Pastoral Teaching Institute
The Lord
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
2013
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Contents
The Sessions........................................................................................................................ 3
Bibliography ....................................................................................................................... 4
A. Faith and Evidence ...................................................................................................... 6
B.
Miracles ....................................................................................................................... 8
Accounts of Miracles........................................................................................................ 13
C. Christ and History ..................................................................................................... 27
Entries in Langer’s Encyclopedia of World History......................................................... 33
Historical Method: Establishing Historical Facts ............................................................. 34
Some Non-Christian References ...................................................................................... 36
Some Quotes..................................................................................................................... 39
The Historicity of the Gospels and Graeco-Roman Historiography ................................ 40
D. What Christ Said About Himself .............................................................................. 44
Christ Speaks About Himself ........................................................................................... 46
The Creeds........................................................................................................................ 57
E. The Resurrection ....................................................................................................... 60
© 2013 by The Sword of the Spirit
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form
for use outside Sword of the Spirit communities without written permission from
The Sword of the Spirit, 4828 S. Hagadorn, E. Lansing, MI 48823, USA.
2
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
The Sessions
Why Believe in Christ
A. Faith and Evidence
B. Miracles
C. Christ and History
D. What Christ Said About Himself
F. The Resurrection
3
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Bibliography
The following is a brief bibliography of helpful materials. In bold are the books that
are the most readable. They are the best place to begin. The others are more contemporary and academic. They provide current scholarly substantiation for the material in the
course.
The material on the Jesus Seminar contains writings that show the questionable nature
of their proceedings and results. It is only helpful for those who have come across writings or statements from the Seminar.
General
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (New York: Macmillan, 1943, 1945, 1952). Macmillan
paperback 1960).
Josh McDowell, Evidence That Demands a Verdict: Historical Evidences for the
Christian Faith (San Bernardino CA: Here’s Life Publishers, 1979). Orig. 1972.
– A collection of facts and quotes; not as useful for reading
Richard Swinburne, Revelation: From Metaphor to Analogy (Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1992).1
Miracles
Ruth Cranston, The Miracle of Lourdes (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1955).
C. S. Lewis, Miracles (New York: Macmillan 1947).
Stanley L. Jaki, Miracles and Physics (Front Royal VA: Christendom Press, 1989).2
Christ and History
F.F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? (Leicester: IV Press,
1982).3
N.T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God (Christian Origins and the Question of God,
vol. 2) (London, SPCK, Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996). 4
The Resurrection
Frank Morison, Who Moved the Stone? (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1958). New edition with introduction by Lee Strobel 2002).
Richard Swinburne, The Resurrection of God Incarnate (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2003).
1
2
3
4
Swinburne was professor of Philosophy at the University of Oxford.
Jaki was professor of the Philosophy of Science at Seton Hall University.
Bruce was professor of Scripture at the University of Manchester.
Wright was professor of Scripture at the University of Oxford.
4
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
N.T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (Christian Origins and the Question of
God, vol. 3) (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003).
Kenneth E. Stevenson and Gary R. Habermas, Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the
Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Ann Arbor MI: Servant, 1981).
The Jesus Seminar
Philip Jenkins, Hidden Gospels: How the Search for Jesus Lost Its Way (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001).
N.T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God (Christian Origins and the Question of God,
vol. 2) (London, SPCK, Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996).
Luke Timothy Johnson, The Real Jesus (San Francisco: Harper, 1996).5
5
Johnson is professor of Scripture at Vanderbilt University.
5
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
A. Faith and Evidence
1. Introduction
Always be prepared to make a defense [a)pologi/a, apologia] to any one who calls
you to account for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness and reverence; (1
Pet 3:15)
– The goal of the course is to equip Christians to evangelize by making a defense to
those asking the reasons for their belief in Christ.
2. The basis of faith (belief)
The objection: you cannot prove it; therefore it is not rational to believe it.
The response: you cannot “prove” a lot of things that are true.
a. Only certain things can be proved.
• Logical or mathematical proof: Once you understand it, you can see that it has
to be that way. This kind of proof is also called apodictic or demonstrative
proof.
• Scientific proof: It is based on laws, which can be established by the scientific
method. It depends on phenomena being repeatable.
b. In the sense of logical, mathematical or scientific proof, there is no proof available for historical events.
1) An event in the past is not necessary or repeatable, but is a singular fact.
2) Christianity is based on historical facts. We cannot prove it in such a way that
no sane person can doubt it, but we can give good evidence for it.
c. There are rational ways of dealing with evidence for historical facts.
1) Legal (courtroom) procedures are very similar, although they concern events
in the recent past.
2) The key element in legal procedure is witnesses to what happened whom you
can question. In history we deal with written accounts and remains.
3) We have to deal with each question according to the nature of the subject matter.
d. “Natural faith” is belief in testimony, but it can be based on good reasons being
given or good evidence being produced.
e. We have to expect that good evidence may not always be accepted or even entertained because of certain presuppositions (prejudices), often formed by the “climate of opinion”.
6
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
3. The nature of Christian (supernatural) faith
a. God’s communications problem
1) He cannot communicate with us the way one human being can communicate
with another (with lips, tongue, vocal cords or with pen and ink).
2) His normal ways of communicating to us, according to Christian teaching:
• He speaks to us through others.
• He gives signs of his presence or action.
• He came in person by becoming man (the incarnation).
• He reveals things to us personally, through the Holy Spirit; he gives us
light.
b. Christian faith
1) It is not a “blind leap”, an arbitrary assumption.
2) Like natural faith, it is a belief in something said or communicated to us.
3) It involves a personal response to the word of God summoning acceptance and
to the revelation of the Spirit, imparting spiritual light.
4) It calls for a personal commitment, a step of entering into a relationship with
God himself.
c. Some consequences
1) As in natural faith, there is an element of decision in believing.
– Because of the content of the Christian message as a summons from God,
we are confronted with a moral decision to follow the truth
For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that
the world might be saved through him. 18 He who believes in him is not
condemned; he who does not believe is condemned already, because he
has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. 19 And this is the
judgment, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness
rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one who
does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light, lest his deeds
should be exposed. 21 But he who does what is true comes to the light,
that it may be clearly seen that his deeds have been wrought in God. (Jn
3:17-20)
– There is also a spiritual influence to deal with:
In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ,
who is the likeness of God. (1 Cor 4:4, cf. Jn 8:43-47)
2) Because God is inviting us into a spiritual (supernatural) relationship, we need
revelation.
3) Because Christianity is manifested in historical events, we can show evidence
for it.
4. The usefulness of considering the evidence
a. Personal usefulness
b. Evangelistic usefulness
7
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
B. Miracles
1. What are miracles?
a. If God acts in history, we should expect some indications of the fact.
b. There are levels of “manifestness” that God has acted:
• The life in the Spirit — vital, spiritual life
• Events that are possible indicators of a greater power at work
• Miracles (wonders) — something strikingly out of the ordinary
c. We are concerned with miracles because:
1) Christ said his miracles were signs that should lead to belief (Jn 5:36, 10:38;
Lk 7:18-23, 11:20).
2) Life in the Spirit and indicator events are harder to establish as actions of God.
3) For many, the presence of miraculous events in Christian historical accounts
indicates those accounts are historically unreliable.
2. Do they happen?
a. We see them strikingly in the life of Christ. Cf. Mark 1:21-45; Acts 2:22; Heb.
2:3-4
b. The objection: But they happened so far back in the past to people with a “primitive (pre-scientific) mentality”.
The response: They happen today.
c. The objection: They happened by natural causes: suggestion or emotional shock
or faith healing.
The response: Suggestion or emotional shock do not explain instantaneous organic cures.
The response: The explanation of faith healing does not explain cures happening
to unbelievers, skeptics, and unconscious people (much less instantaneous organic
cures).
3. What do they show?
a. They do not exactly show that God exists or that Christ is the son of God.
b. They show that something out of the ordinary is going on.
c. They show that there is a power at work that is greater than the ones we are familiar with, greater than the working of normal natural processes.
– This does not mean a violation or suspending of the laws of nature.
d. The nature of the power is commonly identified by the context.
8
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
–
Participants’ Notes 2013
Many miracles provide evidence that God is at work through Christ.
4. Some objections
a. Objection: If people saw a miracle, they would believe.
Response: Not necessarily (cf. Jn 8:48).
b. Objection: Non-Christians can perform them, so they do not show that Christ
comes from God.
• Response 1: Some miracles may be produced by suggestion or other psychological causes.
• Response 2: Some miracles are produced by other supernatural powers, namely, Satan and his angels (2 Thess. 2:9; Rev 13:11-18).
• Response 3: God might sometimes work through non-Christians.
• Response 4: To see that Christ’s miracles indicate he came from God, it helps
to begin by noting that they were extraordinary for quantity and control (Mark
6:53-56, 3:1-6)
Concluding comments
a. Christ’s miracles are signs that God was working through him.
b. They reveal something of the nature of God acting through him.
1) He is in control of natural processes.
2) He is more powerful than Satan and evil spirits.
3) He is over creation.
4) He has come to bring us to a heavenly (spiritual, new covenant) plane.
c. They are evidence of his divinity, but more needs to be said.
9
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Scriptural Passages for Talk B
John 5:36
But the testimony which I have is greater than that of John; for the works which the
Father has granted me to accomplish, these very works which I am doing, bear me
witness that the Father has sent me.
John 10:38
but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may
know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.
Luke 7:18-23
The disciples of John told him of all these things. 19 And John, calling to him two of
his disciples, sent them to the Lord, saying, “Are you he who is to come, or shall we
look for another?” 20 And when the men had come to him, they said, “John the Baptist has sent us to you, saying, ‘Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” 21 In that hour he cured many of diseases and plagues and evil spirits, and on
many that were blind he bestowed sight. 22 And he answered them, “Go and tell John
what you have seen and heard: the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, lepers are
cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, the poor have good news preached
to them. 23 And blessed is he who takes no offense at me.”
Luke 11:20
But if it is by the finger of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has
come upon you.
Mark 1:21-45
And they went into Capernaum; and immediately on the sabbath he entered the synagogue and taught. 22 And they were astonished at his teaching, for he taught them as
one who had authority, and not as the scribes. 23 And immediately there was in their
synagogue a man with an unclean spirit; 24 and he cried out, “What have you to do
with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are, the
Holy One of God.” 25 But Jesus rebuked him, saying, “Be silent, and come out of
him!” 26 And the unclean spirit, convulsing him and crying with a loud voice, came
out of him. 27 And they were all amazed, so that they questioned among themselves,
saying, “What is this? A new teaching! With authority he commands even the unclean
spirits, and they obey him.” 28 And at once his fame spread everywhere throughout
all the surrounding region of Galilee.
And immediately he left the synagogue, and entered the house of Simon and Andrew, with James and John. 30 Now Simon’s mother-in-law lay sick with a fever, and
immediately they told him of her. 31 And he came and took her by the hand and lifted
her up, and the fever left her; and she served them.
That evening, at sundown, they brought to him all who were sick or possessed
with demons. 33 And the whole city was gathered together about the door. 34 And he
10
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
healed many who were sick with various diseases, and cast out many demons; and he
would not permit the demons to speak, because they knew him.
And in the morning, a great while before day, he rose and went out to a lonely
place, and there he prayed. 36 And Simon and those who were with him pursued him,
37 and they found him and said to him, “Every one is searching for you.” 38 And he
said to them, “Let us go on to the next towns, that I may preach there also; for that is
why I came out.” 39 And he went throughout all Galilee, preaching in their synagogues and casting out demons.
And a leper came to him beseeching him, and kneeling said to him, “If you will,
you can make me clean.” 41 Moved with pity, he stretched out his hand and touched
him, and said to him, “I will; be clean.” 42 And immediately the leprosy left him, and
he was made clean. 43 And he sternly charged him, and sent him away at once, 44
and said to him, “See that you say nothing to any one; but go, show yourself to the
priest, and offer for your cleansing what Moses commanded, for a proof to the people.” 45 But he went out and began to talk freely about it, and to spread the news, so
that Jesus could no longer openly enter a town, but was out in the country; and people
came to him from every quarter.
Acts 2:22
“Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God
with mighty works and wonders and signs which God did through him in your midst,
as you yourselves know…
Hebrews 2:3-4
How shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation? It was declared at first by
the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard him, 4 while God also bore
witness by signs and wonders and various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his own will.
John 8:48
The Jews answered him, “Are we not right in saying that you are a Samaritan and
have a demon?”
2 Thessalonians 2:9
The coming of the lawless one by the activity of Satan will be with all power and
with pretended signs and wonders,
Revelation 13:11-18
Then I saw another beast which rose out of the earth; it had two horns like a lamb and
it spoke like a dragon. 12 It exercises all the authority of the first beast in its presence,
and makes the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose mortal wound
was healed. 13 It works great signs, even making fire come down from heaven to
earth in the sight of men; 14 and by the signs which it is allowed to work in the presence of the beast, it deceives those who dwell on earth, bidding them make an image
for the beast which was wounded by the sword and yet lived; 15 and it was allowed to
give breath to the image of the beast so that the image of the beast should even speak,
and to cause those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain. 16 Also
11
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
it causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, to be
marked on the right hand or the forehead, 17 so that no one can buy or sell unless he
has the mark, that is, the name of the beast or the number of its name. 18 This calls
for wisdom: let him who has understanding reckon the number of the beast, for it is a
human number, its number is six hundred and sixty-six.
Mark 6:53-56
And when they had crossed over, they came to land at Gennesaret, and moored to the
shore. 54 And when they got out of the boat, immediately the people recognized him,
55 and ran about the whole neighborhood and began to bring sick people on their pallets to any place where they heard he was. 56 And wherever he came, in villages, cities, or country, they laid the sick in the market places, and besought him that they
might touch even the fringe of his garment; and as many as touched it were made
well.
Mark 3:1-6
Again he entered the synagogue, and a man was there who had a withered hand. 2
And they watched him, to see whether he would heal him on the sabbath, so that they
might accuse him. 3 And he said to the man who had the withered hand, “Come
here.” 4 And he said to them, “Is it lawful on the sabbath to do good or to do harm, to
save life or to kill?” But they were silent. 5 And he looked around at them with anger,
grieved at their hardness of heart, and said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” He
stretched it out, and his hand was restored. 6 The Pharisees went out, and immediately held counsel with the Herodians against him, how to destroy him.
12
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Accounts of Miracles6
Madame Biré: A Cure of Blindness
Madame Biré of Lucon, hard-working country woman and mother of six children,
woke up one morning not to the light but to total darkness. For a long time she had been
having violent headaches, hemorrhages from the stomach, queer confused dizzy feelings.
She knew she was seriously ill. But she never dreamed of this. Blind!
The doctor tried to comfort her in her terror. Maybe it was only temporary. These
things happened sometimes — “nervous blindness,” it was called… “The delicate mechanism of the eye, susceptible to inner strains, tensions,” — and so on.
After the examination the doctor’s voice was grave, compassionate. “I hate to tell
you, Madame, but there has been a complete wasting of the optic nerves — on both sides.
I’m afraid there’s no cure for that, and no recovery.” In his notes Dr. Hilbert put down:
“Luminous reflexes entirely destroyed. Blindness from double papillary atrophy.”
The papillae are the optic discs at the end of the optic nerves; normally a beautiful,
bright orange-red, a network of strong, fine fibers; in Madame Biré’s case they were
grayish white and wasted away to a mere thread.
Her doctor told her, in effect, that the mechanism of vision itself had been destroyed.
How would you feel? How would anybody feel? Working people — the children —
so little money — and blind!
Madame Biré grew rapidly worse. The emotional disturbance brought on more serious hemorrhages. She couldn’t eat — continuous vomiting and lack of food produced
dangerous weakness. And this went on for six months. Her family and Dr. Hibert were
deeply concerned.
Finally she decided to join the Vendée Pilgrimage to Lourdes. Her doctor and her
eldest daughter accompanied her. In the train during the night she had prolonged fainting
spells, and arrived at Lourdes in a nearly dying condition.
In the morning she was taken to the baths, but the crowd was so great she had to return to the Grotto, where she remained for some time, lying back in her little carriage and
praying with the other sick.
Mass ended at 10:15 and the Sacred Host was taken back into the Church of the Rosary. As the priest passed beside her, Madame Biré suddenly stood up and said in a weak
voice: “Ah, I see the Blessed Virgin!” She fell back into her carriage, fainting. A little
blood oozed from her lips. Her daughter thought she was dying.
But Madame Biré soon came to her senses. She saw the statue of the Virgin there in
the niche — less white and brilliant than the first time,” she said. But — she could see!
There is a separate file entitled “Lourdes Verification” that contains a presentation of the method of
verification used at Lourdes.
6
13
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Crowds flocked around her. She was taken to the Medical Bureau with her certificate
from Dr. Hibert, stating, the fact of her complete blindness for months past. Several doctors at the Bureau examined her, among them Dr. Lainey, an oculist from Rouen. He entered his report in the Bureau record:
“Examination of the eyes with the ophthalmoscope showed on both sides a white pearly
papilla, devoid of all color. The veins and the arteries, thrown to one side, were thin and
threadlike. The diagnosis was forced upon me: here was white atrophy of the optic nerve,
of cerebral cause. This, one of the gravest affections, is recognized by all authorities as
incurable. But Madame Biré had recovered her sight that morning. She could read the
finest print, and her distant vision was just as good.”
She had recovered her sight but the lesions remained, to disappear shortly afterward.
Ten doctors made a second examination next day, with the findings: the organ still atrophied and lifeless, the sight clear and perfect. Questions followed thick and fast, with
many scientific words the patient did not understand.
“How can you see, Madame, when you have no papillae?” One doctor asked impatiently.
“I beg your pardon — the Blessed Virgin has given me some!” Madame Biré replied
with spirit ‘Listen, gentlemen, I am not familiar with your long, learned words. I have
just one thing to say” — and she said it in nearly Biblical terms: “For nearly six months I
could not see; I could not see even yesterday morning; and now 1 can see. That is enough
for me.”
It had to be enough for her questioners also. They acknowledged that the cure appeared complete. The future would tell whether it was permanent.
A month after her return home the Medical Bureau asked Madame Biré to go to Poitiers where three specialists, among them Dr. Rubbrecht, a Belgian oculist, examined her.
The Bureau wished to know whether she was still seeing with “dead” eyes. Dr. Rubbrecht
found the phenomena had ceased. “All traces of papillary atrophy,” he wrote, have disappeared. There are no longer any lesions, and the cure is complete.”
From the hour of her cure Madame Biré could eat normally; she recovered her
strength at once. During the following year she gained fifty pounds, could do all her
housework and was perfectly well.
The next year she came back to Lourdes. Dr. Lainey again examined her. He found
the back of the eye normal and the sight perfect. The register stated: Madame Biré is now
in splendid health. Dr. Vallet, saw her twenty years later. Her sight was still excellent.
And a Canonical Commission after lengthy investigation, had pronounced her one of the
Miraculous Cures of the Church.
Dr. Mariaux of Belgium, discussing this case at the Medical Bureau, said: “The spontaneous return of sight and the restoration of the sclerosed optic nerve is a fact absolutely
inexplicable from a clinical point of view.” All the doctors who studied the case unanimously set down the same opinion.
In two fine drawings, afterward photographed, Dr. Lainey showed Madame Biré’s
eyes as they were the first year he examined her, and again the second year. An American
physician, Dr. J. Arthur Reed, of Pasadena, California, who recently operated on my own
eyes, declared on reading the Medical Bureau record and seeing the drawings:
14
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
“Such a case is medically impossible. By all means publish it. Any eye doctor would be
dumbfounded before such a cure. Cases of optic atrophy, such as the one in the photograph, just don’t recover.”
From Ruth Cranston The Miracle of Lourdes, 25–27
15
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
De Rudder: Cures Away From Lourdes
It’s hard enough for the medical man to admit the fact of miraculous cures at Lourdes.
But when he is confronted with cures that have taken place hundreds or thousands of
miles away, just by calling upon the name of Notre Dame de Lourdes, or by using
Lourdes water — that, he says, is really too much to ask us to believe!
And yet it happens — not once or twice, but many times. And the Medical Bureau
states that “it is also equipped for the study of healings which have taken place in other
parts of the world (i.e., outside of the Domaine itself), provided the name of Lourdes has
been invoked.”
Such cures have occurred in many different corners of the earth—in America, Oceania, Canada, Ceylon. They have occurred after Novenas to Notre Dame de Lourdes;* at
Lourdes shrines or replicas of the Grotto; In Lourdes chapels; or at home after the application of Lourdes water. Accounts of such cures fill a substantial portion of the Bureau
records, and fascinated me from the beginning.
One of the most spectacular of these cures in the early days was that of Pierre de
Rudder, whose case caused a storm of discussion and argument all over Europe. Here
was a case that could not by the wildest flight of imagination be attributed to autosuggestion or hysteria, for it had to do, not with nerves or emotions or even altered tissues, but
with broken bones that were instantaneously joined together—the leg bones of an adult
man.
De Rudders was a Belgian peasant who lived in Jabbeke, near Bruges. His leg had
been broken by a falling tree. The break was so bad that, after the fragments of bone were
removed, the two bones that remained intact could be seen in the wound over an inch
apart. The lower part of the limb, no longer attached to the top, “swung in all directions
like a rag.”
Eight years later, the shattered bones still refused to knit, and an abscess had formed
round them, causing a horrible running sore. Surgeons, one after another, pronounced the
case incurable, and Professor Thiart of Brussels, consulted as a last resort, advised amputation of the leg. De Rudder refused. For more than eight years he suffered fearful torture,
having to dress the wound several times a day, and dragging himself along on crutches.
Finally he decided to make a pilgrimage to the statue of Notre Dame de Lourdes that
had been erected at Oostacker, a town near Ghent. Three men lifted him into the train.
Arriving at Ghent, he got into the Oostacker omnibus, and his leg though well wrapped,
discharged so much blood and pus that the driver loudly complained about the drainage
to the seat of his vehicle.
At the Oostacker Grotto, Pierre prayed long and earnestly. First he asked forgiveness
for all his sins. Then he begged Notre Dame de Lourdes the grace of being able to work
and take care of his children, and no longer to live on charity.
As he prayed, all of a sudden he felt a profound movement through his whole body.
Hardly realizing what he was doing, he started to walk — without crutches — all around
* A Novena, as all Catholics know, is a nine-day period of prayers and devotions toward some special end.
16
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
the Grotto. He did this three times. After that he walked to the carriage which was to take
him to the station. On arriving at home, he got off the train in normal fashion.
When he examined his leg, he found that the wound had closed. In a few brief
minutes at the Grotto the bones had become solidly knit together. His legs were as firm
and sound as anybody’s. There was no gap left, and his bones had united. He did not even
limp, for both his legs were the same length.
The news spread swiftly. Soon the whole of Belgium was in an uproar over this
astounding cure. Pierre’s doctor, an agnostic, at first refused to believe it — but went to
see for himself. He found his patient hard at work digging in the garden. The physician,
Dr. Van Hoestenberghe, later wrote to the head of the Medical Bureau:
“Pierre is undoubtedly cured. I have seen him many times during the last eight years, and
my medical knowledge tells me that such a cure is absolutely inexplicable. Again, he has
been cured completely, suddenly, and instantaneously, without any period of convalescence. Not only have the bones been suddenly united, but a portion of bone would seem
to have been actually created to take the place of those fragments I myself have seen
come out of the wound. But if a miracle, then there is something beyond natural law—a
God exists, and surely He must have given some revelation of Himself.”
The doctor returned to the faith of his childhood. And so did scores of others in that
part of Belgium. The cure had a tremendous effect in the religious life and practice of the
entire district. It caused a sensation throughout Europe.
Twenty-eight doctors undertook a study of the case. They made minute inquiries, superintended by both Catholics and unbelievers. They questioned the physicians who had
attended de Rudder, the neighbors in Jabbeke who had witnessed the state of the wound
on the day of his departure, and the people who had been present at the Grotto. They put
de Rudder himself through the strictest possible examination. In the end, they were
forced to admit the authenticity of the unprecedented fact: the instantaneous growth of a
piece of bone over an inch long, filling up the gap where it was wanting, the whole process following upon a simple prayer. On the leg where it had been broken there remained
merely a bluish spot.
Twenty years went by without any weakening of the leg. De Rudder died of pneumonia at the age of seventy-five. An autopsy revealed nothing new regarding the case, except that the leg was restored as the most skillful of surgeons might have done it, had an
operation been possible. And it was done by getting rid of a suppurating wound immediately, and by the instantaneous creation of a bone.”
De Rudder’s leg bones are preserved at the University of Louvain, but copper models
of them were given to Lourdes and may be seen there at the Medical Bureau office.
Dr. Leuret, writing of this case in 1951, says:
“There was an instant formation of bony callus, filling the void between the bony extremities. Whence came the bony substance, and notably the calcium salts necessary for the
solidity which was immediate? Dr. Le Dec has shown very definitely that, in view of all
the conditions, at least fifty days would have been necessary for the formation in question
by normal processes. But in the cure performed at the Shrine of Notre Dame de Lourdes,
it took barely sixty seconds.”
From Ruth Cranston, The Miracle of Lourdes, 145-148
17
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Rabinowitz and Tongues
ONE OF THE MOST delightful people I know is an enormously stout, jovial Jew named
Jacob Rabinowitz. Tib and I were having bagels and lox with him one day at a rear table
in a New York delicatessen when he said quite unexpectedly:
“You’ve heard of an Orthodox Jew? And a Reform Jew?” We nodded. “But have you
ever heard of a Completed Jew?”
When we said we had not Jacob told us his own story. He was a rabbi, the son of a
rabbi, the grandson of a rabbi and so on back seventeen generations: for hundreds of
years the Rabinowitzes had been rabbis of their faith. When Jacob, some years earlier,
had begun to be persuaded of the truth of Christianity, he felt like a traitor to this long
heritage. “I was about to become a converted Jew,” he told us. “How terrible that sounds,
like someone who has turned his back on his Jewishness. But I was proud to be a Jew.
And today I know there’s no conflict. I m not a converted Jew, I’m a completed Jew, like
Peter and like Paul.”
And then Jacob told us about the event which left him feeling that at last he had been
completed. Jacob had been, as he said, a Christian by conviction, but a guilty one — conscious of a deep split within himself. Then one sweltering summer night in July of 1960,
he was invited by a friend to visit the First Assembly of God Church in Pasadena, Texas,
where a revival was in progress. A little reluctantly, because he was leery of emotionalism, Jacob agreed to go.
The service was typically Pentecostal. There were songs and testimonies and handclapping and at last a sermon. At the end of his address, the revivalist invited anyone present who had a personal problem to come forward to the altar rail and receive the prayers
of the congregation.
Suddenly Jacob was seized with a great longing to lay down the burdensome double
life he had carried so long, to resolve once and for all the conflict within him. He went
forward and knelt with some others at the railing. But when the preacher asked him what
his special need was, Jacob remained silent.
“That’s all right,” the revival leader said. “God knows what your needs are better than
you know yourself.” And turning to the congregation he requested prayer “in the Spirit’
for Jacob.
Several men at once left their seats and came to stand around the kneeling rabbi.
Some stood beside, some behind him; a few laid their hands on his head and shoulders,
others simply bowed their heads. Then they began to pray, speaking simultaneously,
some in English, others in tongues.
Suddenly Jacob raised his head and turned to look behind him. His cheeks were
flushed and tear-wet.
“That was beautiful,” he said. “Which one of you is Jewish?”
No one answered.
18
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
“Which one of you knows me? You’ll forgive me: I don’t recognize you…
Still no answer.
Now the whole church became silent. “It came from right here, behind me,” said Jacob. “Just exactly where you’re standing,” he said to one of the men. “Are you Jewish?”
“Me?” The man smiled. “My name’s John Gruver. I’m Irish.”
“That’s the voice! That’s the voice!” said the rabbi, excited now. “But you…you do
speak Hebrew?”
“Not a word of it,” said Gruver.
Jacob stood up. “That’s where you’re wrong,” he said.
“Because you were speaking Hebrew just now…”
As Jacob told us the story, his voice filled with emotion. “Can you imagine that great
big Irishman behind me speaking the most beautiful Hebrew I ever heard? Can you imagine an Irishman speaking Hebrew at all?”
“And how did he now my father’s name? No one in Texas knew my family. But
here’s what he said, I have dreamed a dream — in Hebrew he said it, perfect Hebrew —
‘I have dreamed a dream that you will go into the big populated places and there you will
preach. The ones who have not heard will understand you because you, Jacob, son of
Rabbi Ezekiel, come in the fullness of the blessing of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.’”
The rabbi looked at us. “What do you make of that” He took his napkin out of his collar and shoved back his chair. “God was speaking to me as a Jew and as a Christian too.
There was no difference. In Jesus Christ every difference is swallowed up.”
From John and Elizabeth Sherrill, They Speak With Other Tongues, 89–91
19
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Kathryn Kuhlman Service
Not only does God want to work in us and through us, but he wants to do more than
we usually look for him to do. A few years ago a friend of mine and I were traveling on
the West coast. We had gone out for a conference on evangelism, but one of our main
interests was to visit some people we had heard about who seemed to know a great deal
about faith and spiritual gifts. These people invited us to go to a Kathryn Kuhlman service. Kathryn Kuhlman calls herself an evangelist, but most people would describe her as
a healer. Once a month she holds services in the Shrine Auditorium in Los Angeles. The
Shrine Auditorium holds about 7,000 people, and when Kathryn Kuhlman comes, it is
filled to capacity. People are turned away at the doors.
The meeting we went to began with praise and worship — 7,000 in a huge auditorium
glorifying God. Just that itself impressed me. Then part way through the service, she
called some people who had been there the month before onto the stage to share what had
happened to them. One man had had arthritis so bad that, as he put it over and over again,
“I couldn’t even weed my garden.” In the course of the meeting he had first come to,
while he was sitting in a back room in which he could not even see the service, he had
been totally healed. A second man had come to the service only because a friend had insisted on it. He did not believe in Christ and had no expectation that he would be healed
of the terminal cancer from which he was suffering. Toward the end of the service, he felt
something like a rush of water go through him, and afterwards, he felt much better. The
following week he visited his doctor who certified that he had been healed and even
brought the X-rays to the service to show everyone.
After the two testimonies the service turned to prayer again, and then, all of a sudden,
Kathryn Kuhlman said something like: “Up there in that balcony somebody is being
healed of arthritis,” and then, “Somebody down there can walk now and if he will throw
away his crutches, he will find that it is so.” She pointed out a number of other people in
the audience who were being healed. And I thought to myself, “that sounds good.” But
then people started coming up to the stage, and they told about the different things that
had happened to them. One was cured of arthritis (a number of people in fact had been
cured of arthritis that night), someone came up with his crutches to report on his cure, a
boy deaf in one ear could hear with it. Dozens of people came forward with impressive
healings.
One of the cases I found most impressive was a woman who had had to wear braces
over her whole body and had walked on crutches. I had just happened to see her and talk
to her before the meeting. As the different people were coming forward, I saw a man carrying all the braces and gear the crippled woman had been wearing, while she herself was
walking in front. She told the people of how she had had an automobile accident about
five or six years before, and since then had had a number of operations, some of which
had helped a little, but no doctor could cure her. And yet here she was in front of us bending and jumping and walking back and forth.
20
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
I found that service a great experience for improving my faith. It showed me that the
Lord not only could do things like that; he actually did them in front of me. About a
month later when we were back home, a minister form the East Coast, the father of one
of our friends, came to visit us. He told us the story of how one time he had worked with
Kathryn Kuhlman in her service, and afterwards, for the help he had given her, she gave
him a copy of her book, I Believe in Miracles. The inscription in it was: “There is more,
so much more.”
From Steve Clark, Growing in Faith (Pecos: Dove, 1972), rpt. Living as a Christian Series (Ann Arbor: Servant, 1980), rpt. (Lansing MI: Tabor House, 2003), 20-23
21
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Word of God Healing
Gifts for daily life. To see that ministry gifts can and probably should work in daily
life ways, we have to free ourselves from certain models of how they work. We especially have to free ourselves from focusing on the more manifestly supernatural gifts. Such a
focus leads us to think of ministry gifts as connected with special events rather than ordinary life.
There is a scale of “manifestness” or “obvious supernaturality” or “miraculousness”
of God’s gifts when they operate. Not all of what God does through us is very obviously
supernatural. Therefore many of the results of his work are not manifestly God at work.
They usually seem like they could come from merely natural human efforts, but that does
not mean they are not the result of special workings of God.
For instance, someone might give a prophecy that predicts the unexpected occurrence
of the eruption of a volcano a week ahead of time, as may have happened in the case of
the eruption of Mt. Helena. That same person might give a prophecy to someone being
prayed over by a group of people and say something that seems to be especially apropos
even though the prophet did not know much about the person or the circumstances. The
former would be much more manifestly something that God was involved in, higher on
the spiritual Richter scale, so to speak. The latter could more easily have been merely a
good guess or a human intuition rather than a divine revelation.
The same can be true with the gift of healing. We once had a young woman come to
our prayer meeting and get prayed with for the speedy healing of her broken leg. The
next week she came back armed with dated x-rays of the leg before and after the prayer
meeting. She had been healed at the meeting, went to the doctor to check on the state of
her leg, and been told that what happened was unexplainable by medical science. On the
other hand, we might pray with someone who is sick and they might report they feel better but do not seem to be completely cured. Feeling better as a result of prayer is much
lower on the scale of manifest supernaturalness than coming back with evidence for an
instant cure that cannot be explained by medical science.
The important point for us to recognize is that the events at the lower end of the manifest supernaturalness scale may be supernatural. God may have worked through someone
to give an apropos prophecy that could have been explained as a good guess or have
worked to make someone feel better without giving a complete healing. Those things
could easily have been genuine workings of God, something he did by acting through one
of his servants, even though it would not have been convincing to a skeptic that God was
at work. If we believe in the power of prayer and of the gifts of the Spirit, many of such
events must be the special working of God.
From Stephen B. Clark, Charismatic Spirituality: The Work of the Holy Spirit in Scripture and Practice (Cincinnati OH: St. Anthony Messenger Press, 2004), 93–94
22
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Alexis Carrel
Most critics of Lourdes are people who have never been inside the place. They sit
snugly in their offices at home and write learned dissertations about a center they have
never seen, and matters of which they know — from direct experience — absolutely
nothing.”
One thing you quickly notice: the difference in attitude of the rationalist physician before he has seen a cure, and after. Doctors who have actually seen a cure usually have
nothing to say. They are no longer ready with glib explanations. They are completely
bowled over.
Their vocabulary changes, too. Before they’ve seen a cure, they avoid the word miracle. Afterward, they use it freely — almost involuntarily. A miracle has happened within
themselves, also. Their scientific cocksureness has been severely shaken.
Much depends on whether “I was there,” before they will accept the proceedings as
“scientific.” If some other doctor reports an extraordinary cure, this is apt to be labeled
“charlatanism.” But if “I saw it with my own eyes,” that’s a different matter. Then, it’s
“scientifically accurate.”
Here, as everywhere else, the human factor has to be taken into account. A scientist is
a human being. However coolly impersonal he may consider himself, however calmly
detached and impartial, he is influenced by personal considerations, prejudices — of
background, of national and cultural bias — which manifest themselves in his appraisals,
both in his professional and personal conversation.
This is very evident in the story of one self-styled “rationalist” doctor in whom a
change of view took place after he actually saw a cure, and saw it occur “right there before his eyes.” 7
Doctor Carrel came to Lourdes in charge of certain patients with the National Pilgrimage. He described himself as “a tolerant skeptic, a positivist — interested in Lourdes
cures, not credulous regarding them.” His religious ideas had long since been destroyed,
in the course of his scientific studies.
On his first day at Lourdes he was discussing miracles with Dr. B. who was a strong
believer as well as a scientist of note.
Dr. C. good-naturedly chaffed Dr. B. about his views, and especially about a supposed “cure” that had occurred that morning.
“Straight autosuggestion, my dear fellow. That good nun had been getting well gradually, right there in her own convent — but she believed that her arm would be cured at
Lourdes and so it was.”
7
This story, taken from the book Voyage to Lourdes by Alexis Carrel, is reprinted by kind permission of
Harper & Brothers.
23
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
“What about the cases of Joachime Debant and Pierre de Rudder?”
“Pious propaganda. Extremely interesting, but not valid. De Rudder’s case is obviously incredible. If his story were really authentic, it would be an archetypical miracle-like
the signature of God himself. But it is a duty to meet ‘facts’ of that kind with complete
skepticism.”
“Yet twenty-eight doctors in good standing examined De Rudder over a period of
several years, and testified to the veracity of the testimony and the facts of his cure. Can
you throw out their findings so lightly? And who is to decide which doctor’s work is ‘scientific’ and which not?”
“Well,” said the other more mildly, “I am the last to discredit any reputable colleague.
Certainly there is an incredible power of suggestion in these pilgrimages, and at some
sacred shrines, no doubt; but not for organic diseases. If de Rudder’s cure were authentic,
if it was methodically observed by scientists, I do not see how it could be explained except in terms of the supernatural. But such things must be seen to be believed.”
“What kind of a disease would you have to see cured, to convince you that miracles
exist?”
“An organic disease: a cancer disappearing, a bone re-grown, a congenital dislocation
vanishing. If ever I should see such a phenomenon I would willingly throw overboard all
the theories and hypotheses in the world. But this is not likely, among the patients I have
to do with here.”
He spoke of one patient, Marie Bailly, in whom he had become especially interested
— a girl in the last stages of tuberculous peritonitis.
“I know her history,” he said. “Her whole family died of tuberculosis. She has had tubercular sores, lesions of the lungs, and now, for the past few months, peritonitis diagnosed by both a general practitioner and the well-known Bordeaux surgeon, Bromilloux.
Her condition is very grave. She may die right under my nose. If such a case were cured,
it would indeed be a miracle. I would never doubt again.”
When she actually was cured, and he fully realized it, he was completely overwhelmed.
He had examined the girl just an hour before as she lay on her bed in the Sept
Douleurs Hospital: noted her white, emaciated face, her racing pulse — 150 to the minute, the distended abdomen, her ears and nails already turning blue.
“She may last a few more days, but she is doomed,” he told the Sisters. “Her heart is
giving out. Death is very near.”
A few minutes later, in front of the Grotto, where they had carried her in spite of his
protests, he saw an extraordinary change take place: first in her face, which gradually
seemed to be losing its ashen hue; then, more amazing still, in her swollen abdomen —
which flattened out under the blanket, before his very eyes. Her pulse now was calm and
regular. She drank a glass of milk. Her respiration had become completely normal.
The doctor walked back to his hotel, his mind in a tumult. A dying girl was recovering. It was, literally, the resurrection of the dead. It was a miracle!
At the hospital that evening he examined her again, along with three other doctors.
They confirmed what he already knew: She was cured. In the span of a few hours, a girl
24
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
with a face already turning blue, a distended abdomen, and a fatally racing heart, had
been restored to health.
The sweat broke out on his forehead. He felt as though someone had struck him on
the head. His own heart began to pump furiously. It was the most momentous thing he
had ever seen. It was both frightening and wonderful to see life come pouring back into
an organism almost totally destroyed by years of illness. Here was an indisputable fact —
yet a fact impossible to reconcile with science: a girl dying with an advanced organic disease, had recovered — was sitting there on her bed, smiling, eating, talking in a firm quiet voice. Radiant.
“And what will you do now?” he asked her.
“I shall join the Sisters of St. Vincent de Paul and nurse the sick!” she said, eyes shining.
He fell silent. He no longer knew what to think or what to say. He had no explanation
to offer. He said good night briefly and went out into the street, and so into the Domaine
and toward the Sanctuaries.
As he made his way past thousands of fervent, rapt pilgrims, he no longer wanted to
smile at their childlike hopes. All he had ever believed was turned upside down. The
wildly improbable had become a simple fact. The dying were cured in a few hours — a
few minutes. These pilgrimages had a power of their own, and brought results. Above all,
they brought humility.
It was disconcerting, to say the least, to have declared after careful examination that a
patient would die, and then watch her recover. He might have doubted his own diagnosis,
or his own memory, if he had not kept a written record of the case. But there it was — he
reviewed it again: her tuberculous family, her own gradual deterioration, all the classic
symptoms, and finally the diagnosis of the physicians and surgeons who had had her under their care.
No, there was no doubt of its having been a true case of tuberculous peritonitis. At the
hospital that afternoon he had said she was about to die. Now, tonight, he was unable to
offer any explanation for the incredible fact that she was alive and appeared to be cured.
On the point of death at noon, and well by seven in the evening.
“When one reads about such things,” he said to his friend Dr. B. later, “one cannot
help suspecting some kind of charlatanism. But here is a cure I have seen with my own
eyes. I have seen an apparently chronic invalid restored to health and normal life. These
facts must be recorded; they must be conscientiously studied.
“Of course,” he added, “facts are not the whole answer. Such cures cannot be brought
about by natural means. Autosuggestion is not the final answer — nor the Lourdes water
either, for cures have taken place without it.”
What then? Was it in truth the Virgin, or God Himself who works the miracles? He
could prove neither the existence or nonexistence of God. He was alone in the night, a
solitary human being, wrestling with his doubts and questionings. Was the phenomenon
he had seen a new fact in the tangible world of science, or did it belong to the realm of
the supernatural?
25
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
This was the vital point. It was not a question of accepting some abstract theorem. It
was a question of accepting facts that might change the conception of life itself.
In his restless searchings for an explanation, for an answer to the tremendous event he
had seen, one thing came back to him over and over again: that girl’s face, after her cure;
the joy that flowed from her, shining out to everybody in the room. They all felt it. Peace
and serenity seemed to flood the place. He had never beheld such joy or peace, following
an ordinary cure, in his experience as a physician.
It was not an emotional joy, but a deep and quiet calm, “a profound sense of wellbeing” which, he remembered now, is recorded many times of Lourdes cures. It is not
recorded of natural cures in a hospital, nor of cures by hypnotism or autosuggestion. This
in itself would seem to tell something about the cause: the Power from which the cure
proceeds.
Doubts and questionings faded away beside this girl’s happiness. Intellectual systems
no longer seemed to count. In the face of life and death, mere theories were void. One
thing he saw clearly: it was not science that nourishes the inner life of man. It was the
faith of the soul.
From Ruth Cranston The Miracle of Lourdes, 158–163
26
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
C. Christ and History
Introduction
This talk contains background for how we can establish historical facts like Christ’s
miracles, what he said about himself, and his resurrection.
1. Establishing questions of historical fact
a. Some principles from talk #1:
1) We have to pursue each discipline according to the nature of the subject matter — historical facts cannot be reached by scientific method or direct observation.
2) Historical method is analogous to courtroom procedure — both seek to establish individual facts and both rely on witnesses.
b. An overview of historical method:
– See “Entries in Langer’s Encyclopedia of World History” (p. 33) and “Historical Method” (p. 34).
– The essence of history is historical sources (witnesses). Ancient history
has to rely on many fewer than modern history.
2. The state of the evidence for the life of Christ
a. It is historically irresponsible to hold that he did not exist.
b. In regard to facts about his life, what is the evidence and how does it compare to
evidence for other facts in ancient history — if we rule some (e.g., the resurrection) out on the grounds of lack of evidence, what else should we rule out?
c. What are the sources?
1) There are five historical accounts and 22 additional contemporary documents
that refer to these events (the 27 books of the New Testament).
2) There are many other Christian sources within three generations.
3) There are, in addition, Jewish and Greco-Roman sources that provide some
confirmatory evidence.
4) The transmission of the primary sources (the New Testament) is far better
than anything else we have for ancient history.
d. External confirming evidence.
1) Archaeology confirms the general picture in the sources, confirms some particulars, and disconfirms little if anything.
2) Other sources confirm the general picture, confirm some particulars and disconfirm little if anything.
– See “Some Non-Christian References” (p. 36).
27
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
3) Reasoning from patterns of history: the existence and early vigorous growth
of the “Christian movement” need to be explained. The account in these
sources is the only explanation we have evidence for, and it provides an adequate explanation.
e. What evaluation can we give of the sources we have?
1) Literary form or genre: the sources are historical in nature, not fictional or
mythic.
2) Internal coherence and reliability:
a) There are few discrepancies either within the individual sources or between the main sources, and those are well within the standards for coherence of historical sources.
b) The historical accounts are based on “public” tradition and eyewitnesses
(1 John 1:1-3, John 19:35, 21:24; Luke 1:1-4; 1 Cor. 15:6).
c) They are close to the events.
d) They hold up well in relation to the confirming evidence.
e) All the sources together give a basic unitary witness to the main facts
(miracles, claims, and resurrection).
3. How can we respond to objections to the reliability of the evidence?
a. Objection: There are discrepancies between the sources.
Response: There are always discrepancies between reliable historical sources.
– Historically speaking, there is more or less probability depending on the
level of detail.
b. Objection: They are confessional documents, and so we cannot trust them.
Responses:
• Many, perhaps most, historical sources are “confessional” (designed to
uphold a disputed matter).
• We do not need to accept the claims they make in order to accept their
witness to the historical facts they appeal to.
• These show a rather high degree of historical reliability where they can be
confirmed.
• The authors believed in telling the truth, were rational and critical for their
day, and were ready to die for the truth of what they said.
• The truth of what they said is the only available explanation for the existence of the Christian movement that has any evidence for it.
c. Objection: What they say is not to be taken literally.
Response: Some (e.g., Revelation) is not, but almost all of it is (e.g., Acts).
d. Objection: But they contain accounts of supernatural events, and we know such
things do not happen. See “Some Quotes” on p. 39.
Response: We know they do.
28
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
4. Overall evaluation
–
–
–
See “The Historicity of the Gospels and Greco-Roman Historiography”, p. 40).
To rule Christ’s miracles or the resurrection out on the basis of the adequacy of
the evidence, we have to rule out most if not all of ancient history, at least everything we know about the reign of Tiberius.
Just looked at as history, there is evidence for Christ’s miracles, what he said
about himself, and his resurrection, and it is rather good.
29
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Scriptural Passages for Talk C
Acts 2:22
“Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God
with mighty works and wonders and signs which God did through him in your midst,
as you yourselves know —
Heb. 2:3-4
how shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation? It was declared at first by
the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard him, 4 while God also bore
witness by signs and wonders and various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his own will.
1 John 1:1-3
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with
our eyes, which we have looked upon and touched with our hands, concerning the
word of life — 2 the life was made manifest, and we saw it, and testify to it, and proclaim to you the eternal life which was with the Father and was made manifest to us
— 3 that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you may
have fellowship with us; and our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus
Christ.
John 19:35
He who saw it has borne witness — his testimony is true, and he knows that he tells
the truth — that you also may believe.
John 21:24
This is the disciple who is bearing witness to these things, and who has written these
things; and we know that his testimony is true.
Luke 1:1-4
Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things which have
been accomplished among us, 2 just as they were delivered to us by those who from
the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word, 3 it seemed good to me
also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 that you may know the truth concerning
the things of which you have been informed.
1 Corinthians 15:6
Then he appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom are
still alive, though some have fallen asleep.
30
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Luke 5:17-26
On one of those days, as he was teaching, there were Pharisees and teachers of the
law sitting by, who had come from every village of Galilee and Judea and from Jerusalem; and the power of the Lord was with him to heal. 18 And behold, men were
bringing on a bed a man who was paralyzed, and they sought to bring him in and lay
him before Jesus; 19 but finding no way to bring him in, because of the crowd, they
went up on the roof and let him down with his bed through the tiles into the midst before Jesus. 20 And when he saw their faith he said, “Man, your sins are forgiven
you.” 21 And the scribes and the Pharisees began to question, saying, “Who is this
that speaks blasphemies? Who can forgive sins but God only?” 22 When Jesus perceived their questionings, he answered them, “Why do you question in your hearts?
23 Which is easier, to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven you,’ or to say, ‘Rise and walk? 24
But that you may know that the Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins” —
he said to the man who was paralyzed — “I say to you, rise, take up your bed and go
home.” 25 And immediately he rose before them, and took up that on which he lay,
and went home, glorifying God. 26 And amazement seized them all, and they glorified God and were filled with awe, saying, “We have seen strange things today.”
Mark 2:1-12
And when he returned to Capernaum after some days, it was reported that he was at
home. 2 And many were gathered together, so that there was no longer room for
them, not even about the door; and he was preaching the word to them. 3 And they
came, bringing to him a paralytic carried by four men. 4 And when they could not get
near him because of the crowd, they removed the roof above him; and when they had
made an opening, they let down the pallet on which the paralytic lay. 5 And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “My son, your sins are forgiven.” 6 Now
some of the scribes were sitting there, questioning in their hearts, 7 “Why does this
man speak thus? It is blasphemy! Who can forgive sins but God alone?” 8 And immediately Jesus, perceiving in his spirit that they thus questioned within themselves,
said to them, “Why do you question thus in your hearts? 9 Which is easier, to say to
the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Rise, take up your pallet and walk?
10 But that you may know that the Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins”
— he said to the paralytic — 11 “I say to you, rise, take up your pallet and go home.”
12 And he rose, and immediately took up the pallet and went out before them all; so
that they were all amazed and glorified God, saying, “We never saw anything like
this!”
Matthew 9:1-8
And getting into a boat he crossed over and came to his own city. 2 And behold, they
brought to him a paralytic, lying on his bed; and when Jesus saw their faith he said to
the paralytic, “Take heart, my son; your sins are forgiven.” 3 And behold, some of
the scribes said to themselves, “This man is blaspheming.” 4 But Jesus, knowing
their thoughts, said, “Why do you think evil in your hearts? 5 For which is easier, to
say, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Rise and walk? 6 But that you may know
that the Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins” — he then said to the paralytic — “Rise, take up your bed and go home.” 7 And he rose and went home. 8
31
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
When the crowds saw it, they were afraid, and they glorified God, who had given
such authority to men.
32
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Entries in Langer’s Encyclopedia of World History
58 B.C. To remove opposition at Rome, the triumvirs secured the mission of the irreconcilable M. Porcius Cato (the younger) to investigate the affairs of Cyprus, and allowed the violent demagogue and tribune P. Clodius to move a bill against Cicero for
the execution of Roman citizens without appeal. Cicero voluntarily withdrew to Epirus, the bill was passed, and his property was confiscated.
52 B.C. All Gaul flared into revolt under Vercingetorix. Caesar failed to take Gergovia
(Clermont in Auvergne) and was himself surrounded while besieging Vercingetorix
in Alesia (Alise near Dijon), but finally won a complete victory and captured
Vercingetorix.
14 A.D. Augustus died at Nola on August 19. Legally, his position could not be inherited, since the various powers and offices composing it ceased with his death and
could be received by another only from the senate and Roman people. In fact, however, August had throughout his life sought so to indicate a successor as to insure the
perpetuation of the principate… After several possible successors had predeceased
him, he selected Tiberius, son of his wife Livia by her first husband… Revolts of the
legions in Pannonia and Germany showed the need of a single strong commander to
prevent a recurrence of the civil wars of the later republic. Tiberius already occupied
too strong a position for anyone else to be chosen. The senate therefore conferred on
him the powers and titles of Augustus.
17 A.D.
On the death of their kings, Cappadocia and Commagene became provinces.
26 A.D. Sejanus persuaded Tiberius to retire from the annoyances of an increasingly
hostile Rome. Tiberius eventually settled on Capreae (Capri), an island in the Bay of
Naples, where the popular imagination, probably wrongly, pictured him as giving
way to the most abominable vices. Actually, Tiberius was of rigid morality and of the
utmost conscientiousness in governing the empire and in carrying out the policies of
Augustus.
30 A.D. Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judaea (26–36), ordered the crucifixion of Jesus
of Nazareth, called the Christ (the Greek Christos is a translation of Messiah,
“anointed” in Aramaic), accused of sedition.
From: William L. Langer, An Encyclopedia of World History, 5th ed. (Boston: Houghton
Mifflin, 1972)
33
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Historical Method: Establishing Historical Facts
The establishing of historical facts provides a basis for writing history, that is, writing
an account of past situations (past events, people, institutions, etc.). So the fundamental
question is: did this happen or what was the state of affairs in the place at this time in the
past.
There are other historical questions: what caused the past situation (historical causality); what is the significance of the past situation (later significance); how should we evaluate what happened (evaluation). These are not addressed here.
Example for the below: how we establish facts in First Century Roman history
(e.g., events in the reign of Tiberius)
1. The evidence
a. The main evidence: writings that witness to past facts
• Documents that are history (e.g., a letter from Cicero, an imperial decree)8
• Descriptive accounts and other references that are close to the events
(e.g., The Roman History of Velleius Paterculus, The Antiquities of Josephus,
The Annals of Tacitus, The Twelve Caesars of Suetonius)
• Later accounts and references (e.g., The Roman History of Cassius Dio)
b. Evaluation of the sources
• Reliable transmission (e.g., we have only one late and poor copy of Velleius
Paterculus)
• Literary form or genre (e.g., The Annals is a straight historical account, written in accordance with Greco-Roman principles of historical writing)
• Internal coherence and reliability (e.g., Velleius Paterculus was an eyewitness of some of what he wrote about, The Annals is a careful historical work)
c. Confirming evidence
• Archaeological remains (e.g., the remains of the Roman Forum, of Tiberius’
villa)
• Coherence with information in other documents (e.g., Do the customs described match with those we know of from other sources? Does this fit with
what we know of the law of the country at that time?)
• Reasoning from patterns of history (e.g., Someone ruled Rome at the time
and there is no other candidate; the Roman Empire expanded to Cappadocia
around this time, and this is the only explanation)
8
Victor Ehrenberg and A. H. M. Jones, Documents Illustrating the Reigns of Augustus & Tiberius, 2nd
ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 1955. This contains inscriptions that are background to Tiberius’
reign.
34
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
2. Evaluating the evidence
“Evaluation” here does not concern so much evaluating the motive for what was done
or the character of a historical figure or whether what was done was good or bad, etc.
Rather, it simply means evaluation of whether the evidence we have actually indicates that the fact happened.
• Plausibility, i.e., antecedent probability (e.g., the report of Tiberius’ behavior on Capri is not in accord with what we know of the man)
• Effect on other beliefs and practices (e.g., Tiberius’ reign affects little, so
there is no reason not to believe the accounts)
Note that this is not a criterion of historical evidence, but it is normally used
by historians (and others).
3. Considering what modern historians say
When writing history, comparing the results others have come up with is the final
step. When beginning to study something, reading modern histories is usually the first
step.
35
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Some Non-Christian References
This is a collection of some of the most significant references to the life of Christ in
non-Christian sources. It is intended to illustrate the nature of non-Christian references
and is not complete. A recent survey of all the references can be found in Gary R. Habermas, Ancient Evidence for the Life of Jesus: Historical Records of His Death and Resurrection (Nashville TN: Nelson, 1984).
Josephus, Antiquities, 189
(18.5.2.116) Now, some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod’s army
came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that
was called the Baptist; 117 (18.5.2.117) for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and
commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another,
and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water]
would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the
remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that
the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness. 118 (18.5.2.118) Now,
when [many] others came in crowds about him, for they were greatly moved [or pleased]
by hearing his words, Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people
might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion (for they seemed ready to
do anything he should advise), thought it best, by putting him to death, to prevent any
mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulties, by sparing a man who
might make him repent of it when it should be too late. 119 (18.5.2.119) Accordingly he
was sent a prisoner, out of Herod’s suspicious temper, to Macherus, the castle I before
mentioned, and was there put to death. Now the Jews had an opinion that the destruction
of this army was sent as a punishment upon Herod, and a mark of God’s displeasure
against him.
116
¶ (18.3.3.63) Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call
him a man, for10 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;
64 (18.3.3.64) and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had
condemned him to the cross, 2 those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he
63
9
Josephus was a Jewish historian and wrote the Antiquities about 90 A.D.
The sections of the passage in italics are the ones disputed by some scholars, because they seem like
they could only be written by Christians, and Josephus was not a Christian. There is an Arabic version extent that does not have these passages in this form, and some scholars think it was the original version,
while the version we have was changed by a Christian (perhaps so the book could be used by Christians).
Few scholars would hold that Josephus did not write anything about Jesus or that all the passage is inauthentic.
10
36
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
appeared to them alive again the third day, 3 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.
The version of the above given in the Arabic manuscript, “Book of History Guided by
All the Virtues of Wisdom, Crowned With Various Philosophies and Blessed by the
Truth of Knowledge, composed by Bishop Apapius in the 10th Century:
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 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.
(20.9.1.200) when, therefore, Ananus was of this disposition, he thought he had now a
proper opportunity [to exercise his authority]. 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;
200
Tacitus, the Annals, 15.4411
Such indeed were the precautions of human wisdom. The next thing was to seek means of
propitiating the gods, and recourse was had to the Sibylline books, by the direction of
which prayers were offered to Vulcanus, Ceres, and Proserpina. Juno, too, was entreated
by the matrons, first, in the Capitol, then on the nearest part of the coast, whence water
was procured to sprinkle the fane and image of the goddess. And there were sacred banquets and nightly vigils celebrated by married women. But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiations 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
our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for
the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in
Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre 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. Mockery of every sort was added to
their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or
11
Tacitus was a Roman historian and wrote the Annals 109 A.D.
37
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.
Suetonius, The Lives of the Twelve Caesars, Claudius 2512
Because the Jews at Rome caused continuous disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus,
he expelled them from the city.13
Suetonius, The Lives of the Twelve Caesars, Nero 16
After the great fire at Rome…Punishments were also inflicted on the Christians, a sect
professing a new and mischievous religious belief.
The Talmud, Sanhedrin 43a14
On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged15. For forty days before the execution took
place, a herald went forth and cried, ‘He is going forth to be stoned because he has practised sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can say anything in his favour,
let him come forward and plead on his behalf.’ But since nothing was brought forward in
his favour he was hanged on the even of the Passover.
12
Suetonius was a Roman historian and wrote his Lives about the same time Tacitus wrote the Annals.
“Chrestus” is a variant spelling of Christ. This recounts the same incident referred to in Acts 18:2 and
occurred during 49 A.D.
14
This passage from the Babylonian Talmud has been dated to the Third Century.
15
“Hanged” was a word that could be used for crucifixion, as in Gal 3:13 and Lk 23:39.
13
38
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Some Quotes
Rudolf Bultmann’s famous dictum:
It is impossible to use electric light and the wireless [the radio] and to avail ourselves
of modern medical and surgical discoveries, and at the same time to believe in the New
Testament world of spirits and miracles. We may think we can manage it in our own
lives, but to expect others to do so is to make the Christian faith unintelligible and unacceptable to the modern world.16
An historical fact which involves a resurrection from the dead is utterly inconceivable!17
Stanley L. Jaki’s response:
In Bultmann’s case too, pretentiousness had its unmasking in the ignorance which in
part supported it. One wonders what was his familiarity with Galvani, Volta, Oersted,
Ohm, Ampére, Faraday, Weber, Maxwell, and Marconi 18 — who did not discard the
world of the New Testament in order to make possible a world bathed in electric light and
radio waves. Had Bultmann cited as counterevidence Edison, a voluble representative of
village-atheists, he would have at most been entitled to say that as far as leading electricians the matter is a draw. Consequently it would have been Bultmann’s duty to study the
reasons, patently non-scientific, why some scientists believed while some did not.19
From Rodney Stark, The Rise of Christianity, 9020:
Modern scholars have too long been content to dismiss reports of miracles in the New
Testament and other similar sources as purely literary, not as things that happened. Yet
we remain aware that in tabernacles all over modern America, healings are taking place.
One need not propose that God is the active agent in these “cures” to recognize their reality both as events and as perceptions. Why then should we not accept that “miracles”
were being done in New Testament times too, and that people expected them as proof of
religious authenticity.
16 Rudolf Bultmann and Five Critics, Kerygma and Myth: A Theological Debate (New York: Harper &
Row, 1961), 5. The book was original published in Germany in 1948 and England in 1953.
17 Ibid., p. 39.
18 These are all scientists who contributed to the scientific developments that issued in the electric light
and the wireless.
19 Stanley L. Jaki, Miracles and Physics (Front Royal VA: Christendom Press, 1989), 15.
20 Rodney Stark is a sociologist who has a specialization in the sociology of religion.
39
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
The Historicity of the Gospels and Graeco-Roman Historiography
By A. N. Sherwin-White21
So much for the detailed study of the Graeco-Roman setting of Acts and Gospels. But
it is fitting for a professional Graeco-Roman historian to consider the whole topic of historicity briefly and very generally, and boldly to state a case. Though for two short periods of our history we are lucky enough to have two major contemporary historians of remarkably objective character in Thucydides and Polybius we are generally dealing with
derivative sources of marked bias and prejudice composed at least one or two generations
after the events which they describe, but much more often, as with the Lives of Plutarch
or the central decades of Livy, from two to five centuries later. Though connecting links
are provided backwards in time by series of lost intermediate sources, we are seldom in
the happy position of dealing at only one remove with a contemporary source. Yet not for
that do we despair of reconstructing the story of the tyranny of Pisistratus or of the tribunates of the Gracchi.
Subtle techniques of source-criticism have been evolved for the detection and elimination of various types of bias and anachronism, whether of the intermediate or of the
original source, or of the writer who actually survives and transmits his work to us. To
judge by what is so freely published, we are satisfied with our methods, and believe that a
hard core or basic layer of historical truth can be recovered even from the most deplorable of our tertiary sources — be it Diodorus or Florus or even the Epitome de Caesaribus.
The refinement of source-criticism has not led to the notion that knowledge in ancient
history is unattainable, or that the serious study of ancient politics is nothing but the history of rival propaganda. The basic reason for this confidence is, if put summarily, the
existence of external confirmations, and the working of the synoptic principle. From time
to time external contemporary evidence of a sort less warped by the bias of personalities
— e.g. the texts of laws and public accounts — confirms the conclusions drawn from the
critical study of literary sources. Hence we are bold to trust our results in the larger fields
where there is no such confirmation. Equally the criticism of sources tends to reveal the
existence of a basic unitary tradition beneath the manifold divergences of detail in rival
narratives, which is often the product of their particular bias.
So, it is astonishing that while Graeco-Roman historians have been growing in confidence, the twentieth-century study of the Gospel narratives, starting from no less promising material, has taken so gloomy a turn in the development of form-criticism that the
more advanced exponents of it apparently maintain — so far as an amateur can understand the matter — that the historical Christ is unknowable, and the history of his mission
cannot be written. This seems very curious when one compares the case for the bestknown contemporary of Christ, who like Christ is a well-documented figure — Tiberius
21 From: A. N. Sherwin-White, Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament (Oxford: Clarendon, 1963), 186–193
40
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Caesar. The story of his reign is known from four sources, the Annals of Tacitus and the
biography of Suetonius, written some eighty or ninety years later, the brief contemporary
record of Velleius Paterculus, and the third-century history of Cassius Dio. These disagree amongst themselves in the wildest possible fashion, both in major matters of political action or motive and in specific details of minor events. Everyone would admit that
Tacitus is the best of all the sources, and yet no serious modern historian would accept at
face value the majority of the statements of Tacitus about the motives of Tiberius.22 But
this does not prevent the belief that the material of Tacitus can be used to write a history
of Tiberius. The divergences between the synoptic gospels, or between them and the
Fourth Gospel are no worse than the contradictions in the Tiberius material.
Another example. The internal synoptic divergences, such as arise in the narratives of
narratives of the trial of Christ, are very similar to those that Roman historians meet in
the study of the tribunate of Gaius Gracchus. We have two or even three contradictory
versions, for instance, of the content of the most important of the legislative proposals —
a central point in the story — and there are three divergent versions of the way in which
the riot began in which Gaius lost his life. The four accounts of the trial of Christ are not
more troublesome. The two cases are rather similar in terms of analysis. The three versions of the death of Gaius aim at attributing the blame for the great riot to different persons or groups.23 So, too, the mildly divergent versions of the scene before Pilate and the
Sanhedrin may aim, as has often been suggested, at transferring the blame for the condemnation of Christ, in varying degrees, from the Romans to the Jews.
The objection will be raised to this line of argument that the Roman historical writers
and the Gospels belong to different kinds of literature. Whatever the defects of our
sources, their authors were trying to write history, but the authors of the Gospels had a
different aim. Yet however one accepts form-criticism, its principles do not inevitably
contradict the notion of the basic historicity of the particular stories of which the Gospel
narratives are composed, even if these were not shored up and confirmed by the external
guarantee of their fabric and setting. That the degree of confirmation in Graeco-Roman
terms is less for the Gospels than for Acts is due, as these lectures have tried to show, to
the differences in their regional setting. As soon as Christ enters the Roman orbit at Jerusalem, the confirmation begins. For Acts the confirmation of historicity is overwhelming.
Yet Acts is, in simple terms and judged externally, no less of a propaganda narrative than
the Gospels, liable to similar distortions. But any attempt to reject its basic historicity
even in matters of detail must now appear absurd. Roman historians have long taken it for
granted.
What to an ancient historian is most surprising in the basic assumptions of formcriticism of the extremer sort, is the presumed tempo of the development of the didactic
myths — if one may use that term to sum up the matter. We are not unacquainted with
this type of writing in ancient historiography, as will shortly appear. The agnostic type of
22
Save perhaps Professor Syme, whose great book, Tacitus, aims at a very general rehabilitation not only
of the factual but of the ideological accuracy of Tacitus. But, e.g., F. B. Marsh, The Reign of Tiberius (London, 1931), is more characteristic, or G. Walser, Rom, das Reich, &c. (Baden-Baden. 1951).
23
For a detailed narrative of the rival sources for the tribunates of Caius Gracchus on these lines see J.
Carcopino, Autour des Grecques (Paris, 1928), Ch. iv. For the three versions of the riot see Appian, B.C. i.
25.4; Diod. 34, fr 28 A; Plut. Gaius, 13. 3-4.
41
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
form-criticism would be much more credible if the compilation of the Gospels were
much later in time, much more remote from the events themselves, than can be the case.
Certainly a deal of distortion can affect a story that is given literary form a generation or
two after the event, whether for national glorification or political spite, or for the didactic
or symbolic exposition of ideas. But in the material of ancient history the historical content is not hopelessly lost.
Herodotus particularly comes to mind. In his history, written in mid-fifth century
B.C., we have a fund of comparable material in the tales of the period of the Persian Wars
and the preceding generation. These are retold by Herodotus from forty to seventy years
later, after they had been remodeled by at least one generation of oral transmission. The
parallel with the authors of the Gospels is by no means so far-fetched as it might seem.
Both regard their material with enthusiasm rather than detached criticism. Both are the
first to produce a written narrative of great events which they regard as a mighty saga,
national or ecclesiastical and esoterical as the case may be. For both their story is the vehicle of a moral or a religious idea which shapes the narrative. For Herodotus the classical concept of ‘koros-hubris-até’ is no less basically influential than the notion of, for example, oblation in the pattern of the Gospels, affecting both the parts and the whole of the
narrative. Yet the material of Herodotus presents no intractable difficulty to a critical historian. The material has not been transformed out of all recognition under the influence of
moral and patriotic fervour, in a period of time as long, if not longer, than can be allowed
for the gestation of the form-myths of the synoptic gospels.
Herodotus enables us to test the tempo of myth-making, and the tests suggest that
even two generations are too short a span to allow the mythical tendency to prevail over
the hard historic core of the oral tradition. A revealing example is provided by the story
of the murder of the Athenian tyrant Hipparchus at the hands of Harmodius and Aristogeiton, who became the pattern of all tyrannicides. The true story was that they assassinated Hipparchus in 514 B.C., but the tyranny lasted another four years before the establishment of the Athenian democracy. Popular opinion created a myth to the effect that
Harmodius and Aristogeiton destroyed the tyranny and freed Athens. This was current in
the mid-fifth century. Yet Herodotus, writing at that time, and generally taking the popular view of the establishment of the democracy, gives the true version and not the myth
about the death of Hipparchus. A generation later the more critical Thucydides was able
to uncover a detailed account of exactly what happened on the fatal day in 514 B.C. It
would have been natural and easy for Herodotus to give the mythical version. He does
not do so because he had a particular interest in a greater figure than Harmodius or Aristogeiton, that is, Cleisthenes, the central person in the establishment of the democracy.24
All this suggests that, however strong the myth-forming tendency, the falsification
does not automatically and absolutely prevail even with a writer like Herodotus, who was
naturally predisposed in favour of certain political myths, and whose ethical and literary
interests were stronger than his critical faculty. The Thucydidean version is a salutary
warning that even a century after a major event it is possible in a relatively small or
closed community for a determined inquirer to establish a remarkably detailed account of
a major event, by inquiry within the inner circle of the descendants of those concerned
24
Herod, VI. 123; cf. ibid. 109, 3; Thuc. VI. 53, 3.
42
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
with the event itself. Not that one imagines that the authors of the Gospels set to work
precisely like either Herodotus or Thucydides. But it can be maintained that those who
had a passionate interest in the story of Christ, even if their interest in events was parabolical and didactic rather than historical, would not be led by that very fact to pervert
and utterly destroy the historical kernel of their material. It can also be suggested that it
would be no harder for the Disciples and their immediate successors to uncover detailed
narratives of the actions and savings of Christ within their closed community, than it was
for Herodotus and Thucydides to establish the story of the great events of 520-480 B.C.
For this purpose it matters little whether you accept the attribution of the Gospels to eyewitnesses or not.
The impression of a historical tradition is nowhere more strongly felt than in the various accounts of the trial of Christ, analysed in Roman terms in the second lecture. Consider the close interdependence of Mark and Matthew, supplementing each other even in
particular phrases, yet each with his particular contribution, then Luke with his more coherent and explicit account of the charges and less clear version of the activity of the
Sanhedrin, finally John, who despite many improbabilities and obscurities yet gives a
convincingly contemporary version of the political pressure on Pilate in the age of Tiberius.
Taking the synoptic writers quite generally as primitive historians, there is a remarkable parallel between their technique and that of Herodotus, the father of history, in their
anecdotal conception of a narrative. Consider the great episodes of Herodotus such as the
campaign of Salamis or the story of the rise of Athens and Sparta, before the Persian invasion, each of which is comparable to one of the Gospels in length. Each is composed of
a series of small and disconnected but significant incidents or anecdotes.25 It is notorious
that Herodotus discarded even as a framework the famous account of Salamis provided
by the eye-witness Aeschylus in his play, the Persae, and replaced it by what appears to
be a hotch-potch of incidents. These turn out when carefully considered to be the great
actions of the major personalities — Cleomenes, Themistocles — whose activity decided
the event. The parallel with the technique of the synoptic writers is apparent. It is as
though this was the natural manner in which a primary innovator, with no models to follow, instinctively wrote history, especially when the narrative of events was controlled by
an idea rather than the mere desire to explain what happened. The notions of formcriticism have not been applied systematically to Herodotus. His stories are obviously
open to treatment of this kind. The investigation would cast much light on his literary
method, but would not affect seriously the basic historicity of his material, which is sufficiently established.26
25
Herod, V. 39-54, 66-98, VI. 48-84, for Sparta under Cleomenes; VIII. 1-95, for the Salamis campaign.
Mr. P. A. B. Brunt has suggested in private correspondence that a study of the Alexander sources is
less encouraging for my thesis. There was a remarkable growth of myth around his person and deeds within
the lifetime of contemporaries, and the historical embroidery was often deliberate. But the hard core still
remains, and an alternative but neglected source — or pair of sources — survived for the serious inquirer
Arrian to utilize in the second century A.D. This seems to me encouraging rather than the reverse. The
point of my argument is not to suggest the literal accuracy of ancient sources, secular or ecclesiastical, but
to offset the extreme skepticism with which the New Testament narratives are treated in some quarters. One
might compare the comparative excellence of certain early martyrologies, such as the Scillitan Acta, or the
historical element in the documents known as the Acts of the Pagan Martyrs.
26
43
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
D. What Christ Said About Himself
1. The importance of “claims”
a. Christ was a historical figure who had an extraordinary power. We find his significance by what he said about himself.
b. None of the other founders of great religions made the same sort of claims (nor
did any Christian teacher, except Mother Ann Lee).
2. He claimed to be uniquely important
a. What did he say about himself?
1) His miracles show that God sent him.
2) He was the most important person ever sent by God (the most important person in human history). He was also more important than all the figures and institutions of the old covenant.
3) He was the messiah (the Christ), the anointed king, the descendant (son) of
David, the king promised by God who would come, restore Israel, and bring
the kingdom of God to the whole earth.
4) He was the one sent by God to judge the living and the dead. At some point in
the future, he will judge all human beings and determine their fate.
Note that the term “the Son of man” was a term that he used to designate himself especially when speaking of the future judgment — probably alluding to
Dan 7:13.
5) What human beings do when they come across him is the most important
thing that can happen in their lives, since he can save them from destruction.
6) Those who turn to him have to put him above everything else — an arrogant
demand unless he held a position that warranted it.
7) He had to offer his life as an atonement to God so that human beings may be
saved. He had to have a special position if his death could count that way.
In other words, if this was not true, he was a megalomaniac.
b. How did he seek to communicate this?
1) He let his miracles (and his other actions) speak for him.
2) He gradually spoke more directly about his special position.
3) He backed it up by the kind of man he was.
a) He was supremely dedicated to God and his glory.
b) He was a teacher of righteousness and acted righteously.
– He was not the kind of man who would lie.
c) He was humanly strong and sane.
– There is no trace in the sources of his having mental problems.
44
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
3. Did he claim to be divine?
a. What were the main comprehension problems?
1) If he just said he was God, people would think he was saying that a human being as such, a mere human being, was God (blasphemy) or that he was crazy.
2) When he called himself the son of God, he could be understood to be the son
of God the way we are or the way the kings of Israel (at least the messiah)
were.
b. What did he say about himself in relation to God?
1) The things Christ said about himself in the passages in Part I indicate that he
had a unique relationship to God.
2) He put himself in the place of God, wielding a divine authority in the way he
spoke and acted.
3) He applied words to himself that were spoken about God in the Old Testament. Note that the Old Testament references are in brackets.
4) He spoke about his coming to do the things he did in a way that implied some
kind of preexistence.
5) Christ himself spoke of himself as the Son of God, revealing a unique relationship with God the Father.
This is confirmed by the fact that Christ never spoke of his sonship and our
sonship with God as being the same, that is, he spoke of “my father” and of
“your father”, but never said “our father”.
6) This also confirmed by the fact that it was revealed supernaturally and so was
a way of being the son of God that was different than the kind that other human beings could have because it needed supernatural revelation to be known.
7) He identified himself with God as His Son.
c. A summary
1. The divine nature, the divine power, the divine knowledge, the divine authority, was in Christ, so that when he spoke and acted, God spoke and acted
through him.
2. In the gospels, Christ said that as a human being he was united with God in
such a way that he could reveal God in his words and deeds, that he could act
in God’s place, and that people could relate to him as they would God, because he was the son of God in a unique way.
3. If we remember that “God” almost always meant the one we refer to as “God
the Father”, it is clear why he did not say he was God. Rather, he was the Son
of God, or as the gospel of John also put it, the word of God (John 1:1-14)
45
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Christ Speaks About Himself
This is a collection of passages that indicate that Christ claimed not just to be a miracle worker or a prophet or a teacher, but one who held a special position in God’s plan
and who claimed to have a unique relationship to God.
There are many issues of interpretation regarding these passages. This collection does
not contain discussions of issues. It is designed to allow us to see in an overview what
Christ said. That in itself for most people is enough to substantiate the fact that he
claimed a uniqueness that requires a response of either acceptance or rejection.
Although there are those who deny it, the sayings in the synoptic gospels are good
historical evidence for what Jesus said and thought about himself. There are more serious
discussions about the discourses in the gospel of John, although a good case can be made
for the fact that they also witness to what Jesus said and thought about himself. The collection primarily relies on material from the synoptic gospels and then adds material from
John. At the very least, the material from John is an indicator of how someone who was
regarded as a reliable Christian teacher by those who knew Christ interpreted the things
he said.
Part I: Christ Holds a Unique Position
1. His miracles show that God sent him and works through him.
The disciples of John told him of all these things. 19 And John, calling to him two of
his disciples, sent them to the Lord, saying, “Are you he who is to come, or shall we
look for another?” 20 And when the men had come to him, they said, “John the Baptist has sent us to you, saying, ‘Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” 21 In that hour he cured many of diseases and plagues and evil spirits, and on
many that were blind he bestowed sight. 22 And he answered them, “Go and tell John
what you have seen and heard: the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, lepers are
cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, the poor have good news preached
to them. 23 And blessed is he who takes no offense at me.” (Lk 7:18-23)
But if it is by the finger of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has
come upon you. (Lk 11:20)
But the testimony which I have is greater than that of John [the Baptist]; for the works
which the Father has granted me to accomplish, these very works which I am doing,
bear me witness that the Father has sent me. (Jn 5:36)
but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may
know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father. (Jn 10:38)
46
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
2. He was the most important person ever sent by God (the most important person
in human history). He was also more important than all the figures and institutions of the old covenant.
Then turning to the disciples he said privately, “Blessed are the eyes which see what
you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and
did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it.” (Lk 10:23-24)
The men of Nineveh will arise at the judgment with this generation and condemn it;
for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah
is here. The queen of the South [the queen of Sheba] will arise at the judgment with
this generation and condemn it; for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the
wisdom of Solomon, and behold, something greater than Solomon is here.” (Mt
12:41-42)
Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them a question, saying,
“What do you think of the Christ? Whose son is he?” They said to him, “The son of
David.” He said to them, “How is it then that David, inspired by the Spirit, calls him
Lord, saying, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand, till I put thy enemies
under thy feet?’ If David thus calls him Lord, how is he his son?” And no one was
able to answer him a word, nor from that day did anyone dare to ask him any more
questions. (Mt 22:41-46)
I tell you, something greater than the temple is here. (Mt 12:6)
Your father Abraham rejoiced that he was to see my day; he saw it and was glad. (Jn
8:56)
3. He was the messiah (the Christ), the anointed king, the descendant (son) of
David, the king promised by God who would come, restore Israel, and bring
the kingdom of God to the whole earth.
And Jesus went on with his disciples; to the villages of Caesarea Philippi; and on the
way he asked his disciples, “Who do men say that I am?” And they told him, “John
the Baptist; and others say Elijah; and others one of the prophets.” And he asked
them, “But who do you say that I am?” Peter answered him, “You are the Christ.”
And he charged them to tell no one about him. And he began to teach them that the
Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and the chief
priests and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again. (Mk 8:27-31)
Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed
this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.” (Mt 16:16-17)
The high priest asked him, “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” And Jesus
said, “I am; and you will see the Son of man seated at the right hand of Power, and
coming with the clouds of heaven.” And the high priest tore his garments, and said,
47
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
“Why do we still need witnesses? You have heard his blasphemy. What is your decision?” And they all condemned him as deserving death. (Mk 14:61-64)
Note that some of the above passages in sections 1 and 2 also are about Christ as the
messiah, especially Lk 7:18-23 and Mt 12:41-42.
4. He was the one sent by God to judge the living and the dead. At some point in
the future, he will judge all human beings and determine their fate. Note that
the term “the Son of man” was a term that he used to designate himself especially when speaking of the future judgment — probably alluding to Dan 7:13.
And then they will see the Son of man coming in clouds with great power and glory.
And then he will send out the angels, and gather his elect from the four winds, from
the ends of the earth to the ends of heaven. (Mk 13:26-27)
For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him will the Son of man also be ashamed, when he comes in the glory of his
Father with the holy angels. (Mk 8:38)
Not every one who says to me, “Lord, Lord,” shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but
he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me,
“Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name,
and do many mighty works in your name?” And then will I declare to them, “I never
knew you; depart from me, you evildoers.” (Mt 7:21-23)
When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit
on his glorious throne. Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate them one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats...” (Mt
25:31-32)
For the Son of man is to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he
will repay every man for what he has done. (Mt 16:27)
The high priest asked him, “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” And Jesus
said, “I am; and you will see the Son of man seated at the right hand of Power, and
coming with the clouds of heaven.” And the high priest tore his garments, and said,
“Why do we still need witnesses? You have heard his blasphemy. What is your decision?” And they all condemned him as deserving death. (Mk 14:61-64)
5. What human beings do when they come across him is the most important thing
that can happen in their lives, since he can save them from destruction.
And Jesus said to him, “Today salvation has come to this house, since he also is a son
of Abraham. For the Son of man came to seek and to save the lost.” (Lk 19:9-10)
So every one who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my
Father who is in heaven; but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before
my Father who is in heaven. (Mt 10:32-33)
48
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Blessed are you when men hate you, and when they exclude you and revile you and
cast out your name as evil, on account of the Son of man! Rejoice in that day, and
leap for joy, for behold, your reward is great in heaven; for so their fathers did to the
prophets. (Lk 6:22-23)
Afterward he appeared to the eleven themselves as they sat at table; and he upbraided
them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they had not believed those
who saw him after he had risen. And he said to them, “Go into all the world and
preach the gospel to the whole creation. He who believes and is baptized will be
saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.” (Mk 16:14-16)
You are from below, I am from above; you are of this world, I am not of this world. I
told you that you would die in your sins, for you will die in your sins unless you believe that I am he. (Jn 8:23-24)
6. Those who turn to him have to put him above everything else — an arrogant
demand unless he held a position that warranted it.
For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother,
and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s foes will be those of his
own household. He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me;
and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and he who does
not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. (Mt 10:35-38)
So therefore, whoever of you does not renounce all that he has cannot be my disciple.
(Lk 14:33)
To another he said, “Follow me.” But he said, “Lord, let me first go and bury my father.” But he said to him, “Leave the dead to bury their own dead; but as for you, go
and proclaim the kingdom of God.” Another said, “I will follow you, Lord; but let me
first say farewell to those at my home.” Jesus said to him, “No one who puts his hand
to the plow and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God.” (Lk 9:59-62)
7. He has to offer his life as an atonement to God so that human beings may be
saved. He had to have a special position if his death could count that way.
And he began to teach them that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes, and be killed, and after three
days rise again. (Mk 8:31)
The Son of man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom
for many. (Mt 20:28)
And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink
of it, all of you; for this is my blood of the new covenant, which is poured out for
many for the forgiveness of sins.” (Mt 26:27-28)
49
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Part II: Christ’s Relationship to God
1. The things Christ said about himself in the passages in Part I indicate that he
had a unique relationship to God.
2. He put himself in the place of God, wielding a divine authority in the way he
spoke and acted.
The Son of man is lord even of the sabbath. (Mk 2:28)
You have heard that it was said to the men of old, “You shall not swear falsely, but
shall perform to the Lord what you have sworn” But I say to you, Do not swear at
all...You have heard that it was said, “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.” But I
say to you, Do not resist one who is evil...And when Jesus finished these sayings, the
crowds were astonished at this teaching, for he taught them as one who had authority,
and not as their scribes. (Mt 5:33-34, 38-39, 7:28-29)
And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “My son, your sins are forgiven.” Now some of the scribes were sitting there, questioning in their hearts, “Why
does this man speak thus? It is blasphemy! Who can forgive sins but God alone?”
And immediately Jesus, perceiving in his spirit that they thus questioned within themselves, said to them, “Why do you question thus in your hearts? Which is easier, to
say to the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Rise, take up your pallet and
walk?’ But that you may know that the Son of man has authority on earth to forgive
sins” — he said to the paralytic — “I say to you, rise, take up your pallet and go
home.” And he rose, and immediately took up the pallet and went out before them all;
so that they were all amazed and glorified God, saying, “We never saw anything like
this!” (Mk 2:5-12)
[C.S. Lewis in Mere Christianity (p.40) explained the significance of this event in the
following way, “One part of the claim tends to slip past us unnoticed, because we
have heard it so often that we no longer see what it amounts to. I mean the claim to
forgive sins: any sins. Now unless the speaker is God, this is really so preposterous as
to be comic. We can all understand how a man forgives offences against himself.
You tread on my toe and I forgive you; you steal my money and I forgive you. But
what should we make of a man, himself unrobbed, and untrodden on, who announced
that he forgave you for treading on other men’s toes and stealing other men’s money?
Asinine fatuity is the kindest description we should give of his conduct. Yet this is
what Jesus did. He told people that their sins were forgiven and never waited to consult all other people whom their sins had undoubtedly injured. He unhesitatingly behaved as if he really was the God whose laws are broken and whose love is wounded
in every sin. In the mouth of any speaker who is not God, those words would imply
what I can only regard as a silliness and conceit unrivalled by any other character in
history.”]
When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit
on his glorious throne. Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate them one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats...” (Mt
25:31-32)
50
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
[Here and in similar passages (see above) Jesus claims that he will be the judge of all
human beings at the end of the age, a claim that means he will do what the scripture
said that God would do: “I will judge all the nations round about.” (Joel 3:12)]
And a leper came to him beseeching him, and kneeling said to him, “If you will, you
can make me clean.” Moved with pity, he stretched out his hand and touched him,
and said to him, “I will; be clean.” And immediately the leprosy left him, and he was
made clean. (Mk 1:40-42; see also Mk 2:5-12 above)
[Here and in the previous accounts of Christ’s miracles in this section, we can see
something significant about his miracle-working ability. He does not pray for God to
act or even act in God’s name. He simply speaks a word and it happens (cf. Ps. 33:9),
and often what happens is an act of creation, like restoring a withered hand. Moreover, he has it in complete control. He can wait until he wants it to happen, and then
makes it happen. In other words, we see divine power at work in and through him,
but it manifests itself as his own divine power.]
3. He applied words to himself that were spoken about God in the Old Testament.
Note that the Old Testament references are in brackets.
As they went away, Jesus began to speak to the crowds concerning John: “What did
you go out into the wilderness and behold?...To see a prophet? Yes, I tell you, and
more than a prophet. This is he of whom it is written: ‘Behold, I send my messenger
before thy face, who shall prepare thy way before thee’ [Mal 3:1]”. (Lk 7:24, 26-27)
The disciples of John told him of all these things. And John, calling to him two of his
disciples, sent them to the Lord, saying, “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look
for another?” And when the men had come to him, they said, “John the Baptist has
sent us to you, saying ‘Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?’” In
that hour he cured many of diseases and plagues and evil spirits, and on many that
were blind he bestowed sight. And he answered them, “Go and tell John what you
have seen and heard: the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed,
and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, the poor have good news preached to them.
And blessed is he who takes no offense at me [Isa 35:4-6].”. (Lk 7:18-23)
They were indignant; and they said to him, “Do you hear what these are saying?” And
Jesus said to them, “Yes; have you never read, ‘Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast brought forth perfect praise?’ [Ps 8:2]” (Mt 21:15-16)
Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away. [Is 40:8] (Mk
13:31)
Now John’s disciples and the Pharisees were fasting; and people came and said to
him, “Why do John’s disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees fast, but your disciples do not fast?” And Jesus said to them, “Can the wedding guests fast while the
bridegroom is with them? As long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast...” (Mk 2:18-19)
[Jesus talked about himself as being the bridegroom of his people just as God was
spoken of as the bridegroom of Israel in Is 62:5.]
51
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
I am the good shepherd... (Jn 10:11)
[Jesus talked about himself as being the good shepherd in the same way in which the
prophecy in Ezek. 34:11ff is about God as the good shepherd of his people.]
4. He spoke about his coming to do the things he did in a way that implied some
kind of preexistence.
For the Son of man also came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a
ransom for many. (Mk 10:45)
Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to
abolish them but to fulfill them. (Mt 5:17)
The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I came that they may have life, and
have it abundantly. (Jn 10:10)
I came from the Father and have come into the world; again, I am leaving the world
and going to the Father. (Jn 16:28)
“Your father Abraham rejoiced that he was to see my day; he saw it and was glad.”
The Jews then said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?” Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” So
they took up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple. (Jn 8:56-59)
5. Christ himself spoke of himself as the Son of God, revealing a unique relationship with God the Father.
And he began to tell the people this parable: “A man planted a vineyard, and let it out
to tenants, and went into another country for a long while. When the time came, he
sent a servant to the tenants, that they should give him some of the first fruit of the
vineyard; but the tenants beat him, and sent him away empty-handed. And he sent another servant; him also they beat and treated shamefully, and sent him away emptyhanded. And he sent yet a third; this one they wounded and cast out. Then the owner
of the vineyard said, ‘What shall I do? I will send my beloved son; it may be they will
respect him.’ But when the tenants saw him, they said to themselves, ‘This is the heir;
let us kill him that the inheritance may be ours.’ And they cast him out of the vineyard and killed him. What then will the owner of the vineyard do to them? He will
come and destroy those tenants, and give the vineyard to others.”...The scribes and
the chief priests tried to lay hands on him at that very hour, but they feared the people; for they perceived that he had told this parable against them. (Lk 20:9-19)
[The tenants are the rulers of the Jews, the vineyard is Israel, the servants are the
prophets and men of God in the Old Testament; Jesus speaks of himself as God’s
“beloved Son”, who is going to be put to death by the rulers of the Jews.]
In that same hour he rejoiced in the Holy Spirit and said, “I thank thee, Father, Lord
of heaven and earth, that thou hast hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to babes; yea, Father, for such was thy gracious will. All things
have been delivered to me by my Father; and no one knows who the Son is except the
52
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Father, or who the Father is except the Son and any one to whom the Son chooses to
reveal him. (Lk 10:21-22)
The Jews answered Pilate, “We have a law, and by that law he ought to die, because
he has made himself the Son of God.” When Pilate heard these words, he was the
more afraid. (Jn 19:7-8)
This was why the Jews sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the
sabbath but also called God his own Father, making himself equal with God. (Jn 5:18)
[In this and the previous verses, we can see the central claim Christ made. As scripture scholars have observed, in the New Testament “God” almost always means the
one we would call “God the Father”, and that is the way Christ speaks (otherwise, he
would be claiming to be the son of himself, which would be nonsense). If Christ
claimed to be God, he would be claiming to be God the Father. Rather, he claimed to
be the Son of God, the unique Son of God (John 1:18), the Son of God the way no
other human being could be. That means, as the Jews in John 5:18 saw, that he was
claiming to be the divine Son of God, the Son sent by the Father to do his will.]
This is confirmed by the fact that Christ never spoke of his sonship and our
sonship with God as being the same, that is, he spoke of “my father” and of
“your father”, but never said “our father”.
And in praying do not heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do; for they think that
they will be heard for their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows
what you need before you ask him. Pray then like this:
Our Father who art in heaven
Hallowed be thy name...
But deliver us from evil.
For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father also will forgive you.
(Mt 6:7-15)
[This is the prayer Christ gave to his disciples to pray (cf. Luke 11:1-4). He did not
pray it with them.]
Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? And not one of them will fall to the ground
without your Father’s will. But even the hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear
not, therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows. So every one who
acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in
heaven; but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is
in heaven. (Mt 10:29-32)
While he was still speaking to the people, behold, his mother and his brothers stood
outside, asking to speak to him. But he replied to the man who told him, “Who is my
mother and who are my brothers?” And stretching out his hand toward his disciples,
he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother, and sister, and mother.” (Mt 12:46-50)
6. This also confirmed by the fact that it was revealed supernaturally and so was a
way of being the son of God that was different than the sonship that other human beings could have because it needed supernatural revelation to be known.
53
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
In those days Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized by John in the
Jordan. And when he came up out of the water, immediately he saw the heavens open
and the Spirit descending upon him like a dove; and a voice came from heaven,
“Thou are my beloved Son; with thee I am well pleased.” (Mk 1:9-11)
And after six days Jesus took with him Peter and James and John, and led them up a
high mountain apart by themselves; and he was transfigured before them, and his
garments became glistening, intensely white, as no fuller on earth could bleach them .
. . And a cloud overshadowed them, and a voice came out of the cloud, “This is my
beloved Son; listen to him.” (Mk 9:2-7)
And whenever the unclean spirits beheld him, they fell down before him and cried
out, “You are the Son of God.” (Mk 3:11)
And when he had come out of the boat, there met him out of the tombs a man with an
unclean spirit, who lived among the tombs . . . And when he saw Jesus from afar, he
ran and worshipped him; and crying out with a loud voice, he said, “What have you to
do with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I adjure you by God, do not torment
me.” For he had said to him, “Come out of the man, you unclean spirit.” (Mk 5:2-8)
Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples,
“Who do men say that the Son of man is?” And they said, “Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” He said to them,
“But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of
the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For
flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.” (Mt
16:13-17)
7. He identified himself with God as His Son.
“If you had known me, you would have known my Father also, henceforth you know
him and have seen him.” Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and we shall
be satisfied.” Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you do not
know me, Philip? He who has seen me has seen the Father; how can you say, ‘Show
us the Father’? Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in me?” (Jn
14:7-10)
The doors were shut, but Jesus came and stood among them, and said, “Peace be with
you.” The he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out
your hand, and place it in my side; do not be faithless, but believing.” Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because
you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe.” (Jn 20:2629)
54
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Conclusions
1. The divine nature, the divine power, the divine knowledge, the divine authority, was in Christ, so that when he spoke and acted, God spoke and acted
through him.
2. In the gospels, Christ said that as a human being he was united with God in
such a way that he could reveal God in his words and deeds, that he could act
in God’s place, and that people could relate to him as they would God, because
he was the son of God in a unique way.
3. If we remember that “God” almost always meant the one we refer to as “God
the Father”, it is clear why he did not say he was God. Rather, he was the Son
of God, or as the gospel of John also put it, the word of God.
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was
God. He was in the beginning with God; all things were made through him and
without him was not anything made that was made... And the Word became flesh
and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth. We have beheld his glory, glory as of
the only Son from the Father. (Jn 1:1-14)
C. S. Lewis in his book Mere Christianity summarizes the implication of all this in
the following way.
And what did God do? First of all He left us conscience, the sense of right and wrong;
and all through history there have been people trying (some of them very hard) to
obey it. None of them ever quite succeeded. Secondly, He sent the human race what I
call good dreams: I mean those queer stories scattered all through the heathen religions about a god who dies and comes to life again and, by his death, has somehow
given new life to men. Thirdly, He selected one particular people and spent several
centuries hammering into their heads the sort of God He was — that there was only
one of Him and that He cared about right conduct. Those people were the Jews, the
Old Testament gives an account of the hammering process.
Then comes the real shock. Among these Jews there suddenly turns up a man who
goes about talking as if He was God. He claims to forgive sins. He says He has always existed. He says He is coming to judge the world at the end of time. Now let us
get this clear. Among Pantheists, like the Indians, anyone might say he was a part of
God, or one with God: there would be nothing very odd about it. But this man, since
He was a Jew, could not mean that kind of God. God, in their language, meant the
Being outside the world Who had made it and was infinitely different from anything
else. And when you have grasped that, you will see that what this man said was, quite
simply, the most shocking thing that has ever been uttered by human lips.
I am here trying to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often
say about Him: “I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept
55
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
His claim to be God.” That is the only thing we must not say. A man who was merely
a man and said the sort of things which Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher.
He would either be a lunatic — on a level with man who says he is a poached egg —
or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man
was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him
up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet
and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about
His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.
56
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
The Creeds
The Creeds give us a summary of Christian belief, especially belief about who Christ
was and what he did. The Nicene Creed is used by all the orthodox churches. The Apostles Creed is only used in the Western churches.
The “Nicene” Creed
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
and of all things visible and invisible,
and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only Son of God,
begotten of the Father before all the ages,
(God of God,) light of light, true God of true God,
begotten, not made,
consubstantial with the Father,
through whom all things came into being;
Jn 1:18; 1 Cor 8:6
1 Jn 1:5, 5:20–21
who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven,
and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and Mary the Virgin,
and became man;
he was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate,
and suffered, and was buried,
and rose again on the third day according to the Scriptures;
and ascended into heaven,
and sits on the right hand of the Father,
and is coming again with glory to judge living and dead;
of whose kingdom there will be no end.
And in the Holy Spirit,
the Lord and the life-giver,
Lk 1:33
2 Cor 3:17; Jn 6:63; 2 Cor 3:6
who proceeds from the Father (and the son [filioque])*,
Jn 15:26
who with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified,
who spoke through the prophets —
2 Pet 1:21
And in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church;
57
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
We confess one baptism for the remission of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the age to come. Amen.
Notes
•
•
•
•
Only: The principal Latin text translates “only (monogené)” as unigenitum
God of God: Not in the original creed but in the version used by the Latin (Western)
churches.
Consubstantial: The principal Latin text translates the Greek homooúsion as consubstantialem. This is sometimes translated into English as “one in being” or “one in essence” or
“of the same being/essence”.
From the Son: Not in the original creed but in the version used by the Latin (Western)
churches.
The Apostles’ Creed
•
I believe in God the Father Almighty, creator of heaven and earth;
•
•
And in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord:
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
he descended into hell;
on the third day he rose from the dead;
he ascended into heaven,
and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty;
from there he shall come to judge the living and the dead.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and life everlasting.
Notes
•
The bullets and indentations reflect the traditional twelve articles of the creed.
58
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
•
•
•
Participants’ Notes 2013
Hell: inferna is probably the original version; inferos is a version that is commonly used. Inferna means “lower [places]” or place of the dead. Inferos means the dead or departed [people]. Neither has to refer to the place of eternal punishment (hell as distinguished from
hades), and so “hell” is probably not the best translation in modern English.
Texts probably referring to the descent into Hades: Matt. 12:39-30; Rom. 10:7; Col. 1:18;
Acts 2:27-31; 1 Pet. 3:18-19; 1 Pet. 4:6
Saints: sanctorum could be either masculine or neuter in Latin. If it were masculine, it would
mean “holy persons” and probably refer to the church as the communion of saints. If it were
neuter it would mean “holy things” and probably refer to taking part in things like the Eucharist.
59
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
E. The Resurrection
1. The significance of the resurrection
The resurrection is mainly important because it is the victory of Christ over sin, Satan
and death and because it brings us new life. Nonetheless, it is also a testimony to who
Christ was.
2. The historical evidence
a. 1 Corinthians 15:3-7
– It is circumstantial (supportive of the main topic).
– It is very early (the letter was written within 25 years of the event; the formula
is much earlier).
– It indicates a number of people and a variety of occasions.
– It was testable.
b. The sermons in Acts
– They were probably earlier than Acts itself and good summary accounts.
– They indicate that people very early said: “We saw it.”
c. The gospel and Acts accounts
– The eyewitnesses were concerned with the physical reality of it (they were not
naïve, lacking all skepticism — cf. Lk 24:36-43, Jn 20:26-29).
– Objection: There are discrepancies in the accounts.
Response: That is an indication that they are historical evidence.
d. Other evidence for the resurrection.
– Almost all the books of the New Testament mention it.
– Almost all the early Christian writings as well, some going back to the time of
the New Testament, mention it.
– It was a clear central belief from a time when it could be established.
– The Shroud of Turin seems to provide some further evidence (like having the
empty tomb).
3. Evaluating the evidence
a. The facts that need to be explained:
1) A very strong movement arose rapidly based on the conviction of the resurrection. There has to be an adequate explanation of that.
2) There is good historical evidence that many saw him, better than the evidence
we have for almost all the events of ancient history.
3) There is also evidence that the tomb was empty and no body was to be found.
60
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
The simplest explanation is that Christ rose from the dead. Note that simplicity is
a key criterion for historical and scientific evidence.
b. Are there plausible alternate explanations that are stronger?
– As we have observed, the fact that many people do not believe in miracles
makes them ready to say that any explanation is more plausible.
1) The early Christians hid the body and proclaimed the resurrection, i.e., committed fraud.
Response: But the apostles and early Christians were not the kind of people
who would do such a thing — they were truthful men of high character, devout Jews who believed in God’s judgment, did not get rich or powerful from
it, had themselves been forced to change their opinions, were strong in their
proclamation of it, were willing to die for it. Is it really plausible that they
could have carried on with a body in the closet?
2) Someone else stole the body.
Response: But who? The Jews? The Romans. There was no reason for anyone
to have done it. Opponents of Christianity like the Jews and Romans would
have produced the body. Grave robbers were not interested in the corpse.
3) It was a mistake and he did not really die (he was in a trance) or he revived
(resuscitation).
Response: But did he then hide afterwards and let people proclaim him risen?
Did the apostles know it and lie? Also, the resurrected body was different
from a physical body.
4) They did not recognize him — they must have seen someone else (an imposture).
Response: But they did recognize him after some interaction — initial uncertainty is a common human reaction after seeing people who have changed
since the last time you saw them.
5) The women made a mistake and looked in the wrong tomb.
Response: The tomb seems to have been guarded and other people apparently
checked carefully, but even if they had not, would not Joseph of Arimathea or
someone have discovered the mistake?
6) People were having hallucinations when they thought they saw him. An alternate version of this is that they were having a vision.
Response: But so many witnesses, so many different occasions, a tomb empty,
a lengthy time of physical interaction (eating, etc.)? Hallucinations are not like
this, nor are visions. Both are normally one-time to one-person.
7) People just came to a conviction that he was spiritually alive, because of the
spiritual effect of their faith in him (perhaps including the outpouring of the
Spirit).
Response: The sources show a concern to state that he was physically there
(though in a glorified and “spiritualized” condition). Moreover, the Jews
would not have considered him to be risen from the dead if there was still a
dead body around. Nor would the apostles.
61
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
8) It was just wish fulfillment.
Response: The response to (6) covers this. In addition, according to the evidence they did not seem to be wishing for this to happen.
9) This was just a mythic account to start a religion.
Response: The material does not read like myth. It reads like history.
c. Conclusion: It is much harder to believe in the alternate theories, given the evidence, than in the resurrection — unless you believe a resurrection could not happen, or unless you do not want it to have happened.
62
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Scriptural Passages for Talk E
1 Corinthians 15:3-8
For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for
our sins in accordance with the scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on
the third day in accordance with the scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas,
then to the twelve. 6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one
time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8 Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.
Acts 2:24-32
But God raised him up, having loosed the pangs of death, because it was not possible
for him to be held by it. … 32 This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses.
Acts 3:14-15
But you denied the Holy and Righteous One, and asked for a murderer to be granted
to you, 15 and killed the Author of life, whom God raised from the dead. To this we
are witnesses.
Acts 4:10
be it known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ
of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by him this man
is standing before you well.
Acts 5:30-32
The God of our fathers raised Jesus whom you killed by hanging him on a tree. 31
God exalted him at his right hand as Leader and Savior, to give repentance to Israel
and forgiveness of sins. 32 And we are witnesses to these things, and so is the Holy
Spirit whom God has given to those who obey him.”
Acts 10:40-41
but God raised him on the third day and made him manifest; 41 not to all the people
but to us who were chosen by God as witnesses, who ate and drank with him after he
rose from the dead.
Acts 13:30-31
But God raised him from the dead; 31 and for many days he appeared to those who
came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are now his witnesses to the people.
Acts 17:31
because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a
man whom he has appointed, and of this he has given assurance to all men by raising
him from the dead.”
63
Modern Issues: Why Believe in Christ
Participants’ Notes 2013
Acts 26:23
that the Christ must suffer, and that, by being the first to rise from the dead, he would
proclaim light both to the people and to the Gentiles.”
Luke 24:36-42
As they were saying this, Jesus himself stood among them. 37 But they were startled
and frightened, and supposed that they saw a spirit. 38 And he said to them, “Why are
you troubled, and why do questionings rise in your hearts? 39 See my hands and my
feet, that it is I myself; handle me, and see; for a spirit has not flesh and bones as you
see that I have.” 41 And while they still disbelieved for joy, and wondered, he said to
them, “Have you anything here to eat?” 42 They gave him a piece of broiled fish, 43
and he took it and ate before them.
John 20:26-29
Eight days later, his disciples were again in the house, and Thomas was with them.
The doors were shut, but Jesus came and stood among them, and said, “Peace be with
you.” 27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put
out your hand, and place it in my side; do not be faithless, but believing.” 28 Thomas
answered him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe.”
64