the new testament documents and the historicity of the resurrection
Post on 07-Apr-2018
215 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 1/24
The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
Sam Shamoun
The historicity of the resurrection is firmly rooted in the reliability of the New Testament
documents. If it can be shown that the NT documents are unreliable, then the case for theresurrection goes out the window. If, however, it can be demonstrated that the NT documents
are historically accurate and were written down during the lifetime of the eyewitnesses to the
life and resurrection of Jesus, then the truth claim of Christianity is affirmed.
We will examine both the external and internal evidence and see where does it lead us.
External Evidence
External evidence would include the number and dating of the available NT manuscripts as
well as archaeological evidence that serves to affirm or debunk the early composition of the
New Testament. The first will be the evidence furnished by the MSS themselves.
Manuscript Evidence
We have today in our possession 5,300 known Greek manuscripts of the New Testament,
another 10,000 Latin Vulgates, and 9,300 other early versions (MSS), giving us more than
24,000 manuscript copies of portions of the New Testament in existence today! (taken from
McDowell's Evidence That demands a Verdict , vol.1, 1972 pp. 40-48; Time, January 23,
1995, p. 57). Though we do not have any originals, with such a wealth of documentation atour disposal with which to compare, we can delineate quite closely what those originals
contained. No other ancient writing of antiquity has as many MSS as the New Testament.
In fact, when we compare the works of antiquity with that of the NT documents, we will then
see how superior the New Testament really is in terms of dating and number of MSS.
The Time Gap And The Number Of MSS:
Author Date
Written
Earliest
Copy Time Span
Copies
(extent)
Secular Manuscripts:
Herodotus (History) 480 - 425 BC 900 AD 1,300 years 8
Thucydides (History) 460 - 400 BC 900 AD 1,300 years ?
Aristotle (Philosopher) 384 - 322 BC 1,100 AD 1,400 years 5
Caesar (History) 100 - 44 BC 900 AD 1,000 years 10
Pliny (History) 61 - 113 AD 850 AD 750 years 7
Suetonius (Roman History) 70 - 140 AD 950 AD 800 years ?
Tacitus (Greek History) 100 AD 1,100 AD 1,000 years 20
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 2/24
In comparison, we have copies of the NT which date approximately 15-20 years after the
authors of scripture originally penned the autographs.
Biblical Manuscripts: (note: these are individual manuscripts):
Magdalene Ms (Matthew
26)1st century 50-60 AD coexistent(?)
John Rylands (John) 90 AD 130 AD 40 years
Bodmer Papyrus II (John) 90 AD 150-200 AD 60-110 years
Chester Beatty Papyri (NT) 1st cen. 200 AD 150 years
Diatessaron by Tatian
(Gospels)1st cen. 200 AD 150 years
Codex Vaticanus (Bible) 1st cen. 325-350 AD 275-300 years
Codex Sinaiticus (Bible) 1st cen. 350 AD 300 years
Codex Alexandrinus (Bible) 1st cen. 400 AD 350 years
Total New Testament manuscripts = 5,300 Greek MSS, 10,000 Latin Vulgates, 9,300 others
= 24,000 copies. Total MSS compiled prior to 600 AD = 230. Some of the most important
MSS include:
The John Ryland Papyri:
Manuscript portions of the Gospel of John, located in the John Ryland Library of Manchester,
England and believed to be the oldest known fragment of the New Testament, dated AD 130,
within 40 years of the original.
Lukan Papyrus:
"The Lukan papyrus, situated in a library in Paris has been dated to the late 1st century or
early 2nd century, so it predates the John papyrus by 20-30 years (Time April 26, 1996,
pg.8)."
Mark and Qumran:
"But of more importance are the manuscript findings of Mark and Matthew! New research
which has now been uncovered by Dr. Carsten Thiede, and is published in his newly
released book on the subject, the Jesus Papyrus mentions a fragment from the book of
Mark found among the Qumran scrolls (fragment 7Q5) showing that it was written
sometime before 68 AD It is important to remember that Christ died in 33 AD, so this
manuscript could have been written, at the latest, within 35 years of His death; possibly
earlier, and thus during the time that the eyewitnesses to that event were still alive!"
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 3/24
Magdelene Manuscript:
"The most significant find, however, is a manuscript fragment from the book of Matthew
(chapt.26) called the Magdalene Manuscript which has been analyzed by Dr. Carsten Thiede,
and also written up in his book The Jesus Papyrus. Using a sophisticated analysis of the
handwriting of the fragment by employing a special state-of-the-art microscope, hedifferentiated between 20 separate micrometer layers of the papyrus, measuring the height
and depth of the ink as well as the angle of the stylus used by the scribe. After this analysis
Thiede was able to compare it with other papyri from that period; notably manuscripts found
at Qumran (dated to 58 AD), another at Herculaneum (dated prior to 79 AD), a further one
from the fortress of Masada (dated to between 73/74 AD), and finally a papyrus from the
Egyptian town of Oxyrynchus. The Magdalene Manuscript fragments matches all four,
and in fact is almost a twin to the papyrus found in Oxyrynchus, which bears the date of
65/66 AD Thiede concludes that these papyrus fragments of St. Matthew's Gospel were
written no later than this date and probably earlier. That suggests that we either have a
portion of the original gospel of Matthew, or an immediate copy, which was written while
Matthew and the other disciples, and eyewitnesses to the events were still alive. Thiswould be the oldest manuscript portion of our Bible in existence today, one which co-
exists with the original writers!
"What is of even more importance is what it says. The Matthew 26 fragment uses in its text
nomina sacra (holy names) such as the diminutive "IS" for Jesus and "KE" for Kurie
or Lord (The Times, Saturday, December 24, 1994). This is highly significant for our
discussion today, because it suggests that the godhead of Jesus was recognized centuries
before it was accepted as official church doctrine at the council of Nicea in 325 AD There
is still ongoing discussion concerning the exact dating of this manuscript. However, if the
dates prove to be correct then this document alone completely eradicates the criticism leveled
against the gospel accounts (such as the "Jesus Seminar") that the early disciples knew
nothing about Christ's divinity, and that this concept was a later redaction imposed by the
Christian community in the second century (AD)."
(NOTE: The preceding citations can be found at the following web page:
http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/bib-qur/bibmanu.htm)
Other, more extensive, copies of the New Testament include the Chester Beatty Papyri,
containing major portions of the New Testament and dated early 3rd century, the Bodmer
Papyrus, dated late 2nd century, the Codex Sinaiticus, dated AD 350, and the Codex
Vaticanus, dated AD 325 - AD 350. Some of the codices contain the entire New Testament. Itcan be seen that, as far as the time gap between the original writing of the New Testament
and the earliest extant manuscripts, there is no work from the ancient world which can
compare to the New Testament. As Sir Frederic Kenyon, former Curator of the British
Museum, says:
"The net result of this discovery [of the Chester Beatty Papyri] ... is, in fact, to reduce the gap
between the earlier manuscripts and the traditional dates of the New Testament books so far
that it becomes negligible in any discussion of their authenticity. No other ancient book
has anything like such an early and plentiful testimony to its text." (Sir Frederic G.
Kenyon, The Bible and Modern Scholarship [London: John Murray, 1948], 20, as cited in
McDowell, Evidence That Demands A Verdict , p. 49)
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 4/24
Add to this list the possible discovery of several NT quotations found in Qumran:
"Jose O'Callahan, a Spanish Jesuit paleographer, made headlines around the world on March
18, 1972, when he identified a manuscript fragment from Qumran ... as a piece of the Gospel
of Mark. The piece was from Cave 7. Fragments from this cave had previously been dated
between 50 B.C. and A.D. 50, hardly within the time frame established for New Testamentwritings. Using accepted methods of papyrology and paleography, O'Callahan compared
sequences of letters with existing documents and eventually identified nine fragments as
belonging to one Gospel, Acts, and a few Epistles. Some of these were dated slightly later
than 50, but still extremely early ...
Mark 4:28 7Q6 A.D. 50
Mark 6:48 7Q15 A.D. ?
Mark 6:52, 53 7Q5 A.D. 50
Mark 12:17 7Q7 A.D. 50
Acts 27:38 7Q6 A.D. 60+
Rom. 5:11, 12 7Q9 A.D 70+
1 Tim. 3:16; 4:1-3 7Q4 A.D. 70+
2 Peter 1:15 7Q10 A.D. 70+
James 1:23, 24 7Q8 A.D. 70+
"... Both friends and critics acknowledge that, if valid, O'Callahan's conclusions will
revolutionize New Testament theories. If even some of these fragments are from the New
Testament, the implications for Christian apologetics are enormous. Mark and Acts must
have been written within the lifetimes of the apostles and contemporaries of the events.
There would be no time for mythological embellishment of the records... They must be
accepted as historical ... There would hardly be time for a predecessor series of Q
manuscripts ... And since these manuscripts are not originals but copies, parts of the New
Testament would be shown to have been copied and disseminated during the lives of the
writers. No first-century date allows time for myths or legends to creep into the stories
about Jesus." (Norman Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics [Baker Books,
Grand Rapids; 1999], p. 530)
Hence, if further research confirms O'Callahan's theories this would establish beyond any
reasonable doubt the reliability of the New Testament. Even without these discoveries, the
evidence from the Patristic writings and MSS overwhelmingly supports the authenticity andreliability of the biblical text.
For instance, in the Patristic writings the case for the preservation of the NT text and its early
composition is further established, as well as the extensive usage of the New Testament,
especially that of the four Gospels:
"Of the four gospels alone there are 19,368 citations by the church fathers from the late
first century on. This includes 268 by Justin Martyr (100-165), 1038 by Ireneaus (active in
the late second century), 1017 by Clement of Alexandria (ca. 155-ca. 220), 9231 by Origen
(ca. 185-ca. 254), 3822 by Tertullian (ca. 160s-ca. 220), 734 by Hippolytus (d. ca. 236) and
3258 by Eusebius (ca. 265-ca. 339…) Earlier, Clement of Rome cited Matthew, John, 1Corinthians in 95 to 97. Ignatius referred to six Pauline Epistles in about 110, and between
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 5/24
110 and 150 Polycarp quoted from all four Gospels, Acts and most of Paul's Epistles.
Shepherd of Hermas (115-140) cited Matthew, Mark, Acts, I Corinthians, and other books.
Didache (120-150) referred to Matthew, Luke, I Corinthians, and other books. Papias,
companion of Polycarp, who was a disciple of the apostle John, quoted John. This argues
powerfully that the Gospels were in existence before the end of the first century, while some
eyewitnesses (including John) were still alive." (Norman Geisler, Encyclopedia, pp. 529-530)
Some critics have tried to debunk the NT documents due to the variant readings that exist
between the MSS. Geisler responds:
"There is widespread misunderstanding among critics about 'errors' in the biblical
manuscripts. Some have estimated there are about 200,000 of them. First of all, these are not
'errors' but variant readings, the vast majority of which are strictly grammatical. Second,
these readings are spread throughout the more than 5300 manuscripts, so that a variant
spelling of one letter in one verse in 2000 manuscripts is counted as 2000 'errors.' Textual
scholars Westcott and Hort estimated that only one in sixty of these variants have
significance. This would leave a text 98.33 percent pure. Philip Schaff calculated that, of the150,000 variants known in his day, only 400 changed the meaning of the passage, only fifty
were of real significance, and not even one affected 'an article of faith or a precept of duty
which is not abundantly sustained by other and undoubted passages, or by the whole tenor of
Scripture teaching' (Schaff, 177).
"Most other ancient books are not so well authenticated. New Testament scholar Bruce
Metzger estimated that the Mahabharata of Hinduism is copied with only about 90 percent
accuracy and Homer's Illiad with about 95 percent. By comparison, HE ESTIMATED THE
NEW TESTAMENT IS ABOUT 99.5 PERCENT ..." (Geisler, Encyclopedia, pp. 532-533)
B. F. Westcott and F.J.A. Hort, the editors of The New Testament in Original Greek , also
commented:
"If comparative trivialities such as changes of order, the insertion or omission of the article
with proper names, and the like are set aside, the works in our opinion still subject to doubt
can hardly mount to more than a thousandth part of the whole New Testament." (B.F.
Westcott, and F.J.A. Hort, eds., New Testament in Original Greek , 1881, vol. II, 2.)
Sir Frederick Kenyon states:
"... no unbiased scholar would deny that the text that has come down to us is substantiallysound." (Kenyon, The Bible, as cited in McDowell, Evidence, p. 49)
Kenyon rightly concludes:
"It cannot be too strongly asserted that in substance the text of the Bible is certain: Especially
is this the case with the New Testament." (Sir Frederic G. Kenyon, Our Bible and the Ancient
Manuscripts [New York: Harper and Brothers, 1941], 23 as cited in McDowell, Evidence, p.
45)
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 6/24
F. F. Bruce comments:
The evidence for our New Testament writings is ever so much greater than the evidence for
many writings of classical author, the authenticity of which no one dreams of questioning.
And if the New Testament were a collection of secular writings, their authenticity would
generally be regarded as beyond all doubt. (F.F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? 5th rev. ed. [Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity Press, 1988], p. 15)
Archaeology And The NT
Independent archaeological research has solidified the authenticity and the historical
reliability of the New Testament. Some of the discoveries include:
Luke refers to Lysanias as being the tetrarch of Abilene at the beginning of John the
Baptist’s ministry, circa 27 A. D. (Luke 3:1) Historians accused Luke of being in
error, noting that the only Lysanias known was the one killed in 36 B. C. Now,however, an inscription found near Damascus refers to "Freedman of Lysanias the
tetrarch" and is dated from 14 and 29 A. D.
Paul, writing to the Romans, speaks of the city treasurer Erastus (Romans 16:23). A
1929 excavation in Corinth unearthed a pavement inscribed with these words:
ERASTVS PRO:AED:P:STRAVIT: ("Erastus curator of public buildings, laid this
pavement at his own expense.")
Luke mentions a riot in the city of Ephesus which took place in a theater (Acts 19:23-
41). The theater has now been excavated and has a seating capacity of 25,000.
Acts 21 records an incident which broke out between Paul and certain Jews from
Asia. These Jews accused Paul of defiling the Temple by allowing Trophimus, a
Gentile, to enter it. In 1871, Greek inscriptions were found, now housed in Istanbul
which read:
NO FOREIGNER MAY ENTER WITHIN THE BARRICADE WHICH
SURROUNDS THE TEMPLE AND ENCLOSURE. ANYONE WHO IS CAUGHT
DOING SO WILL HAVE HIMSELF TO THANK FOR HIS ENSUING DEATH.
Luke addresses Gallio with the title Proconsul (Acts 18:12). A Delphi inscription
verifies this when it states, "As Lucius Junius Gallio, my friend, and the Proconsul of
Achaia ..."
Luke calls Publicus, the chief man of Malta, "First man of the Island." (Acts 28:7)Inscriptions now found do confirm Publicus as the "First man". (Josh McDowell, The
Best of Josh Mcdowell: A Ready Defense, pp. 110-111)
The five porticoes of the pool of Bethesda by the Sheep Gate and the pool of Siloam
mentioned in John 5:2 and 9:1-7 has now been unearthed.
The pavement (Gabbatha) of John 18:13 and Solomon’s porch in the Temple
precincts (John 10:22-23), have been found.
Archaeologists have unearthed Jacob’s well at Sychar. (John 4:5)
An inscription found in Ceasarea confirms Pilate’s role as the prefect of Judea during
the time of Christ.
The discovery of a bone-box of a crucified man named Johanan from the first century
Palestine confirms the fact that nails were used to pierce the ankles of the victims.Such was the case of Christ, of course, and this discovery is significant in answering
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 7/24
the skeptics who believed that the Romans used only ropes to tie the victim’s legs to
the cross.
Finally, in 1990, the burial grounds of Caiaphas, the Jewish high priest, and his family
were uncovered. This is an undeniable fact that Caiaphas existed as a true historical
figure.
The significance of such extra-Biblical evidence is of such magnitude that honest skeptics are
now forced to agree that the Bible is historically accurate and reliable. One such person was
Sir William Ramsey, considered one of the world’s greatest archaeologists. He believed that
the New Testament, particularly the books of Luke and Acts, were second-century forgeries.
He spent thirty years in Asia Minor, seeking to dig up enough evidence to prove that Luke-
Acts was nothing more than a lie. At the conclusion of his long journey however, he was
compelled to admit that the New Testament was a first-century compilation and that the Bible
is historically reliable. This fact led to his conversion and embracing of the very faith he once
believed to be a hoax.
Dr. Ramsey stated:
"Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy ... this
author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians."
Ramsey further said: "Luke is unsurpassed in respects of its trustworthiness." (Josh
McDowell, The Best of Josh Mcdowell: A Ready Defense, pp. 108-109)
Other skeptics who have conceded the Bible’s historical accuracy include the renowned
Jewish archaeologist Nelson Glueck:
"It may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a
biblical reference," and "the almost incredibly accurate historical memory of the Bible, and
particularly so when it is fortified by archaeological fact." (Josh McDowell, Evidence That
Demands A Verdict p. 65)
This is a very significant statement since it is made by one who totally denied the inspiration
of Scripture. Earl Radmacher, former president of Western Conservative Baptist Seminary,
notes:
"I listened to him [Glueck] when he was at Temple Emmanuel in Dallas, and he got rather
red in the face and said, ‘I’ve been accused of teaching the verbal, plenary inspiration of theScripture. I want it to be understood that I have never taught this. All I have ever said is that
in all my archaeological investigation I have never found one artifact of antiquity that
contradicts any statement of the Word of God.’" (Ibid., p. 22 [emphasis ours])
Another one time skeptic was Dr. Clifford Wilson who, due to the discoveries made,
concluded that, "It is the studied conviction of this writer that the Bible is ... the ancient
world’s most reliable history textbook ..." (Wilson, Rocks, Relics And Biblical Reliability,
p. 126)
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 8/24
Dr. Wilson, like Ramsey, goes on to hail Luke for his accuracy:
Luke demonstrated a remarkably accurate knowledge of geographical and political
ideas. He referred correctly to provinces that were established at that time, as indicated in
Acts 15:6. He demonstrated a clear knowledge of local customs, such as those relating to the
speech of the Lycaonians (Acts 14:11), some aspects relating to the foreign woman who wasconverted at Athens (Acts 17:34), and he even knew that the city of Ephesus was known as
the "temple-keeper of Artemis" (Acts 19:35) ... he refers to different local officers by their
exact titles – the proconsul (deputy) of Cyprus (Acts 13:7), the magistrates at Phillipi (Acts
16:20,35), the politarchs (another word for magistrates) at Thessalonica (Acts 17:6), the
proconsul of Achaia (Acts 18:12), and the treasurer of Corinth (Aedile) – which was the title
of the man known as Erastus at Corinth (Acts 19:22; Romans 16:23 ...)
Luke had accurate knowledge about various local events such as the famine in the days of
Claudius Caesar (Acts 11:29); he was aware that Zeus and Hermes were worshiped together
at Lystra, though this was unknown to modern historians (Acts 14:11,12). He knew that
Diana or Artemis was especially the goddess of the Ephesians (Acts 19:28); and he was ableto describe the trade at Ephesus in religious images. (Ibid., pp. 112-113)
Hence, Wilson’s statement:
"Those who know the facts now recognize that the New Testament must be accepted as a
remarkably accurate source book ..." (Ibid., p. 120)
Leading NT archaeologist John McRay was interviewed by atheist turned Christian Lee
Strobel regarding the archaeological evidence for the NT. After dealing with the evidence for
Luke's accuracy, Strobel asked McRay about the evidence supporting John's Gospel:
Archaeology may support the credibility of Luke, but he isn't the only author of the New
Testament. I wondered what scientists would have to say about John, whose gospel was
sometimes considered suspect because he talked about locations that couldn't be verified.
Some scholars charged that since he failed to get these basic details straight, John must not
have been close to the events of Jesus' life.
That conclusion, however, has been turned upside down in recent years. "There have been
several discoveries that have shown John to be very accurate," McRay pointed out. "For
example, John 5:1-15 records how Jesus healed an invalid by the Pool of Bethesda. John
provides the detail that the pool had five porticoes. For a long time people cited this as anexample of John being inaccurate, because no such place had been found.
"But more recently the pool of Bethesda has been excavated - it lies maybe forty feet below
ground - and sure enough, there were five porticoes, which means colonnaded porches or
walkways, exactly as John described. And you have other discoveries - the pool of Siloam
from John 9:7, Jacob's well from John 4:12, the probable location of the Stone Pavement near
Jaffa Gate where Jesus appeared before Pilate, even Pilate's own identity - all of which have
lent historical credibility to John's gospel."
"So this challenges the allegation that the gospel of John was written so long after Jesus that
it can't possibly be accurate," I said.
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 9/24
"Most definitely," he replied. (Strobel, The Case for Christ - A Journalist's Personal
Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus [Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, MI,
1998; ISBN: 0-310-20930-7], p. 99)
Finally, John Elder states emphatically, "Nowhere has archaeological evidence refuted the
Bible as history." (Elder, Prophets, Idols And Diggers, p. 16)
The Internal Evidence
The evidence within the NT documents also affirms the early composition of the New
Testament.
The Authors Claimed That They Were Recording Eyewitness Testimony:
The writers claimed that they were either eyewitnesses or personally knew the eyewitnesses.
For instance, Luke claims to have carefully investigated everything handed down to him from
the eyewitnesses:
"Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among
us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses
and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated
everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account
for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you
have been taught." Luke 1:1-4
Luke also was Paul’s traveling companion who had also met James the brother of the Lord
and the elders of the Jerusalem Church:
"After we had torn ourselves away from them, we put out to sea and sailed straight to Cos.
The next day we went to Rhodes and from there to Patara. We found a ship crossing over to
Phoenicia, went on board and set sail. After sighting Cyprus and passing to the south of it, we
sailed on to Syria. We landed at Tyre, where our ship was to unload its cargo. Finding the
disciples there, we stayed with them seven days. Through the Spirit they urged Paul not to go
on to Jerusalem. But when our time was up, we left and continued on our way. All the
disciples and their wives and children accompanied us out of the city, and there on the beach
we knelt to pray. After saying good-by to each other, we went aboard the ship, and theyreturned home. We continued our voyage from Tyre and landed at Ptolemais, where we
greeted the brothers and stayed with them for a day. Leaving the next day, we reached
Caesarea and stayed at the house of Philip the evangelist, one of the Seven. He had four
unmarried daughters who prophesied. After we had been there a number of days, a prophet
named Agabus came down from Judea. Coming over to us, he took Paul's belt, tied his own
hands and feet with it and said, "The Holy Spirit says, `In this way the Jews of Jerusalem will
bind the owner of this belt and will hand him over to the Gentiles.'" When we heard this, we
and the people there pleaded with Paul not to go up to Jerusalem. Then Paul answered, "Why
are you weeping and breaking my heart? I am ready not only to be bound, but also to die in
Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus." When he would not be dissuaded, we gave up
and said, "The Lord's will be done." After this, we got ready and went up to Jerusalem. Someof the disciples from Caesarea accompanied us and brought us to the home of Mnason, where
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 10/24
we were to stay. He was a man from Cyprus and one of the early disciples. When we
arrived at Jerusalem, the brothers received us warmly. The next day Paul and the rest of
us went to see James, and all the elders were present . Paul greeted them and reported in
detail what God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. When they heard this,
they praised God. Then they said to Paul: "You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews
have believed, and all of them are zealous for the law." Acts 21:1-20
Luke also knew Mark:
"When this had dawned on him, he went to the house of Mary the mother of John, also called
Mark, where many people had gathered and were praying." Acts 12:12
In fact, Luke also records that Mark caused a rift between Paul and Barnabas due to the fact
that Mark had left them on one missionary journey to go back home. (cf. Acts 13:5, 13;
15:36-41)
Paul in his epistles mentions not only Luke, but Mark as well:
"My fellow prisoner Aristarchus sends you his greetings, as does Mark, the cousin of
Barnabas. (You have received instructions about him; if he comes to you, welcome him.)…
Our dear friend Luke, the doctor, and Demas send greetings." Colossians 4:10, 14
Incidentally, Paul supplies additional information as to why Barnabas would want Mark to go
with them on their missionary journey even after the latter had abandoned them. Barnabas
and Mark were cousins! Paul also mentions that both Mark and Luke were with him at the
same time, implying that the two knew each other.
"Only Luke is with me. Get Mark and bring him with you, because he is helpful to me in
my ministry." 2 Timothy 4:11
The Apostle Peter mentions both Mark and Paul in his writings:
"She who is in Babylon, chosen together with you, sends you her greetings, and so does my
son Mark." 1 Peter 5:13
"Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, JUST AS OUR DEAR BROTHER
PAUL ALSO WROTE YOU WITH THE WISDOM THAT GOD GAVE HIM. His letters
contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort,AS THEY DO OTHER SCRIPTURES, to their own destruction." 2 Peter 3:15-16
Whether one accepts Petrine authorship or not, this is evidence of the early acceptance of
some, if not all, of Paul's writings as Scripture. Being conservatives, we affirm Petrine
authorship and hence believe that Peter spoke highly of Paul and considered the latter’s
writings to be inspired by God. In fact, Peter personally testifies in this very same epistle that
he had seen Jesus glorified before his very eyes:
"We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming
of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received honor
and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying,
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 11/24
‘This is my son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.’ We ourselves heard this voice
that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain." 2 Peter 1:16-18
Another disciple, John, opens up his first epistle with the claim of being an eyewitness to the
life of the historical Jesus:
"That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our
own eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched - this we proclaim
concerning the Word of life. The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we
proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and appeared to us. We
proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with
us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. We write this to
make our joy complete." 1 John 1:1-4
The Apostles also appealed to hostile eyewitnesses for verification of their claims:
"Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you bymiracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves
know. This man was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you,
with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross. But God raised
him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death
to keep its hold on him." Acts 2:22-24
"Why should any of you consider it incredible that God raises the dead? I too was
convinced that I ought to do all that was possible to oppose the name of Jesus of Nazareth.
And that is just what I did in Jerusalem. On the authority of the chief priests I put many of the
saints in prison, and when they were put to death, I cast my vote against them. Many a time I
went from one synagogue to another to have them punished, and I tried to force them to
blaspheme. In my obsession against them, I even went to foreign cities to persecute them.
"On one of these journeys I was going to Damascus with the authority and commission of the
chief priests. About noon, O king, as I was on the road, I saw a light from heaven, brighter
than the sun, blazing around me and my companions. We all fell to the ground, and I heard a
voice saying to me in Aramaic, [1] `Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It is hard for you
to kick against the goads.' "Then I asked, `Who are you, Lord?' "`I am Jesus, whom you are
persecuting,' the Lord replied. ‘Now get up and stand on your feet. I have appeared to you to
appoint you as a servant and as a witness of what you have seen of me and what I will show
you. I will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles. I am sending you to them
to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God,so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by
faith in me.' "So then, King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the vision from heaven. First to
those in Damascus, then to those in Jerusalem and in all Judea, and to the Gentiles also, I
preached that they should repent and turn to God and prove their repentance by their deeds.
That is why the Jews seized me in the temple courts and tried to kill me. But I have had God's
help to this very day, and so I stand here and testify to small and great alike. I am saying
nothing beyond what the prophets and Moses said would happen- that the Christ [2] would
suffer and, as the first to rise from the dead, would proclaim light to his own people and to
the Gentiles." At this point Festus interrupted Paul's defense. "You are out of your mind,
Paul!" he shouted. "Your great learning is driving you insane." "I am not insane, most
excellent Festus," Paul replied. "What I am saying is true and reasonable. The king is familiarwith these things, and I can speak freely to him. I am convinced that none of this has
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 12/24
escaped his notice, because it was not done in a corner. King Agrippa, do you believe the
prophets? I know you do." Then Agrippa said to Paul, "Do you think that in such a short time
you can persuade me to be a Christian?" Paul replied, "Short time or long-I pray God
that not only you but all who are listening to me today may become what I am, except
for these chains." Acts 26:8-29
It would have been impossible for the Apostles to appeal to hostile Jews and Roman
authorities for the verification of the resurrection and get away with it had the resurrection
not occurred.
Finally, the NT documents indicate that there were eyewitnesses present for nearly every
moment of Jesus’ final hours and eventual resurrection:
There were eyewitnesses present at Jesus’ arrest. (cf. Mt. 26:47-56; Luke 22:44-54;
John 18:1-13)
There were eyewitnesses present at Jesus’ trial. (cf. John 18:15-28; Luke 22:61-62)
There were eyewitnesses at the cross. (cf. Mark 15:40-41; John 19:25-27) There were eyewitnesses to his burial. (cf. John 19:38-42)
There were eyewitnesses who saw the empty tomb. (cf. Matthew 28:11-15; John 20:1-
7)
Finally, there were eyewitnesses who testified that they had seen Jesus alive from the
dead, and who were willing to die for their claim. (cf. Luke 24:36-46; Acts 1:1-5; 1
Corinthians 15:3-8- more on this passage later)
Evidence For Early Dating:
The Gospels furnish evidence that attests to the fact that some of the books were definitely
written before the year A.D. 70.
Mark
Mark mentions the high priest without naming him. (cf. Mark 14:60-63) According to the
other writers, the high priest at the time of Jesus’ public ministry was Caiaphas. (cf. Matthew
26:57) Caiaphas was high priest from A.D. 18-37. This presumes that Mark’s audience would
have automatically known to which high priest he was alluding to, affirming that the tradition
underlying this gospel is very early, possibly no later than A.D. 40.
Mark also mentions Alexander and Rufus and presumes that his audience would have known
who these gentlemen were:
"A certain man from Cyrene, Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus, was passing by on
his way in from the country, and they forced him to carry the cross." Mark 15:21
Church Tradition indicates that Mark composed his Gospel in Rome. Interestingly, Paul in
his letter to the Romans dated approximately at A.D. 57 mentions a person named Rufus:
"Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord, and his mother, who has been a mother to me, too."
Romans 16:13
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 13/24
This is possibly the same Rufus mentioned by Mark.
Luke
The consensus of NT scholarship agree that Luke-Acts were authored by the same person. A
great portion of the book of Acts centers on Jerusalem, the Temple, Paul’s conversion and hismissionary activities. The author also mentions the deaths of Stephen (Acts 7:51-8:1) and
James, the brother of John (Acts 12:2).
Interestingly, the author does not mention the deaths of James the brother of the Lord (A.D.
62), Peter (A.D. 65-68), and Paul (A.D. 67-68). He also does not mention the burning of
Rome and the persecution of Christians there (A.D. 64) or the destruction of the Temple
(A.D. 70) but ends at Paul’s imprisonment at Rome (A.D. 63).
It seems rather stranger that the author would choose to omit such information had he in fact
been writing after these events had already taken place. This seems to strongly support the
fact that the book must have been written no later than A.D. 63.
In fact, the apostle Paul actually quotes from the Gospel of Luke:
"For the SCRIPTURE says, 'Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain,' and 'The
worker deserves his wages.'" 1 Timothy 5:18
Paul quotes Deuteronomy 25:4. The second quote is from Luke 10:7:
"Stay in that house, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for THE WORKER
DESERVES HIS WAGES. Do not move around from house to house."
Paul quotes Luke and places it on the same level of authority of Moses’ writings! The
consensus of scholars agree that Luke was the last of the synoptic gospels to be written,
implying that all three were in circulation at the time of Paul's writing, which some scholars
date at approximately 61-65 AD. This argues the fact that Luke must have been written
between 55-60 A.D. with Acts shortly following.
John
The Gospel of John provides several lines of evidence supporting its early dating. The first is
John 5:2
"Now there IS in Jerusalem near the Sheep Gate a pool, which in Aramaic is called Bethesda
and which is surrounded by five covered colonnades."
John doesn’t say that there "was" a pool, but that there still "is." This suggests that John’s
Gospel was written before the destruction of the Temple, and hence the destruction of the
pool itself, or that the material underlying John's Gospel is quite early.
John also records an incident, which seemingly has no historical value other than a
recollection, which only an eyewitness would know:
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 14/24
"So Peter and the other disciple started for the tomb. Both were running, but the other
disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. He bent over and looked in at the strips
of linen lying there but did not go in. Then Simon Peter, who was behind him, arrived and
went into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying there, as well as the burial cloth that had
been around Jesus' head. The cloth was folded up by itself, separate from the linen.
Finally the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went inside. He saw andbelieved." John 20:3-8
How would the author have known these pieces of incidental information if he were not an
eyewitness or at least recording the testimony of an eyewitness?
The NIV Study Bible furnishes additional evidence for the early dating of the Gospel of John:
"The author is the apostle John…'the disciple whom Jesus loved' (13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7,
20, 24). He was prominent in the early church but is not mentioned by name in this Gospel -
which would be natural if he wrote it, but hard to explain otherwise. The author knew
Jewish life well, as seen from references to popular Messianic speculations (e.g., 1:20-21;7:40-42), to the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9), and to Jewish customs,
such as the duty of circumcision on the eighth day taking precedence over the
prohibition of working on the Sabbath ... He knew the geography of Palestine, locating
Bethany about 15 stadia (about two miles) from Jerusalem (11:18) and Cana, a village
not referred to in any earlier writing known to us (2:1; 21:2). The gospel of John has
many touches that were obviously based on the recollections of an eyewitness- such as the
house at Bethany being filled with the fragrance of the broken perfume jar (12:3). Early
writers such as Irenaeus and Tertullian say that John wrote this Gospel, and all the evidence
agrees ..."
The Dictionary of the Bible by John L. McKenzie continues to say in relation to the evidence
furnished by the Dead Sea Scrolls and its effect on the dating of John:
The question is now affected by the relations of Jn with Qumran* documents; these have
more affinities with Jn than any other NT book, and this seriously questions the
authorship of Jn. Many critics have questioned the authorship of Jn because they thought the
Gospel was the product of Hellenistic thought rather than Jewish thought; specifically,
elements of Hellenistic-Oriental mysticism or mystery* religion, or Syrian or Iranian
Gnosticism were proposed. Even before the discovery of the Qumran documents many
studies had shown that the roots of the thought of Jn are satisfactorily shown in the OT;
cf separate articles on theological topics. The affinities of Jn with Qumran go far toexclude anything but a Palestinian origin of the Gospel. If this be accepted, the question of
the date becomes urgent once more.
If Jn is the most Jewish rather than the least Jewish of the Gospels, it becomes doubtful that
it is the latest. If it is to be dated at the latest before 70 . It is probably earlier than both
Lk and Gk Mt, and possibly early as Mk ..." (McKenzie, Dictionary of the Bible
[Touchstone Book; New York, NY 1995], p. 449)
Matthew
The Gospel of Matthew gives us some hints that it is an eyewitness document. One such hintcomes from Matthew 27:3-8:
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 15/24
"When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with
remorse and returned the thirty silver coins to the chief priests and the elders. ‘I have sinned,’
he said, ‘for I have betrayed innocent blood.’ ‘What is that to us?’ they replied. ‘That's your
responsibility.’ Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and
hanged himself. The chief priests picked up the coins and said, ‘It is against the law to put
this into the treasury, since it is blood money.’ So they decided to use the money to buy thepotter's field as a burial place for foreigners. That is why it has been called the Field of
Blood TO THIS DAY."
The fact that the field was still known to Matthew’s readers presumes that Matthew was
writing to eyewitnesses who could have gone to the site themselves and personally verified
whether such a place existed.
Matthew records another tradition that had also been circulating during his time:
"While the women were on their way, some of the guards went into the city and reported to
the chief priests everything that had happened. When the chief priests had met with the eldersand devised a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money, telling them, "You are to
say, `His disciples came during the night and stole him away while we were asleep.' If this
report gets to the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble." So the soldiers
took the money and did as they were instructed. And this story has been widely circulated
among the Jews to this very day." Matthew 28:11-15
If the results on the early dating of the Magdelene Papyrus are accepted, this affirms that
Matthew was originally written in the early fifties. Even if we accept the later dating of the
liberal scholars which places the Gospel sometime after A.D. 70 the tradition itself definitely
precedes the composition of Matthew. This implies that within forty years of Jesus’ death and
resurrection, a rumor had been circulating that the Apostles had stolen the body. This
indirectly affirms that the tomb was in fact empty! The claim that the body had been stolen
presumes that there was no corpse lying in Jesus’ grave.
Paul
Writing to the Corinthian Church in A.D. 55, Paul appeals to a tradition that he had
previously received and had passed down orally to the Corinthians when visiting them for the
first time:
"For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sinsaccording to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according
to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he
appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are
still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the
apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born." 1 Corinthians
15:3-8
Paul not only passes on a tradition that he had previously received before A.D. 55, but also
appeals to nearly 500 eyewitnesses to the resurrection of Jesus that were still alive at the time
of his writing!
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 16/24
The preceding lines of evidence led men like John A.T. Robinson in his book, Redating the
New Testament , to affirm that all the NT books were completed before 70 A.D. The late
William F. Albright, considered to be one of the world's foremost archaeologists, commented
on the composition of the New Testament:
We can already say emphatically that there is no longer any solid basis for dating any book of the New Testament after about A.D. 80, two full generations before the date between 130 and
150 given by the more radical New Testament critics of today. (Josh McDowell & Bill
Wilson, He Walked Among Us- Evidence For The Historical Jesus [Thomas Nelson
Publishers; Nashville, TN, 1993], p. 110 emphasis ours)
Albright also went on to say:
In my opinion, every book of the New Testament was written by a baptized Jew in the forties
and eighties of the first century A.D. (very probably sometime between about A.D. 50 and
75)." (Ibid.)
Critics who concur that the books of the New Testament, including John, are historically
accurate include Tübingen's Dr. Peter Stuhlmacher. "As a Western Scripture scholar," stated
Dr. Stuhlmacher, "I am inclined to doubt these [gospel] stories, but as a historian I am
obliged to take them as reliable." (Ibid.)
He also says, "The biblical texts as they stand are the best hypothesis we have until now to
explain what really happened." (Ibid.)
Four Additional Lines of Evidence Supporting the Historicity of the Resurrection
There are essentially four established facts which the consensus of NT scholars universally
accept that affirms the empty tomb, and hence the resurrection. They are:
Fact 1: After the crucifixion, Jesus was buried by Joseph of Arimathea in his own
personal tomb.
NT researchers have established this fact on the basis of the following evidence:
The oldest Christian traditions attest that Jesus was buried. (cf. 1 Cor. 15:4; the
tradition underlying Mark) It seems highly unlikely that Christians would have invented the story of Joseph of
Arimathea, especially since the Gospels purport that Joseph was a member of the
Sanhedrin, which had earlier condemned Jesus to death. It would have been highly
improbable for the Gospel traditions to pass off Joseph as an actual member of the
Jewish ruling council in light of the fact that these traditions were circulating at the
same time the ruling council was still in existence.
The burial story lacks any traces of legendary development which were commonly
used in narrating mythical events.
No competing burial story exists which would serve to challenge the credibility of the
Gospel traditions. The earliest evidence suggests that the only burial story in
circulation amongst the Christians is that of Joseph of Arimathea.
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 17/24
John A.T. Robinson, himself a liberal, admits that the burial of Jesus is one of the best-
attested facts on the historical Jesus. In refutation of those who denied the entombment of
Jesus, Robinson stated that the burial of Jesus "is one of the earliest and best-attested facts
about Jesus." (The Human Face of God [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1973], p. 131)
Fact 2: On that first Easter Sunday, a group of women found the tomb of Jesus empty.
There are a number of reasons why most scholars accept this fact.
The empty tomb story is found in the oldest Christian traditions (the source material
used by Mark; the allusion to the empty tomb by Paul in 1 Cor. 15:3-5).
The discovery of the empty tomb lacks any legendary embellishments. The Gospels
do not record how Christ rose from the dead, but simply state that the tomb was found
empty.
The curious fact that it was a group of women who found the empty tomb strongly
argues for authenticity. This is due to the fact that in first century Palestine, a
woman’s testimony was considered useless. Why would the Evangelists have womendiscovering the empty tomb if they wanted to convince their audience of the
historicity of the resurrection? This is perhaps one of the reasons why Paul does not
include the women in his list of eyewitnesses to the resurrection in 1 Cor. 15:3-8.
As we had indicated earlier, the early Jewish allegation that the disciples had stolen
the body presupposes that the body was missing from the tomb.
Jacob Kremer, an Austrian specialist in the resurrection, states that "by far, most scholars
hold firmly to the reliability of the biblical statements concerning the empty tomb." ( Die
Osterevangelien: Geschichten um Geschichte [Stuttgart Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1977], pp.
49-50)
Fact 3: On multiple occasions and under different circumstances various individuals
and groups experienced appearances of Jesus being alive after his death.
Three specific reasons universally accepted by NT Scholars support the fact that these
appearances did occur.
The list of eyewitnesses to Jesus’ postresurrection appearances as quoted by Paul
guarantees that these appearances occurred. (cf. 1 Cor. 15:5-7) This is based on the
fact that the great majority of these eyewitnesses, nearly 500 individuals, were still
alive when Paul wrote this down. The Gospel traditions provide multiple, independent attestation for the appearances of
Christ.
Researchers have discovered certain signs of historical credibility in specific
appearances - i.e., the unexpected activity of the disciples fishing prior to Jesus’
appearance by the Lake of Tiberias, and the conversion of James and Paul, two
skeptics.
The late Norm Perrin, former New Testament scholar at the University of Chicago, summed
up the view of the consensus of NT scholarship:
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 18/24
"The more we study the tradition with regard to the appearances, the firmer the rock begins to
appear upon which they are based." (Perrin, The Resurrection according to Matthew, Mark,
and Luke [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977], p. 80)
Fact 4: The first followers believed that Jesus had been raised from the dead despite the
fact that they had no reason to believe this.
The reason for the disciples not having any reason to believe that their Messiah had been
raised include:
Their leader was dead. The Jews had no belief in a dying and rising Messiah since
they believed that the Messiah would reign forever.
According to the Law, Jesus’ execution was an indication that he was a criminal and a
blasphemer who had fallen under the curse of God. To believe that Jesus was the
Messiah in light of his shameful death would have been something impossible for the
disciples to accept.
Finally, the Jews had no prior belief that a single individual would be raised from thedead to an immortal life, especially on the third day. The Jews believed in a general
resurrection where the entire nation would be raised to life.
Yet, the disciples both believed and were willing to die for the fact that Jesus had been raised
from the dead. C. F. D. Moule of Cambridge rightly concluded that we have a belief for
which no prior historical influence can account. The only explanation that makes sense in
light of the data is that Jesus did in fact rise from the dead. (Moule and Don Cupitt, "The
Resurrection: A Disagreement," Theology, p. 75 [1972]: 507-19; Moule, The Phenomenon of
the New Testament , Studies in Biblical Theology, 2 series, no. 1 [Naperville, Ill.: Alec R.
Allenson, 1967], pp. 3, 13)
The Early Church on the Inspiration of the New Testament:
As we have already noted, we have in our possession the writings of the Apostles’ disciples
and their followers. It is interesting to read that not only did they quote extensively from the
NT documents, but they also viewed the writings on the same level of authority and
inspiration as that of the OT books. Let us proceed to the Church Fathers:
"For as there are four quarters of the world in which we live, and four universal winds [these
two comments refer to N, S, E, W], and as the Church is dispersed over all the earth, and thegospel is the pillar and base of the Church and breath of life, so it is natural that it should
have FOUR PILLARS ... [God] has given us the gospel in FOURFOLD FORM, BUT HELD
TOGETHER BY ONE SPIRIT." Irenaeus, d. 180 A.D. [follower of Polycarp disciple of the
Apostle John]. (Josh McDowell , Evidence That Demands A Verdict , Vol. I [San Bernardino,
CA: Here's Life, 1972], pp. 63-64)
"Take up the epistle of the blessed apostle Paul. What did he write to you Corinthians) at the
time when the Gospel first began to be preached? Truly, he wrote to you UNDER THE
INSPIRATION OF THE SPIRIT." Clement of Rome 96 A.D. (David W. Bercot, ed., A
Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs [Hendrickson Publishers, Massachusetts, 1998], p. 601)
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 19/24
"The apostle has used the same word in writing. For he was guided, of course, BY THE
SAME SPIRIT BY WHOM THE BOOK OF GENESIS WAS DRAWN UP- AS WERE ALL
THE DIVINE SCRIPTURES." Tertullian, 198 A.D. (Ibid., p. 602)
"Although different matters are taught us in the various books of the Gospels, there is not
difference as regards the faith of believers. For in all of them, all things are related UNDERONE IMPERIAL SPIRIT." Muratorian Fragment, 200 A.D. (Ibid.)
"In addition for the proof of our statements, we take the testimonies from that which is called
the Old Testament and that which is called the New- WHICH WE BELIEVE TO BE
DIVINE WRITINGS." Origen, 225 A.D.
This clearly indicates that from the inception of the writings one can find support for the
Church's view of both the authority and inspiration of most, if not all, of the NT books.
Early Non-Christian References to Jesus
Thallus (c. A. D. 50-75):
A third-century Christian historian, Julius Africanus, composed a History of the World down
to around ad. 220 in five volumes. In one of the surviving fragments, Julius discussed the
three-hour darkness which occurred at the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. Matthew 27:45) and
makes this comment:
In the third book of his history, Thallus calls this darkness an eclipse of the sun - wrongly
in my opinion. (5.50)
(NOTE: For a more detailed outline on the authenticity of Thallus and Africanus we
recommend the following articles at the Christian Thinktank: [1] and [2])
Pliny the Younger (c. A.D. 62-113):
Governor of Bithynia in northwestern Turkey, writing a letter to the emperor Trajan about the
Christian movement, dated A.D. 111:
"I have never been present at an examination of Christians. Consequently, I do not know the
nature of the extent of the punishments usually meted out to them, nor the grounds of startingan investigation and how far it should be pressed ... I have asked them if they are Christians,
and if they admit it, I repeat the question a second and third time, with a warning of the
punishment awaiting them. If they persist, I order them to be led away for execution; for,
whatever the nature of their admission, I am convinced that their stubbornness and
unshakable obstinacy ought not to go unpunished ... They also declared that the sum total of
their guilt or error to be no more than this: they had met regularly before dawn on a fixed
day to chant verses alternately amongst themselves in honor of Christ as if to a god, and
also bind themselves by oath, not for any criminal purpose, but to abstain from theft,
robbery, and adultery ... This made me decide that it was all the more necessary to extract
the truth by torture from two slave-women whom they call deaconesses. I found nothing but a
degenerate sort of cult carried to extravagant lengths."
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 20/24
Lucian of Samosata, Second-century Satirist:
Lucian speaks scornfully of Christ and the Christians, connecting them with the synagogues
of Palestine alluding to Christ as,
"the man who was crucified in Palestine because he introduced this new cult into the world...Furthermore, their first lawgiver persuaded them that they were all brothers one of another
after they have transgressed once for all by denying the Greek gods and worshipping the
crucified sophist Himself and living under His laws."
Cornelius Tacitus (c. A. D. 55-117):
Roman historian writing in A.D. 115 on Emperor Nero’s persecution of Christians in the year
A.D. 64:
"But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiation of the gods did
not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order. Consequently,to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a
class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom
the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands
of one of its procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition thus
checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil,
but even Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find
their center and become popular ..."
The only superstition that had broken out from Judea to Rome was the Christian claim that on
the third day the crucified Christ had been resurrected from the dead.
Flavius Josephus (b. A. D. 37):
A first-century historian became a Pharisee at the age of 19 and at the age of 29 was
commander of the Jewish forces in Galilee. Being captured by the Romans, he was attached
to their headquarters. Josephus wrote several works in Greek: an autobiographical Life;
Contra Gekum, an apologetic treatise on Judaism; an eyewitness account of the revolt against
Rome (A. D. 66-74), titled The Jewish War and a history of the Jewish people from Adam to
his time, called the Antiquities.
It comes as no surprise to find Josephus writing on the ministry of Jesus Christ, called theTestimonium Flavianum:
"Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it is lawful to call him a man, for he was
a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew
over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ, and when
Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned Him to the
cross, those that loved Him at the first did not forsake Him; For He appeared to them
alive again in the third day; and the divine prophets had foretold these and countless other
wonderful things concerning Him. And the tribe of Christians so named from Him are not
extinct at this day." ( Antiquities, xviii. 33.)
The following is a tenth-century Arabic version of the Testimonium:
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 21/24
"At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And His conduct was good, and
[He] was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations
became His disciples. Pilate condemned Him to be crucified and to die. And those who
had become His disciples did not abandon His discipleship. They reported that He had
appeared to them three days after His crucifixion and that He was alive; accordingly, He
was perhaps the Messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders."
Many scholars attacked this passage as nothing more than a Christian forgery due its pro-
Christian statements. Others, however, agree that the reference has an authentic core to it,
despite its seemingly pro-Christian insertions. New Testament scholar Edwin M. Yamauchi
explains that although there is obvious Christian terminology used throughout, there are a
number of factors that point to a Josephan style of writing:
1. Jesus is called a "wise man." Though the phrase is complimentary, it is less than one
would expect from Christians.
2. "For he was one who wrought surprising feats." This is not necessarily a statement
that could only have come from a Christian.3. "He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks" is simply an observation.
4. "Those who had in the first place come to love him did not give up their affection for
him," confirms to Josephus’ characteristic style.
5. "and the tribe of the Christians, so-called after him, has till this day not disappeared."
Most scholars would agree that the word phylon "tribe", is not a typically Christian
expression. (Michael J. Wilkins and J.P. Moreland, Jesus Under Fire: Modern
Scholarship Reinvents the Historical Jesus, p. 213)
Renowned Jewish scholar Geza Vermes also believes that the Testimonium originates fromJosephus, albeit with Christian additions. Vermes demonstrates that the expressions ‘wise
man’ and a ‘performer of astonishing deeds’ are thoroughly Josephan in style:
(1) The form of the description of Jesus as sophos aner and paradoxon ergon poietes, when
compared with the presentation of other personalities, biblical and post-biblical, strikes me
as genuinely Josephan. King Solomon is referred to as ‘a wise man possessing every virtue’
(andri sopho kai pasan arêten echonti) ( Ant . viii 53). The prophet Elisha was ‘a man
renowned for righteousness’ (aner epi dikaiosune diaboetos) who performed paradoxa erga
( Ant . ix 182). Daniel, in turn, is portrayed as ‘a wise man and skilful in discovering things
beyond man’s power’ (sophos aner kai deinos heurein ta anechana) ( Ant . x 237). A little
later he appears as ‘a good and just man’ (aner agathos kai dikaios) ( Ant . x 246). Ezra is said
to have been ‘a just man who enjoyed the good opinion of the masses’ (dikaios aner kaidoxes apolauon agathes para to plethei) ( Ant . xi 121). Among post-biblical personalities,
Honi-Onias is called ‘a just man and beloved of God’ (dikaios aner kai theophiles) ( Ant . xiv22), and Samaias ‘a just man’ (dikaios aner ) ( Ant . xiv 172). John the Baptist is introduced as
‘a good man’ (agathos aner ) who ‘exhorted the Jews to lead righteous lives, to practice
justice towards their fellows and piety towards God’ ( Ant . xviii 117). As for the leading
Pharisee at the time of the outbreak of the first revolution, Simeon ben Gamaliel, he is
presented as ‘a man highly gifted with intelligence and judgment’ (aner pleres suneseos kai
logismou) (Vita 192) ...
In brief, there seems to be no stylistic or historical argument that might be marshaled against
the authenticity of the two phrases in question. In fact, the clause that follows ‘wise man’,viz. ‘if indeed one might call him a man’ (eige andra auton legein chre), which is generally
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 22/24
recognized as an interpolation, seems to support - as Paul Winter has aptly pointed out - the
originality of sophos aner , an idiom which in the mind of a later Christian editor required
further qualification.
(2) In addition to appearing prima facie to be Josephan, closer analysis of sophos aner
and paradoxon ergon poeites points to the improbability of their later Christianprovenance. To begin with, the title ‘wise man’ has no New Testament roots, and in the
absence of such an authoritative backing it is, I think, totally unfit to express the kind of
elevated theological notion that a forger would have intended to introduce into Josephus’ text.
It would have been meaningless to invent a testimony that did not support the belief of
the interpolator. But not only does it fail to convey the idea of the divine Christ of the
church; it actually conflicts in a sense with New Testament terminology. Jesus is
admittedly twice identified by Paul in I Cor. 1:24 and 30 with the abstract ‘wisdom of God’,
but the adjective sophos as applied to men in the same chapter (1:18-31) carries a pejorative
connotation. Furthermore, on the only occasion where the Gospels put this word into the
mouth of Jesus, ‘the wise’ are unfavourably compared to ‘babes’ (nepioi) (Matt. 11:25; Luke
10:21). In the few instances where the term sophos is employed positively, it relates toChristian teachers, but never to Jesus himself . (Vermes, Jesus In His Jewish Context
[Fortress Press Minneapolis, 2003], pp. 92-93; bold emphasis ours)
Even the radical liberal NT scholar and Jesus Seminar co-founder and member, John
Dominic Crossan, believes that both the Testimonium and Tacitus’ statement are basically
authentic early witnesses to Jesus. Crossan writes:
Jesus’ death by execution under Pontius Pilate is as sure as anything historical can ever be.
For, if no follower of Jesus had written anything for one hundred years after his crucifixion,
we would still know about him from two authors not among supporters. Their names are
Flavius Josephus and Cornelius Tacitus ... We have, in other words, not just Christian
witnesses but one major Jewish and one major pagan historian who both agree on three points
concerning Jesus: there was a movement , there was an execution because of that movement,
but, despite that execution, there was a continuation of the movement.
In describing civil disturbances during Pontius Pilate’s rule over the Jewish homeland’s
southern half between 26 and 36 C.E., Josephus mentions Jesus and followers called
Christians. His text was later preserved under Christian control, and I give their delicate but
deliberate improvements italicized within brackets so that you can ignore them:
About this time there lived Jesus, a wise [if indeed one ought to call him a man]. For he wasone who wrought surprising feats and was teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly.
He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. [ He was the Messiah]. When Pilate, upon
hearing him accused by men of the highest standing amongst us, had condemned him to be
crucified, those who had in the first place come to love him did not give up their affection for
him. [On the third day he appeared to them restored to life, for the prophets of God had
prophesied these and countless other marvelous things about him.] And the tribe of the
Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared. ( Jewish Antiquities 18.63)
(Crossan, Who Killed Jesus? Exposing the Roots of Anti-Semitism in the Gospel Story of The
Death of Jesus [HarperSan Francisco, paperback edition 1996], p. 5)
Josephus also mentions John the Baptist’s ministry and beheading at the request of Salomeduring the birthday feast of Herod Antipas. ( Antiquities, xviii. 116-119) Furthermore, he
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 23/24
mentions James, the Lord’s brother, and the fate which befell him at the hands of the High
Priest Ananus:
"But the younger Ananus who, as we said, received the high priesthood, was a bold
disposition and exceptionally daring; he followed the party of the Sadducees, who were
severe in judgment above all the Jews, as we have already shown. As therefore Ananus wasof such a disposition, he thought he had now a good opportunity, as Festus was now dead,
and Albinus was still on the road; so he assembled a council of judges, and brought before it
the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ, whose name was James, together with
some others, and having accused them as law-breakers, he delivered them over to be stoned.
( Antiquities, xx 9:1)
From the preceding non-Christian sources we discover:
Jesus Christ was worshipped as God.
Christ performed wonderful deeds.
Christ was sentenced to die on a cross by the orders of Pontius Pilate during the reignof Tiberius.
Christ’s followers claimed that he had appeared alive to them after his death,
affirming that he had been resurrected, something considered to be nothing more than
a superstition.
Those who were devoted to him refused to recant their faith, opting instead to die
horrible deaths for the sake of the one they had come to love and adore.
Jesus’ brother was well known even by non-Christians, having been put to death
presumably for his belief that his brother was in fact the Messiah.
In light of the preceding factors, we find that the non-Christian sources are in agreement with
the New Testament portrayal of Jesus Christ. This serves to further establish the authenticity
of the New Testament beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Recommended Reading
The following Books are highly recommended for further study on the historicity of the New
Testament and the resurrection:
Michael Wilkins & J.P. Moreland, eds.
Jesus Under Fire: Modern Scholarship Reinvents the Historical JesusZondervan Publishing House, 256p
Boyd, Gregory A.
Cynic, Sage, or Son of God?
SP Pubs, 1995, ISBN 1-56476-448-6
Gary R Habermas
The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ
Paperback, Published by College Pr Pub Co., June 1996
ISBN: 0899007325 [third revised/enlarged edition of the earlier "The Verdict of History"]
8/4/2019 The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-new-testament-documents-and-the-historicity-of-the-resurrection 24/24
N. Thomas Wright
Jesus and the Victory of God
Augsburg, Fortress Press, 1996, ISBN 0-8006-2682-6
William Lane Craig
Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and ApologeticsCrossway Books, 350p, ISBN 0-89107-764-2
Paul Copan, ed.
Will The Real Jesus Please Stand Up? A Debate between William Lane Craig and John
Dominic Crossan Grand Rapids, MI Baker Books, 1998 ISBN 0-8010-2175-8
John Ankerberg, John Weldon (Contributor)
Ready With an Answer
Harvest House Publishers, Inc., June 1997 ISBN 1565076184
top related