God Exists: Convincing Evidence - Part 4

 

Hi there,

If you were to ask any professing Athiest what they think about the Christian Bible, you would likely hear them respond that it is a book of fables and has been repeatedly proved to be false and unreliable. This seems to be the prevailing thought amongst that particular community of people. But...are they right?  How do we as Christians respond to this type of rebuttal, if we are to respond at all? The God-Man Jesus is primarily revealed to mankind in the pages of these ancient and sacred texts, so it makes perfect sense that His believers ought to know and understand the historical facts that make the Christian Bible reliable. Further, it is more than reasonable to expect His followers to use this information in defense of the hope that is in them.  

In short, as Jesus is revealed in the New Testament gospel's, they must be validated as historically accurate and true. The following information, as taken ver batim from Cold Case Christianity, is the evidence that convinces me.

They were written early.

A significant case can be built to establish the early dating of the Gospels. There are several missing historical events in Acts, including the destruction of the temple (70 A.D.), the siege of Jerusalem (68-70 A.D.), and the deaths of Paul (64-67 A.D.), Peter (64-67 A.D.), and James (61 A.D.). The absence of these events is reasonable if the Book of Acts was written no later than 60 A.D. Paul appears to have quoted Luke’s Gospel twice; 1 Timothy 5:18 (written 63-64 A.D.), Luke 10:6-7, 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 (written between 53-57 A.D.), and Luke 22:19-20. This means Paul would have had access to Luke’s Gospel as early as 53 A.D. Luke quoted Mark’s Gospel more than any other source. But this means the information in Marks Gospel is even earlier that Luke’s, placing Mark in the late 40’s or early 50’s A.D.

They are corroborated.

Abundant touch-point corroboration exists to verify the New Testament accounts, even though this evidence is unsurprisingly fractional. From archaeology, to fulfilled prophecy, to the ancient statements of early non-Christian authors, to the internal evidence of language, proper nouns and cultural details, the New Testament Gospels are corroborated better than any other ancient text. PERIOD!

They have not changed over time.

There is a New Testament chain-of-custody related to transmission of the gospels and letters of Paul. The Gospel of John, for example, can be traced from John to his three personal students (Ignatius, Polycarp and Papias) to their personal student (Iranaeus) to his personal student (Hippolytus). These men in the chain of custody wrote their own letters and documents describing what they had been taught by their predecessors. The evidence is clear, the foundational claims related to Jesus have not changed at all from the first record to the last.

They are not biased.

If the authors of the Gospels are lying about their claims, their lying for one of these three reasons:

·       Financial greed

·       Sexual or relational lust

·       The pursuit of power

Did they get rich from their claims? No. Did they get a bunch of girlfriends because of their claims? No. What about power? Couldn’t it be argued that these men became important leaders within their religious communities? While this might seem a reasonable motive, apply it to the foremost leader of the early movement: Paul. He started off with the authority and respect of his religious community. Why would he leave this if this were his motivation? None of the Gospel authors gained anything from their testimony and instead suffered persecution and death for their claims. The authors lacked motive and bias.

Thank you for reading. Please leave a comment with your thoughts and/or questions!

Cheers,

Patrick