There are three tests historians use to determine the credibility and trustworthiness of any ancient document. The Honesty Test, the Telephone Test and the Corroboration Test.
The Honesty Test asks: Do we have reason to believe that the writer cares about the truth and is telling the truth? In the Gospels (the four accounts of Jesus' life) we have five evidences that help us conclude the gospel writers cared about the truth and were telling the truth.
Evidence #1: The Eye Witness Testimony
Why should we believe what we read about Jesus in the Bible? Well, for starters, we have eyewitness testimony (the most powerful kind of testimony there is). Historians say: The closer the writer was to the events he/she recorded determine the extent of the credibility (or believability). The closer the writer was to the events recorded, the more credible the writer. This fares well for those who believe the Bible can be trusted because the New Testament accounts of the life and teaching of Jesus were recorded by men who had been either eyewitnesses themselves or who related the accounts of eyewitnesses.
Some skeptics ask “How can the Gospels be accurate if they give different accounts of the same event?” Well, a surprising discovery is that many historians consider minor variations to be evidence in favor of the truth of an account. The idea is that if the writers were lying, they’d be sure to get their stories straight and agree in every detail. What seems to be a contradiction is often just the same event viewed from a different perspective. You see, the four accounts of Jesus’ life are given from four different perspectives, much like four witnesses who all saw the same accident but reported different details of what happened. So we see that the differences in the accounts of Jesus’ life and teaching are actually evidence of their truthfulness.
Evidence #3: The Specificity
When people make up a story, do they give you lots of details you can check out or do they intentionally leave it vague? They leave it vague, right? That’s why myths start off in a galaxy far, far away or in a land once upon a time. But were the gospel writers vague or specific in what they wrote? Let’s look at the gospel writer Luke. Notice how many particular details that can be checked out by historians.
Luke 3:1-2, “In the fifteenth year [not the 14th, not the 16th] of the reign of Tiberius Caesar [not Augustus Caesar or Tiberius Caesar or Caligula Caesar or Nero Caesar]—when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, Herod tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene—2 during the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the wilderness.” NIV
How much more specific could you get!!?? And if these details weren’t true what could any skeptic do and what could any historian do? They could check it out and they could disprove it. But the problem (for skeptics) is that even irreligious scholars agree that Luke is an incredibly accurate historian. Do you see what the writers are doing? They’re saying: We care about the truth and we care about the details!
Evidence #4: The Embarrassment
Warner Wallace is a cold case detective who used to be an atheist. Cold case detectives study old cases with fresh eyes. They often times don’t have eyewitnesses so they rely on circumstantial evidence. Well, he was challenged to consider the claims of Christ, so he applied forensic evidence to the New Testament. After doing so, he became a Christian! What happened? Well, he said the New Testament, specifically the gospel of Mark, had all the signs you look for of credible testimony. So for example one thing that he looked for (and historians also look for) is something called the criterion of embarrassment. What this means is if we want to know if a witness cares about the truth we look and see if the witness reports things that are disparaging to his or her character. If someone reports something that’s embarrassing what’s the only reason that person would report it? Because they care about the truth! Nobody makes up stories to make themselves look bad! People make up stories to make themselves look good!
This is what’s so interesting about the gospels: When you look at the Gospels do you think the Gospel writers make themselves look good? Or do they make themselves look bad? Let’s take a look...
In John chapter 18, when Jesus was arrested and brought into the courtyard of the high priest, Peter, the leader of the disciples, was asked by a little servant girl “You aren’t one of this man’s disciples too are you?” How did Peter respond? Did he stand on a table and say “Listen up everybody. I don’t care if I die for saying this but I am a follower of Jesus and I believe that he is the Son of God sent from heaven to die for our sins. Repent and place your faith in Him!”? No! The Bible records that Peter denied that he even knew who Jesus was! And he didn’t do this once or twice. The Bible records that he denied Jesus three times! What could be more embarrassing than that?!!!
Here’s another example...In Luke 18 Jesus is teaching his disciples about how his death will fulfill what’s been written by the prophets concerning him. When Jesus finishes his teaching, what happens? Do the disciples say “We totally understand everything you just said”? No! The Bible records in v.34 “The disciples did not understand any of this.” This same thing happened in John 12. Jesus had just done something of spiritual significance and did the disciples discern its meaning? No! Verse 16 records “His disciples didn’t understand...” Truth be told - The Bible repeatedly records the disciples embarrassing shortcomings, lack of faith and lack of spiritual discernment. If the disciples just made up these stories about Jesus, we have to ask ourselves why they didn’t make themselves the heroes of the story, instead of as the guys who are constantly getting it wrong?
How do we know the authors of Scripture cared about the truth? Because they regularly report embarrassing accounts disparaging to their character! The only reason they would do that is because it was the truth!
Evidence #5: The Cost
We have reason to believe the accounts of Jesus’ life are true because of what it cost the disciples to stick to their story. What did it cost them to believe in and teach others about Jesus? It ultimately cost them their lives. Some were crucified, some were beheaded, some were tortured - all because they wouldn’t recant that Jesus was the Son of God who rose from the dead.
When I look at the disciples I have to ask myself: What more could they do to convince us that they cared about the truth? They gave their own lives! They gave their own lives when all they had to do was walk away from their belief in Jesus and they would’ve been spared. That’s meaningful to me because many people won’t walk across the street for what they believe today. Yet the disciples gave their lives.
The Honesty Test asks: Do we have reason to believe that the writer cares about the truth and is telling the truth? In the Gospels (the four accounts of Jesus' life) we have five evidences that help us conclude the gospel writers cared about the truth and were telling the truth.
Evidence #1: The Eye Witness Testimony
Why should we believe what we read about Jesus in the Bible? Well, for starters, we have eyewitness testimony (the most powerful kind of testimony there is). Historians say: The closer the writer was to the events he/she recorded determine the extent of the credibility (or believability). The closer the writer was to the events recorded, the more credible the writer. This fares well for those who believe the Bible can be trusted because the New Testament accounts of the life and teaching of Jesus were recorded by men who had been either eyewitnesses themselves or who related the accounts of eyewitnesses.
- Matthew: recorded his own first hand account of the life of Jesus
- Mark: records Peter’s first hand account of the life of Jesus
- Luke: records various first hand accounts of the life of Jesus
- John: recorded his own first hand account of the life of Jesus, I John 1:1, “We proclaim to you the one who existed from the beginning, whom we have heard and seen. We saw him with our own eyes and touched him with our own hands. He is the Word of life.” NLT
Some skeptics ask “How can the Gospels be accurate if they give different accounts of the same event?” Well, a surprising discovery is that many historians consider minor variations to be evidence in favor of the truth of an account. The idea is that if the writers were lying, they’d be sure to get their stories straight and agree in every detail. What seems to be a contradiction is often just the same event viewed from a different perspective. You see, the four accounts of Jesus’ life are given from four different perspectives, much like four witnesses who all saw the same accident but reported different details of what happened. So we see that the differences in the accounts of Jesus’ life and teaching are actually evidence of their truthfulness.
Evidence #3: The Specificity
When people make up a story, do they give you lots of details you can check out or do they intentionally leave it vague? They leave it vague, right? That’s why myths start off in a galaxy far, far away or in a land once upon a time. But were the gospel writers vague or specific in what they wrote? Let’s look at the gospel writer Luke. Notice how many particular details that can be checked out by historians.
Luke 3:1-2, “In the fifteenth year [not the 14th, not the 16th] of the reign of Tiberius Caesar [not Augustus Caesar or Tiberius Caesar or Caligula Caesar or Nero Caesar]—when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, Herod tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene—2 during the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the wilderness.” NIV
How much more specific could you get!!?? And if these details weren’t true what could any skeptic do and what could any historian do? They could check it out and they could disprove it. But the problem (for skeptics) is that even irreligious scholars agree that Luke is an incredibly accurate historian. Do you see what the writers are doing? They’re saying: We care about the truth and we care about the details!
Evidence #4: The Embarrassment
Warner Wallace is a cold case detective who used to be an atheist. Cold case detectives study old cases with fresh eyes. They often times don’t have eyewitnesses so they rely on circumstantial evidence. Well, he was challenged to consider the claims of Christ, so he applied forensic evidence to the New Testament. After doing so, he became a Christian! What happened? Well, he said the New Testament, specifically the gospel of Mark, had all the signs you look for of credible testimony. So for example one thing that he looked for (and historians also look for) is something called the criterion of embarrassment. What this means is if we want to know if a witness cares about the truth we look and see if the witness reports things that are disparaging to his or her character. If someone reports something that’s embarrassing what’s the only reason that person would report it? Because they care about the truth! Nobody makes up stories to make themselves look bad! People make up stories to make themselves look good!
This is what’s so interesting about the gospels: When you look at the Gospels do you think the Gospel writers make themselves look good? Or do they make themselves look bad? Let’s take a look...
In John chapter 18, when Jesus was arrested and brought into the courtyard of the high priest, Peter, the leader of the disciples, was asked by a little servant girl “You aren’t one of this man’s disciples too are you?” How did Peter respond? Did he stand on a table and say “Listen up everybody. I don’t care if I die for saying this but I am a follower of Jesus and I believe that he is the Son of God sent from heaven to die for our sins. Repent and place your faith in Him!”? No! The Bible records that Peter denied that he even knew who Jesus was! And he didn’t do this once or twice. The Bible records that he denied Jesus three times! What could be more embarrassing than that?!!!
Here’s another example...In Luke 18 Jesus is teaching his disciples about how his death will fulfill what’s been written by the prophets concerning him. When Jesus finishes his teaching, what happens? Do the disciples say “We totally understand everything you just said”? No! The Bible records in v.34 “The disciples did not understand any of this.” This same thing happened in John 12. Jesus had just done something of spiritual significance and did the disciples discern its meaning? No! Verse 16 records “His disciples didn’t understand...” Truth be told - The Bible repeatedly records the disciples embarrassing shortcomings, lack of faith and lack of spiritual discernment. If the disciples just made up these stories about Jesus, we have to ask ourselves why they didn’t make themselves the heroes of the story, instead of as the guys who are constantly getting it wrong?
How do we know the authors of Scripture cared about the truth? Because they regularly report embarrassing accounts disparaging to their character! The only reason they would do that is because it was the truth!
Evidence #5: The Cost
We have reason to believe the accounts of Jesus’ life are true because of what it cost the disciples to stick to their story. What did it cost them to believe in and teach others about Jesus? It ultimately cost them their lives. Some were crucified, some were beheaded, some were tortured - all because they wouldn’t recant that Jesus was the Son of God who rose from the dead.
When I look at the disciples I have to ask myself: What more could they do to convince us that they cared about the truth? They gave their own lives! They gave their own lives when all they had to do was walk away from their belief in Jesus and they would’ve been spared. That’s meaningful to me because many people won’t walk across the street for what they believe today. Yet the disciples gave their lives.
No comments:
Post a Comment