and Acts, were second-century forgeries. He spent
thirty years in Asia Minor, digging up enough evidence to prove that Luke-Acts
was nothing more than a lie. At the conclusion of his long journey however, he
was compelled to admit that the New Testament was a first- century compilation
and that the Bible is historically reliable. This fact led to his conversion and
embracing of the very faith he once believed to be a hoax.
Dr. Ramsey stated:
"Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of
fact trustworthy ... this author should be placed along with the very
greatest of historians."
Ramsey further said:
"Luke is unsurpassed in respects of its trustworthiness." (Josh McDowell,
The Best of Josh Mcdowell: A Ready Defense, pp. 108-109)
Other skeptics who have conceded the Bible's historical accuracy include the
renowned Jewish archaeologist Nelson Glueck:
"It may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever
controverted a biblical reference," and "the almost incredibly accurate
historical memory of the Bible, and particularly so when it is fortified by
archaeological fact." (Josh McDowell, Evidence That Demands A Verdict p.
65)
This is a very significant statement since it is made by one who totally
denied the inspiration of Scripture. Earl Radmacher, former president of Western
Conservative Baptist Seminary, notes:
"I listened to him [Glueck] when he was at Temple Emmanuel in Dallas, and
he got rather red in the face and said, `I've been accused of teaching the
verbal, plenary inspiration of the Scripture. I want it to be understood that I
have never taught this. All I have ever said is that in all my archaeological
investigation I have never found one artifact of antiquity that contradicts
any statement of the Word of God.'" (Ibid., p. 22 [emphasis ours])
Another one time skeptic was Dr. Clifford Wilson who, due to the discoveries
made, concluded that, "It is the studied conviction of this writer that the
Bible is ... the ancient world's most reliable history textbook..."
(Wilson, Rocks, Relics And Biblical Reliability, p. 126)
Dr. Wilson, like Ramsey, goes on to hail Luke for his accuracy:
Luke demonstrated a remarkably accurate knowledge of geographical and
political ideas. He referred correctly to provinces that were
established at that time, as indicated in Acts 15:6. He demonstrated a clear
knowledge of local customs, such as those relating to the speech of the
Lycaonians (Acts 14:11), some aspects relating to the foreign woman who was
converted at Athens (Acts 17:34), and he even knew that the city of Ephesus was
known as the "temple-keeper of Artemis" (Acts 19:35) ... he refers to different
local officers by their exact titles – the proconsul (deputy) of Cyprus (Acts
13:7), the magistrates at Phillipi (Acts 16:20,35), the politarchs (another word
for magistrates) at Thessalonica (Acts 17:6), the proconsul of Achaia (Acts
18:12), and the treasurer of Corinth (Aedile) – which was the title of the man
known as Erastus at Corinth (Acts 19:22; Romans 16:23 ...)
Luke had accurate knowledge about various local events such as the
famine in the days of Claudius Caesar (Acts 11:29); he was aware that Zeus and
Hermes were worshiped together at Lystra, though this was unknown to modern
historians (Acts 14:11,12). He knew that Diana or Artemis was especially the
goddess of the Ephesians (Acts 19:28); and he was able to describe the trade at
Ephesus in religious images. (Ibid., pp. 112-113)
Hence, Wilson's statement:
"Those who know the facts now recognize that the New Testament must be
accepted as a remarkably accurate source book..." (Ibid., p. 120)
Finally, John Elder states emphatically, "Nowhere has archaeological evidence
refuted the Bible as history." (Elder, Prophets, Idols And Diggers, p.
16)
The Internal Evidence
The evidence within the NT documents also affirms the early composition of
the New Testament.
Evidence For Early Dating:
The Gospels furnish evidence that attests to the fact that some of the books
were definitely written before the year A.D. 70.
Mark
Mark mentions the high priest without naming him. (cf. Mark 14:60-63)
According to the other writers, the high priest at the time of Jesus' public
ministry was Caiaphas. (cf. Matthew 26:57) Caiaphas was high priest from A.D.
18-37. This presumes that Mark's audience would have automatically known to
which high priest he was alluding to, affirming that the tradition underlying
this gospel is very early possibly no later than A.D. 40.
Mark also mentions Alexander and Rufus and presumes that his audience would
have known who these gentlemen were:
"A certain man from Cyrene, Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus, was
passing by on his way in from the country, and they forced him to carry the
cross." Mark 15:21
Church Tradition indicates that Mark composed his Gospel in Rome.
Interestingly, Paul in his letter to the Romans dated approximately at A.D. 57
mentions a person named Rufus:
"Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord, and his mother, who has been a
mother to me, too." Romans 16:13 This is possibly the same Rufus mentioned by
Mark.
Luke
The consensus of NT scholarship agree that Luke-Acts were authored by the
same person. A great portion of the book of Acts centers on Jerusalem, the
Temple, Paul's conversion and his missionary activities. The author also
mentions the deaths of Stephen (Acts 7:51-8:1) and James, the brother of John
(Acts 12:2).
Interestingly, the author does not mention the deaths of James the brother of
the Lord (A.D. 62), Peter (A.D. 65-68), and Paul (A.D. 67-68). He also does not
mention the burning of Rome and the persecution of Christians there (A.D. 64) or
the destruction of the Temple (A.D. 70) but ends at Paul's imprisonment at Rome
(A.D. 63).
It seems rather stranger that the author would choose to omit such
information had he in fact been writing after these events had already taken
place. This seems to strongly support the fact that the book must have been
written no later than A.D. 63. In fact, the apostle Paul actually quotes from
the Gospel of Luke:
"For the SCRIPTURE says, 'Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the
grain,' and 'The worker deserves his wages.'" 1 Timothy 5:18
Paul quotes both Deuteronomy 25:4. The second quote is from Luke 10:7:
"Stay in that house, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for THE
WORKER DESERVES HIS WAGES. Do not move around from house to house."
Paul quotes Luke and places it on the same level of authority of Moses'
writings! The consensus of scholars agree that Luke was the last of the synoptic
gospels to be written, implying that all three were in circulation at the time
of Paul's writing, which some scholars date at approximately 61-65 AD. This
argues the fact that Luke must have been written between 55-60 A.D. with Acts
shortly following.
John
The Gospel of John provides several lines of evidence supporting its early
dating. The first is John 5:2
"Now there IS in Jerusalem near the Sheep Gate a pool, which in Aramaic is
called Bethesda and which is surrounded by five covered colonnades."
John doesn't say that there "was" a pool, but that there still "is." This
suggests that John's Gospel was written before the destruction of the Temple,
and hence the destruction of the pool itself.
John also records an incident, which seemingly has no historical value other
than a recollection, which only an eyewitness would know:
"So Peter and the other disciple started for the tomb. Both were running,
but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. He bent
over and looked in at the strips of linen lying there but did not go in.
Then Simon Peter, who was behind him, arrived and went into the tomb. He
saw the strips of linen lying there, as well as the burial cloth that had been
around Jesus' head. The cloth was folded up by itself, separate from the
linen. Finally the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also
went inside. He saw and believed." John 20:3-8
How would the author have known these pieces of incidental information had he
not been an eyewitness or at least have been recording the testimony of an
eyewitness?
The NIV Study Bible furnishes additional evidence for the early dating of the
Gospel of John:
"The author is the apostle John...'the disciple whom Jesus loved' (13:23;
19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20, 24). He was prominent in the early church but is not
mentioned by name in this Gospel- which would be natural if he wrote it, but
hard to explain otherwise. The author knew Jewish life well, as seen from
references to popular Messianic speculations (e.g., 1:20-21; 7:40-42), to
the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9), and to Jewish customs,
such as the duty of circumcision on the eighth day taking precedence over the
prohibition of working on the Sabbath... He knew the geography of Palestine,
locating Bethany about 15 stadia (about two miles) from Jerusalem (11:18)
and Cana, a village not referred to in any earlier writing known to us
(2:1; 21:2). The gospel of John has many touches that were obviously based on
the recollections of an eyewitness- such as the house at Bethany being filled
with the fragrance of the broken perfume jar (12:3). Early writers such as
Irenaeus and Tertullian say that John wrote this Gospel, and all the evidence
agrees..."
The Dictionary of the Bible by John L. McKenzie continues to say in
relation to the evidence furnished by the Dead Sea Scrolls and its effect on the
dating of John:
The question is now affected by the relations of Jn with Qumran* documents;
these have more affinities with Jn than any other NT book, and this
seriously questions the authorship of Jn. Many critics have questioned the
authorship of Jn because they thought the Gospel was the product of Hellenistic
thought rather than Jewish thought; specifically, elements of
Hellenistic-Oriental mysticism or mystery* religion, or Syrian or Iranian
Gnosticism were proposed. Even before the discovery of the Qumran documents
many studies had shown that the roots of the thought of Jn are satisfactorily
shown in the OT; cf separate articles on theological topics. The affinities of
Jn with Qumran go far to exclude anything but a Palestinian origin of the
Gospel. If this be accepted, the question of the date becomes urgent once
more.
If Jn is the most Jewish rather than the least Jewish of the Gospels, it
becomes doubtful that it is the latest. If it is to be dated at the latest
before 70. It is probably earlier than both Lk and Gk Mt, and possibly early as
Mk..." (McKenzie, Dictionary of the Bible [Touchstone Book; New York,
NY 1995], p. 449)
Matthew
Matthew records a tradition, which was circulating in his time:
"While the women were on their way, some of the guards went into the city
and reported to the chief priests everything that had happened. When the chief
priests had met with the elders and devised a plan, they gave the soldiers a
large sum of money, telling them, "You are to say, `His disciples came during
the night and stole him away while we were asleep.' If this report gets to the
governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble." So the soldiers took
the money and did as they were instructed. And this story has been widely
circulated among the Jews to this very day." Matthew 28:11-15
If the results on the early dating of the Magdelene Papyrus are accepted,
this affirms that Matthew was originally written in the early fifties. Even if
we accept the later dating of the liberal scholars that places the Gospel
sometime after A.D. 70 the tradition itself definitely precedes the composition
of Matthew. This implies that within forty years of Jesus' death and
resurrection, a rumor had been circulating that the Apostles had stolen the
body. This indirectly affirms that the tomb was in fact empty! Had the body in
fact been stolen this would affirm that there was no corpse lying in Jesus'
grave.
Paul
Writing to the Corinthian Church in A.D. 55, Paul appeals to a tradition that
he had previously received and had passed down orally to the Corinthians when
visiting them for the first time:
"For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: 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 Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five
hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though
some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the
apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born." 1
Corinthians 15:3-8
Paul not only passes on a tradition that he had previously received before
A.D. 55, but also appeals to nearly 500 eyewitnesses to the resurrection of
Jesus that were still alive at the time of his writing!
The writers also claimed that they were either eyewitnesses or personally
knew the eyewitnesses. For instance, Luke claims to have carefully investigated
everything handed down to him from the eyewitnesses:
"Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been
fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the
first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have
carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me
to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you
may know the certainty of the things you have been taught." Luke 1:1-14
Luke also was Paul's traveling companion who had also met James the brother
of the Lord and the elders of the Jerusalem Church:
"After we had torn ourselves away from them, we put
out to sea and sailed straight to Cos. The next day we went to Rhodes and
from there to Patara. We found a ship crossing over to Phoenicia, went on
board and set sail. After sighting Cyprus and passing to the south of it,
we sailed on to Syria. We landed at Tyre, where our ship
was to unload its cargo. Finding the disciples there, we stayed with them
seven days. Through the Spirit they urged Paul not to go on to Jerusalem. But
when our time was up, we left and continued on our way. All
the disciples and their wives and children accompanied us out of the
city, and there on the beach we knelt to pray. After saying good-by to
each other, we went aboard the ship, and they returned home. We
continued our voyage from Tyre and landed at Ptolemais, where we
greeted the brothers and stayed with them for a day. Leaving the next day,
we reached Caesarea and stayed at the house of Philip the evangelist,
one of the Seven. He had four unmarried daughters who prophesied. After we
had been there a number of days, a prophet named Agabus came down from Judea.
Coming over to us, he took Paul's belt, tied his own hands and feet with
it and said, "The Holy Spirit says, `In this way the Jews of Jerusalem will bind
the owner of this belt and will hand him over to the Gentiles.'" When we
heard this, we and the people there pleaded with Paul not to go up to
Jerusalem. Then Paul answered, "Why are you weeping and breaking my heart? I am
ready not only to be bound, but also to die in Jerusalem for the name of the
Lord Jesus." When he would not be dissuaded, we gave up and said,
"The Lord's will be done." After this, we got ready and went up to
Jerusalem. Some of the disciples from Caesarea accompanied us and brought
us to the home of Mnason, where we were to stay. He was a man from
Cyprus and one of the early disciples. When we arrived at Jerusalem, the
brothers received us warmly. The next day Paul and the rest of us went to
see James, and all the elders were present. Paul greeted them and reported
in detail what God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. When
they heard this, they praised God. Then they said to Paul: "You see,
brother, how many thousands of Jews have believed, and all of them are zealous
for the law." Acts 21:1-20
Luke also knew Mark:
"When this had dawned on him, he went to the house of Mary the mother of
John, also called Mark, where many people had gathered and were praying."
Acts 12:12
In fact, Luke also records the fact that Mark caused a rift between Paul and
Barnabas due to the fact that Mark had left them on one missionary journey to go
back home. (cf. Acts 13:5, 13; 15:36-41)
Paul in his epistles mentions not only Luke, but Mark as well:
"My fellow prisoner Aristarchus sends you his greetings, as does Mark,
the cousin of Barnabas. (You have received instructions about him; if he
comes to you, welcome him.)... Our dear friend Luke, the doctor, and
Demas send greetings." Colossians 4:10, 14
Incidentally, Paul supplies additional information as to why Barnabas would
want Mark to go with them on their missionary journey even after the latter had
abandoned them. This is due to the fact that Barnabas and Mark were cousins!
Paul also mentions that both Mark and Luke were with him at the same time,
implying that the two knew each other.
"Only Luke is with me. Get Mark and bring him with you,
because he is helpful to me in my ministry." 2 Timothy 4:11
The Apostle Peter mentions both Mark and Paul in his writings:
"She who is in Babylon, chosen together with you, sends you her greetings,
and so does my son Mark." 1 Peter 5:13
"Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, JUST AS OUR DEAR
BROTHER PAUL ALSO WROTE YOU WITH THE WISDOM THAT GOD GAVE HIM. His letters
contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable
people distort, AS THEY DO OTHER SCRIPTURES, to their own destruction." 2 Peter
3:15-16
Whether one accepts Petrine authorship or not, this is evidence of the early
acceptance of some, if not all, of Paul's writings as Scripture. Being
conservatives, we affirm Petrine authorship and hence believe that Peter spoke
highly of Paul and considered the latter's writings as inspired by God.
The Apostles also appealed to hostile eyewitnesses for verification of their
claims:
"Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by
God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him,
as you yourselves know. This man was handed over to you by God's set
purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to
death by nailing him to the cross. But God raised him from the dead, freeing him
from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on
him. Acts 2:22-24
"Why should any of you consider it incredible that God raises the
dead? I too was convinced that I ought to do all that was possible to oppose
the name of Jesus of Nazareth. And that is just what I did in Jerusalem. On the
authority of the chief priests I put many of the saints in prison, and when they
were put to death, I cast my vote against them. Many a time I went from one
synagogue to another to have them punished, and I tried to force them to
blaspheme. In my obsession against them, I even went to foreign cities to
persecute them. "On one of these journeys I was going to Damascus with the
authority and commission of the chief priests. About noon, O king, as I was on
the road, I saw a light from heaven, brighter than the sun, blazing around me
and my companions. We all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice saying to me
in Aramaic, [1] `Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It is hard for you to kick
against the goads.' "Then I asked, `Who are you, Lord?' "`I am Jesus, whom you
are persecuting,' the Lord replied. `Now get up and stand on your feet. I have
appeared to you to appoint you as a servant and as a witness of what you have
seen of me and what I will show you. I will rescue you from your own people and
from the Gentiles. I am sending you to them to open their eyes and turn them
from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may
receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith
in me.' "So then, King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the vision from heaven.
First to those in Damascus, then to those in Jerusalem and in all Judea, and to
the Gentiles also, I preached that they should repent and turn to God and prove
their repentance by their deeds. That is why the Jews seized me in the temple
courts and tried to kill me. But I have had God's help to this very day, and so
I stand here and testify to small and great alike. I am saying nothing beyond
what the prophets and Moses said would happen- that the Christ [2] would suffer
and, as the first to rise from the dead, would proclaim light to his own people
and to the Gentiles." At this point Festus interrupted Paul's defense. "You are
out of your mind, Paul!" he shouted. "Your great learning is driving you
insane." "I am not insane, most excellent Festus," Paul replied. "What I am
saying is true and reasonable. The king is familiar with these things, and I can
speak freely to him. I am convinced that none of this has escaped his notice,
because it was not done in a corner. King Agrippa, do you believe the
prophets? I know you do." Then Agrippa said to Paul, "Do you think that in such
a short time you can persuade me to be a Christian?" Paul replied, "Short
time or long - I pray God that not only you but all who are listening to me
today may become what I am, except for these chains." Acts 26:8-29
It would have been impossible for the Apostles to appeal to hostile Jews and
Roman authorities for the verification of the resurrection and get away with it
had the resurrection not occurred.
The preceding lines of evidence led men like John A.T. Robinson in his book,
Redating the New Testament, to affirm that all the NT books were
completed before 70 A.D. The late William F. Albright, considered to be one of
the world's foremost archaeologists, commented on the composition of the New
Testament is noteworthy:
We can already say emphatically that there is no longer any solid basis for
dating any book of the New Testament after about A.D. 80, two full generations
before the date between 130 and 150 given by the more radical New Testament
critics of today. (Josh McDowell & Bill Wilson, He Walked Among Us-
Evidence For The Historical Jesus [Thomas Nelson Publishers; Nashville, TN,
1993], p. 110 emphasis ours)
Albright also went on to say:
In my opinion, every book of the New Testament was written by a baptized
Jew the forties and eighties of the first century A.D. (very probably sometime
between about A.D. 50 and 75)." (Ibid.)
Critics who concur that the books of the New Testament, including John, are
historically accurate include Tubingen's Dr. Peter Stuhlmacher. As a Western
Scripture scholar, stated Dr. Stuhlmacher, "I am inclined to doubt these
[gospel] stories, but as a historian I am obliged to take them as reliable."
(Ibid.)
He also says, "The biblical texts as they stand are the best hypothesis we
have until now to explain what really happened." (Ibid.)
Four Additional Lines of Evidence Supporting the Historicity of the
Resurrection
There are essential four established facts which the consensus of NT scholars
universally accept that affirms the empty tomb, and hence the resurrection. They
are:
Fact 1: After the crucifixion, Jesus was buried by Joseph of Arimathea in
his own personal tomb.
NT researchers have established this fact on the basis of the following
evidence:
The oldest Christian traditions attest that Jesus was buried. (cf. 1 Cor.
15:4; the tradition underlying Mark)
It seems highly unlikely that Christians would have invented the story of
Joseph of Arimathea, especially since the Gospels purport that Joseph was a
member of the Sanhedrin, which had earlier condemned Jesus to death. It would
have been highly improbable for the gospel traditions to pass off Joseph as an
actual member of the Jewish ruling council in light of the fact that these
traditions were circulating at the same time the ruling council was still in
existence.
The burial story lacks any traces of legendary development which were
commonly used in narrating mythical events.
No competing burial story exists which would serve to challenge the
credibility of the Gospel traditions. The earliest evidence suggests that the
only burial story in circulation amongst the Christians is that of Joseph of
Arimathea.
John A.T. Robinson, himself a liberal, admits that the burial of Jesus is one
of the best-attested facts on the historical Jesus. In refutation of those who
denied the entombment of Jesus, Robinson states that the burial of Jesus "is one
of the earliest and best-attested facts about Jesus." (The Human Face of God
[Philadelphia: Westminster, 1973], p. 131)
Fact 2: On that first Easter Sunday, a group of women found the tomb of
Jesus empty.
There are a number of reasons why most scholars accept this fact.
The empty tomb story is found in the oldest Christian traditions (the source
material used by Mark; the allusion to the empty tomb by Paul in 1 Cor. 15:3-5).
The discovery of the empty tomb lacks any legendary embellishments. The
Gospels do not record how Christ rose from dead, but simple state that the tomb
was found empty.
The curious fact that it was a group of women who found the empty tomb
strongly argues for authenticity. This is due to the fact that in first century
Palestine, a woman's testimony was considered useless. Why would the Evangelists
have women discovering the empty tomb if they wanted to convince their audience
of the historicity of the resurrection? This is perhaps one of the reasons why
Paul does not include the women in his list of eyewitnesses to the resurrection
in 1 Cor. 15:3-8.
As we had indicated earlier, the early Jewish allegation that the disciples
had stolen the body presupposes that the body as missing from the tomb.
Jacob Kremer, an Austrian specialist in the resurrection, states that "by
far, most scholars hold firmly to the reliability of the biblical statements
concerning the empty tomb." ( Die Osterevangelien- Geschichten um
Geschichte [Stuttgart Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1977], pp. 49-50)
Fact 3: On multiple occasions and under different circumstances various
individuals and groups experienced appearances of Jesus alive after his
death.
Three specific reasons universally accepted by NT Scholars support the fact
that these appearances did occur.
The list of eyewitnesses to Jesus' postresurrection appearances as quoted by
Paul guarantees that these appearances occurred. (cf. 1 Cor. 15:5-7) This is
based on the fact that the great majority of these eyewitnesses, nearly 500
individuals, were still alive when Paul wrote this down.
The Gospel traditions provide multiple, independent attestation for the
appearances of Christ.
Researchers have discovered certain signs of historical credibility in
specific appearances- i.e., the unexpected activity of the disciples fishing
prior to Jesus' appearance by the Lake of Tiberias, and the conversion of James
and Paul, two skeptics.
The late Norm Perrin, former New Testament scholar at the University of
Chicago, summed up the view of the consensus of NT scholarship:
"The more we study the tradition with regard to the appearances, the firmer
the rock begins to appear upon which they are based." (Perrin, The
Resurrection according to Matthew, Mark, and Luke [Philadelphia: Fortress,
1977], p. 80)
Fact 4: The first followers believed that Jesus had been raised from the
dead despite the fact that they had no reason to believe this.
The reason for the disciples not having any reason to believe that their
Messiah had been raised include:
Their leader was dead. The Jews had no belief in a dying and rising Messiah
since they believed that the Messiah would reign forever.
According to the Law, Jesus' execution was an indication that he was a
criminal and a blasphemer who had fallen under the curse of God. To believe that
Jesus was the Messiah in light of his shameful death would have been something
impossible for the disciples to accept.
Finally, the Jews had no prior belief that a single, individual would be
raised from the dead to an immortal life, especially on the third day. The Jews
believed in a general resurrection where the entire nation would be raised to
life.
Yet, the disciples both believed and were willing to die for the fact that
Jesus had been raised from the dead. C.F.D. Moule of Cambridge rightly concluded
that we have a belief for which no prior historical influence can account. The
only explanation that makes sense in light of the data is that Jesus did in fact
rise from the dead. (Moule and Don Cupitt, "The Resurrection: A Disagreement,"
Theology, p. 75 [1972]: 507-19; Moule, The Phenomenon of the New
Testament, Studies in Biblical Theology, 2 series, no. 1 [Naperville, Ill.:
Alec R. Allenson, 1967], pp. 3, 13)
The Early Church on the Inspiration of the New
Testament:
As we have already noted, we have in our possession the writings of the
Apostles' disciples and their followers. It is interesting to read that not only
did they quote extensively from the NT documents, but they also viewed the
writings on the same level of authority and inspiration as that of the OT books.
Let us proceed to the Church Fathers:
"For as there are four quarters of the world in which we live, and four
universal winds [these two comments refer to N, S, E, W], and as the Church is
dispersed over all the earth, and the gospel is the pillar and base of the
Church and breath of life, so it is natural that it should have FOUR PILLARS...
[God] has given us the gospel in FOURFOLD FORM, BUT HELD TOGETHER BY ONE
SPIRIT." Irenaeus, d. 180 A.D. [follower of Polycarp disciple of the Apostle
John]. (Josh McDowell, EVIDENCE THAT DEMANDS A VERDICT, Vol. I [San Bernardino,
CA: Here's Life, 1972], pp. 63-64).
"Take up the epistle of the blessed apostle Paul. What did he write to you
Corinthians) at the time when the Gospel first began to be preached? Truly, he
wrote to you UNDER THE INSPIRATION OF THE SPIRIT." Clement of Rome 96 A.D.
(David W. Bercot, ed., A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs [Hendrickson
Publishers, Massachusetts, 1998], p. 601)
"The apostle has used the same word in writing. For he was guided, of course,
BY THE SAME SPIRIT BY WHOM THE BOOK OF GENESIS WAS DRAWN UP- AS WERE ALL THE
DIVINE SCRIPTURES." Tertullian, 198 A.D. (Ibid., p. 602)
"Although different matters are taught us in the various books of the
Gospels, there is not difference as regards the faith of believers. For in all
of them, all things are related UNDER ONE IMPERIAL SPIRIT." Muratorian Fragment,
200 A.D. (Ibid.)
"In addition for the proof of our statements, we take the testimonies from
that which is called the Old Testament and that which is called the New- WHICH
WE BELIEVE TO BE DIVINE WRITINGS." Origen, 225 A.D.
This clearly indicates that from the inception of the writings, one can find
support for the Church's view of both the authority and inspiration of most, if
not all, of the NT books.
Early Non-Christian References to Jesus
Thallus (c. 50-75ad):
A third-century Christian historian, Julius Africanus, composed a History of
the World down to around ad. 220 in five volumes. In one of the surviving
fragments, Julius discussed the three-hour darkness which occurred at the
crucifixion of Jesus (cf. Matthew 27:45) and makes this comment:
In the third book of his history, Thallus calls this darkness an eclipse of
the sun-wrongly in my opinion. (5.50) (NOTE- For a more detailed outline on the
authenticity of Thallus and Africanus we recommend the following articles [1] and
[2]
Cornelius Tacitus (c. A. D. 55-117):
Roman historian writing in A.D. 115 on Emperor Nero's persecution of
Christians in the year A.D. 64: "But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of
the emperor, and the propitiation of the gods did not banish the sinister belief
that the conflagration was the result of an order. Consequently, to get rid of
the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on
a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace.
Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty
during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of its procurators. Pontius
Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition thus checked for the moment,
again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even Rome,
where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find
their center and become popular..."
The only superstition that had broken out from Judea to Rome was the
Christian claim that on the third day the crucified Christ had been resurrected
from the dead.
Pliny the Younger (c. A.D. 62-113):
Governor of Bithynia in northwestern Turkey, writing a letter to the emperor
Trajan about the Christian movement, dated A.D. 111:
"I have never been present at an examination of Christians. Consequently, I
do not know the nature of the extent of the punishments usually meted out to
them, nor the grounds of starting an investigation and how far it should be
pressed... I have asked them if they are Christians, and if they admit it, I
repeat the question a second and third time, with a warning of the punishment
awaiting them. If they persist, I order them to be led away for execution; for,
whatever the nature of their admission, I am convinced that their
stubbornness and unshakable obstinacy ought not to go unpunished... They
also declared that the sum total of their guilt or error to no more than this:
they had met regularly before dawn on a fixed day to chant verses alternately
amongst themselves in honor of Christ as if to a god, and also bind themselves
by oath, not for any criminal purpose, but to abstain from theft, robbery, and
adultery... This made me decide that it was all the more necessary to
extract the truth by torture from two slave-women whom they call deaconesses. I
found nothing but a degenerate sort of cult carried to extravagant lengths."
Lucian of Samosata, Second-century Satirist:
Lucian speaks scornfully of Christ and the Christians, connecting them with
the synagogues of Palestine alluding to Christ as,
"the man who was crucified in Palestine because he introduced this new cult
into the world... Furthermore, their first lawgiver persuaded them that they
were all brothers one of another after they have transgressed once for all by
denying the Greek gods and worshipping the crucified sophist Himself and
living under His laws."
Flavius Josephus (b. A. D. 37):
A first-century historian became a Pharisee at the age of 19 and at the age
of 29 was commander of the Jewish forces in Galilee. Being captured by the
Romans, he was attached to their headquarters. Josephus wrote several works in
Greek: an autobiographical Life; Contra Gekum, an apologetic treatise on
Judaism; an eyewitness account of the revolt against Rome (A. D. 66-74), titled
The Jewish War and a history of the Jewish people from Adam to his time,
called the Antiquities.
It comes as no surprise to find Josephus writing on the ministry of Jesus
Christ, called the Testimonium Flavianum:
"Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it is lawful to call
him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, a 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, and when Pilate, at the suggestion
of the principal men among us, had condemned Him to the cross, those that loved
Him at the first did not forsake Him; For He appeared to them alive again in the
third day; and the divine prophets had foretold these and countless other
wonderful things concerning Him. And the tribe of Christians so named from Him
are not extinct at this day." (Antiquities, xviii. 33.)
In the beginning, scholars attacked this passage as a Christian interpolation
because of its pro-Christian statements. Now however, scholars are reassessing
their earlier stand on this passage based on the fact that every ancient copy
found to date contains the statements in question. A tenth-century Arabic
version of the Testimonium serves as a vivid example of this fact as it reads:
"At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And His conduct
was good, and [He] was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews
and the other nations became His disciples. Pilate condemned Him to be
crucified and to die. And those who had become His disciples did not abandon
His discipleship. They reported that He had appeared to them three days after
His crucifixion and that He was alive; accordingly, He was perhaps the
Messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders." 199)
Even those who try to dispute the authenticity of the passage, most if not
all still agree that the reference has an authentic core to it, in spite its
seemingly pro-Christian insertions. New Testament scholar Edwin M. Yamauchi
explains that although there is obvious Christian terminology used throughout,
there are a number of factors that point to a Josephan style of writing:
Jesus is called a "wise man." Though the phrase is complimentary, it is
less than one would expect from Christians.
"For he was one who wrought surprising feats." This is not necessarily a
statement that could only have come from a Christian.
"He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks" is simply an observation.
"Those who had in the first place come to love him did not give up their
affection for him," confirms to Josephus' characteristic style.
"and the tribe of the Christians, so-called after him, has till this day not
disappeared." Most scholars would agree that the word phylon "tribe", is
not a typically Christian expression. (Michael J. Wilkins and J. P. Moreland,
Jesus Under Fire: Modern Scholarship Reinvents the Historical Jesus, p.
213)
Josephus also mentions John the Baptist's ministry and beheading at the
request of Salome during the birthday feast of Herod Antipas.
(Antiquities, xviii. 116-119) Furthermore, he mentions James, the Lord's
brother, and the fate which befell him at the hands of the High Priest Ananus:
"But the younger Ananus who, as we said, received the high priesthood, was
a bold disposition and exceptionally daring; he followed the party of the
Sadducees, who were severe in judgment above all the Jews, as we have already
shown. As therefore Ananus was of such a disposition, he thought he had now a
good opportunity, as Festus was now dead, and Albinus was still on the road; so
he assembled a council of judges, and brought before it the brother of Jesus
who was called the Christ, whose name was James, together with some others,
and having accused them as law-breakers, he delivered them over to be
stoned. (Antiquities, xx 9:1)
From the preceding non-Christian sources we discover:
Jesus Christ was worshipped as God.
Christ performed wonderful deeds.
Christ was sentenced to die on a cross by the orders of Pontius Pilate during
the reign of Tiberius.
Christ's followers claimed that he had appeared alive to them after his
death, affirming that he had been resurrected, something considered to be
nothing more than superstition.
Those who were devoted to him refused to recant their faith, opting instead
to die horrible deaths for the sake of the one they came to love and adore.
Jesus' brother was well known even by non-Christians, having been put to
death presumably for his belief that his brother was in fact the Messiah.
In light of the preceding factors, we find that the non-Christian sources are
in agreement with the New Testament portrayal of Jesus Christ. This serves to
further establish the authenticity of the New Testament beyond a shadow of a
doubt.
Recommended Reading
The following Books are highly recommended for further study on the
historicity of the New Testament and the resurrection:
Michael Wilkins & J.P. Moreland, eds.
Jesus Under Fire: Modern
Scholarship Reinvents the Historical Jesus
Zondervan Publishing House, 256p,
$16.99
Boyd, Gregory A.
Cynic, Sage, or Son of God?
SP Pubs, 1995, $15.99,
ISBN 1-56476-448-6
Gary R Habermas
The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of
Christ
Paperback, $13.99, Published by College Pr Pub Co., June 1996
ISBN: 0899007325 [third revised/enlarged edition of the earlier "The Verdict
of History"]
N.Thomas Wright
Jesus and the Victory of God
Augsburg, Fortress Press,
1996, ISBN 0-8006-2682-6
William Lane Craig
Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and
Apologetics
Crossway Books, 350p, ISBN 0-89107-764-2
Paul Copan, ed.
Will The Real Jesus Please Stand Up?" A Debate between
William Lane Craig and John Dominic Crossan
Grand Rapids, MI Baker Books,
1998 ISBN 0-8010-2175-8
Further articles by Sam
Shamoun
