Ladies and gentlemen, will make the notice certisons a fist right here and it will be
now in fireworks and a good Feeling, is it supposed to take Sharp, its finalelapse?
All day.
We'll get started in just a minute.
A New York minute?
An island minute.
A Connecticut minute.
Whatever that is.
Yeah, Brent knows Connecticut minutes, yes.
We don't want to start early, but we'll probably start.
Yeah, he'll come probably.
Yeah, I think so.
Okay.
Welcome back, everyone.
It's good to be here again.
For those of you who don't know me, my name's Tom Schmidt.
And I've been here a few times talking to you about the reliability of the New Testament.
It's kind of a sub-series within our greater series on Scripture.
And a couple weeks ago when I was with you, we talked about the preservation of the New Testament.
And we looked at how the New Testament has been preserved and passed down to us through the generations.
And how this is done carefully and reliably.
And then the next time I was with you, we talked about the canonicity of the New Testament.
And we looked at how the New Testament books were put together.
Who chose what books were in the Bible?
Why are some books in the New Testament, some books not in the New Testament?
We talked about whether there was some kind of conspiracy theory or something like that.
And we saw how God reliably and superintended this whole process to preserve and pass down the New Testament to us.
Today, we're going to talk about the accuracy of the New Testament.
And we're going to see if what the New Testament says is true.
So we know it might have been reliably preserved.
But that doesn't necessarily mean that it contains true things.
So we're going to look at that in our time together this morning.
We'll investigate whether what the New Testament says about Jesus is true and why its claims are factual.
And this pertains especially to the New Testament's central claim that Jesus was crucified, buried, and then resurrected.
So those are some things we'll go over today.
But first, I want to open in a word of prayer.
Father in heaven, we thank you for how you have given your word to us, how you've preserved it and gathered it for us through your saints.
Father, we also thank you for how your word is trustworthy and how you sent your son Jesus to rescue us from our sins.
It's in his mighty name that we pray.
Amen.
All right.
So to begin with, I want to ask a question.
Can we trust that the New Testament is accurate and true?
We sometimes hear accusations that the New Testament is based on myths and folktales, that it's inaccurate and deceptive.
I've heard these claims many times before, sometimes in popular culture, sometimes in the classroom.
I'm sure some of you have heard these claims as well.
And today, what we're going to look at is that the New Testament is not based on rumors or lies or myths.
And indeed, there are several reasons why we can trust its factual claims.
Now, these reasons, they build on one another.
And so we're going to start with perhaps one of the most foundational reasons and then go from there.
So one reason that we can trust that the New Testament is true and accurate is first and foremost because it's based off of eyewitness testimony.
It's not based off of rumor and report or hearsay.
And these eyewitnesses were behind the documents of the New Testament.
And they were in a position to know what Jesus said and did and to report it accurately.
So, for example, John, the disciple of Jesus, says this about Jesus, whom he calls the word of life.
He says,
John tells us here that he's preaching not something that he just heard a rumor about,
but something that he witnessed, that he saw with his eyes, that he touched with his hands, that he heard directly with his own ears.
And Peter, another disciple of Jesus, he tells us the same thing.
For we did not follow cleverly devised tales when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
But we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
Peter says that in his second epistle.
He says much the same thing in his first epistle.
In chapter 5, verse 1, he also adds that he was an eyewitness of the sufferings of Christ.
And other New Testament authors make similar claims.
For instance, Luke, the gospel writer.
He says,
It seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning,
to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus,
so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught.
Theophilus was the person to whom Luke wrote, and Luke tells him that he went to the eyewitnesses,
he investigated everything carefully from the beginning,
so that he, Theophilus, and you all may know the exact truth about what you have been taught.
So we've heard from the Apostle John and the Apostle Peter and Luke the evangelist,
but we have more testimony as well.
We have the testimony from the Apostle Paul.
He gives perhaps the earliest account of the resurrection of Jesus.
He says this,
For I delivered to you as a first importance what I also received,
that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures,
that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,
and that he appeared to Cephas, that's Peter, then to the Twelve.
Then he appeared to more than 500 brothers at one time,
most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep.
Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.
The resurrection of Jesus is the essence of our faith,
and Paul gives his own eyewitness testimony here.
And indeed, the Twelve disciples, the Twelve Apostles of Jesus, they concur.
They say in the book of Acts, chapter 2, verse 32,
This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses.
The fact that the New Testament is based on eyewitness testimony is so well established
that even ancient anti-Christian sources agree.
Now, what do I mean by these ancient anti-Christian sources?
These sources were ancient writers who attacked Christianity in the 2nd through 4th centuries.
They were people like Celsus, Porphyry, Heracles, and Julian the Apostate.
They were highly educated, powerful, extremely hostile to Christianity.
But even when they were attacking the New Testament,
they still attributed its writings to Jesus' disciples.
These ancient skeptics did not believe that the New Testament documents
were written under false names far after the time of Jesus
and were hence based on rumors like some scholars try to maintain today.
They acknowledged that it was the disciples who wrote them.
So if such ancient hostile sources agree
that the disciples were ultimately behind the New Testament documents,
then I think we can safely conclude that the New Testament documents
are not based off of rumor or hearsay.
But I want to ask you something more.
Even if we can be sure that the New Testament is based on eyewitness testimony,
how can we be sure that the eyewitnesses were telling the truth?
We all know that eyewitnesses can lie.
So do we have good reason to think that these eyewitnesses are being truthful
and not fabricating their claims?
Well, we have several reasons to trust the claims of these eyewitnesses.
Firstly, they did not have worldly motives to lie about the resurrection of Jesus.
They did not gain materially from their claims.
They did not gain money or fame.
They did not gain power or earthly benefit
by preaching that Jesus was the Son of God and was resurrected.
Not only does the New Testament testify to this,
but even those ancient critics of Christianity I mentioned before,
like Celsus and Julian the Apostate,
even they agree with this.
In fact, if you read their writings,
they mock the apostles for being poor and uneducated,
for being members of the lower class
and friends with slaves and minority groups.
They knew that the apostles did not gain riches or political power
for following Jesus.
They knew they were impoverished and they mocked them for it.
In fact, far from seeking material gain for their beliefs,
the apostles and the authors of the New Testament,
they knowingly risked persecution and humiliation
and scorn and shame and death.
Indeed, many of the disciples of Jesus were executed for their faith in Jesus
or even tortured.
And when the authorities warned them to stop preaching in the name of Jesus
and threaten them with punishment,
they said this in the book of Acts,
we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard.
Despite all these threats,
they continued to proclaim that Jesus was resurrected.
And just look at the outcome of their lives.
Peter was executed.
Paul executed.
John was exiled as a prisoner to the island of Patmos.
James, his brother, was beheaded.
Matthew executed.
Thaddeus, Nathaniel, James, the brother of Jesus,
they were all executed.
And we have good historical data to support these outcomes.
And more than this,
we have evidence that many other early Christians suffered the same fate.
The fact that the apostles were terribly persecuted for their belief in the resurrection of Jesus
is so beyond question that, again, as I've said before,
even non-Christian sources agree with this.
They tell us that the apostles were persecuted and executed.
Sometimes they brag about it.
We see this in, for example, the Jewish Talmud, the Jewish historian Josephus.
They both claim that Matthew, that Thaddeus, that Nathaniel and James were executed.
Josephus talks about James and the Jewish Talmud talks about the rest.
Another Jewish document, the Toldot Yeshu,
describes how Jesus was executed,
that his 12 disciples then spread his teaching among the nations,
and that, quote,
they were slain.
And it even criticizes Peter for teaching, quote,
the meek acceptance of suffering.
And the Roman historian Tacitus,
he tells of a persecution of Christians in Rome under Emperor Nero
that sounds exactly like the circumstances under which Peter was executed.
But despite such great persecution,
the apostles and eyewitnesses,
they continued to maintain that Jesus really was resurrected.
These sufferings are not something that so many people would each be likely to endure
for a claim they knew that was a lie.
Instead,
it seems far more likely that the apostles were simply being honest and sincere.
So,
the first reason we can trust the eyewitnesses
is because they don't seem to have worldly motives to lie.
They gained nothing from what they were saying.
And secondly,
they had everything to lose.
They were persecuted for what they said,
yet they preached and continued to preach it.
And this trustworthy character of the apostles,
it was so steadfast that they passed it on down to their own disciples.
Just like Jesus,
the apostles went on to have disciples of their own.
And when we examine the character of these men,
these followers of the apostles,
we see that they also conducted themselves in the same way as Jesus and the apostles did.
They also suffered and were martyred for faith in Jesus.
Take,
for example,
Ignatius of Antioch and Polycarp of Smyrna.
Both were disciples of the apostles.
Both have writings that remain for us to read.
And both of them were executed for their faith in Jesus.
In fact,
let's look at Ignatius specifically.
He was a disciple of Peter,
perhaps also Paul.
And while he was awaiting his execution for being a Christian,
he wrote several letters to churches encouraging them.
And in one letter,
he talks about how Peter witnessed the resurrected Jesus.
Here's what he says.
For Jesus suffered all these things for our sakes in order that we might be saved.
And he truly suffered just as he truly raised himself,
not as unbelievers say.
For I know and believe that he was in the flesh even after the resurrection.
When he came to Peter and those with him,
and he said,
Take hold of me,
handle me,
and see that I am not a disembodied spirit.
And immediately they touched him and believed,
being closely united with his flesh and blood.
For this reason,
they too despised death.
Indeed,
they proved to be greater than death.
And after his resurrection,
he ate and drank with them,
like one who is composed of flesh,
though spiritually he was united with the Father.
Here Ignatius,
the disciple of Peter,
proclaims the resurrection of Jesus.
He says that he knows Jesus appeared to Peter.
And for this reason,
Peter and the apostles despised death.
Why?
Because they had seen the one who had conquered death,
and they knew death had power over them no longer.
And Ignatius,
though a man condemned to die,
he joyfully testifies to this,
just as Peter testified to him.
So let me summarize.
Can we trust that the New Testament is accurate and true?
Well,
yes,
we can.
It's based on eyewitness testimony of the apostles,
not on rumor and report.
And these eyewitnesses are trustworthy,
because they did not stand to gain anything materially from their claims.
They did not have motives to lie about the resurrection.
Rather,
they risked persecution and death.
And in fact,
their own disciples went on to do the very same thing.
And these points are so beyond question,
that even ancient non-Christian sources admit to many of them.
Well,
so far,
I've been talking about how the New Testament writers were in a position to know the facts about Jesus,
and how the New Testament documents were written with a backing of eyewitness testimony.
And I've also shown how we can trust that these eyewitnesses were not lying about what they were saying.
But let's not stop here.
Let's see if we can test the reliability of the eyewitnesses in other ways.
Let's not just trust their character or motives.
Let's see if we can test their truthfulness and accuracy a little more scientifically.
After all,
eyewitnesses might still have accidentally put in false information.
They might have gotten carried away in their great passion.
They might have exaggerated things or convinced themselves of something that wasn't actually true.
Even if the eyewitnesses were sincere,
they might have still been inaccurate.
We all know honest people who make wrong statements.
So let's do a more thorough investigation here.
Let's forget about character and motives.
Let's see if the New Testament can hold up to good,
old-fashioned, brass tacks, nuts and bolts, historical scrutiny.
And this is what we're going to do.
Throughout the New Testament, the authors make numerous historical claims.
And we can check these claims against the historical record to see if they're true.
So when the New Testament mentions a person or a place or an event,
we can check that claim against the historical record to see if the New Testament is accurate.
This is just like in a detective case when the testimony of an eyewitness is checked against the facts
to see if their testimony can be corroborated by the evidence.
And when we subject the New Testament writers to historical scrutiny,
we find that the New Testament authors were indeed accurate
and they were not in the habit of making up information.
Let me show you what I mean.
We'll start with some easy, basic stuff,
and then we'll get to more complicated stuff as we go.
So first of all, the New Testament authors report the existence of several Roman emperors.
And we know from various historical sources
that they correctly identify them in their proper historical context.
And this comes from various lines of evidence like historical reports,
the archaeological record, coins, things like that.
You can see a coin of Emperor Augustus on the screen, which Luke talks about.
Emperor Tiberius is also mentioned by Luke.
There he is.
Emperor Claudius mentioned in the book of Acts.
Herod the Great mentioned in the early part of the Gospel of Matthew.
He's the guy who tried to kill baby Jesus.
Herod Archelaus is also mentioned in Matthew.
Herod Philip, Herod Antipas, Herod Agrippa, Herod Agrippa II.
There's a lot of Herods.
It's hard to get them all straight, but the New Testament does.
And we could go on for other rulers like Arathos IV.
Paul mentions him.
Pontius Pilate.
This is a famous Pontius Pilate stone.
And I know it might be difficult for you to read it,
but on here it says the name Teos Pilatus.
It's missing the P-O-N.
It's missing from the stone.
But anyway, all scholars agree this is an inscription mentioning Pontius Pilate from his time frame.
Yes.
Very quickly, is that like the back of a seat in a theater?
Oh, I don't know where the stone comes from.
I'd have to check, and we may not actually know.
I'd have to see if we know the provenance of it.
When I was in Israel, when we were like in Caesarea by the seat or something like that,
the tour guide pointed to a seat, you know, and they had their names on it.
They were VIP seats.
At that time, I think in 1999, he claimed that this was the first archaeological evidence
because the seat had a righteous name.
So all I know is it's called the Pilate stone.
It is in Israel.
So this is in Israel.
I don't know if that's part of a back of a chair or not,
but we also have lots of other evidence for Pontius Pilate.
It's not just this stone.
He's mentioned in many historical ancient sources outside of the Bible.
Right, he's saying the only part.
Okay, yes, yes, yes.
But if we're honest here, these names that I've been talking about,
they're a little easy to get right.
It's like naming the correct presidents.
It's not too hard to get those right.
So let's do something a little more challenging.
It's good that the New Testament get these folks right,
but let's see what the New Testament authors do with lesser-known figures
whom someone would likely only know about if they were well-informed.
Well, the New Testament authors speak about many people like Bernice,
Drusilla, Judas the Galilean, Festus,
people even like James the brother of Jesus, John the Baptist,
Caiaphas the high priest, Herodias, and her daughter Salome,
and the list goes on.
And when we check the historical record,
we see that all of these folks are mentioned outside of the Bible
by non-Christian sources,
and that the New Testament correctly places every one of them
in their proper historical context.
The New Testament is even correct about a minor person named Erastus,
Paul's fellow partner from Corinth.
And if you go to Corinth today,
you can still see his name emblazoned on one of the paving stones.
Erastus seems to have been one of the ministers of public works.
And I know it might be hard to see,
but the beginning of the E is there,
R-A-S-T-U-S.
The U looks like a V.
Erastus.
How do we know that's the Erastus that Paul would refer to?
Erastus mentions him as a Corinthian minister of,
I think,
of public works,
or maybe of some kind of official.
And we know that when this name was put down,
that that's what the public officials who were responsible for laying these things
and arranging it would put their names on.
So the place matches,
the name matches,
the profession matches,
and the time matches.
A person in the ancient world wouldn't likely know about these things
unless they were actually there
and witnessed many of these people.
And we can even go to the names in the New Testament
of humble peasants and workers.
Even they can be verified.
Now, they can't be verified on an individual basis,
but it turns out that,
but they can be verified statistically.
And let me tell you what I mean.
It turns out that every generation and every location
has a frequency rate in their choice of names.
So when people have children,
they choose certain names,
and every generation has a frequency rate.
So for instance,
in the United States,
100 years ago,
Betty,
Sally,
those were popular names.
Not so popular these days.
We have different names that children tend to have.
And you can line up these statistics,
figure out what names are popular,
look at the frequency rate.
And some scholars have done this
with ancient names from first century Israel.
And they have found
that the frequency rate of those names
matches up with the New Testament's reports
of a lot of Marys
and a lot of Simons.
If you read the New Testament,
you're like,
everybody's named Mary.
Everybody's named Simon.
Well, that's exactly what was going on
in first century Palestine.
And so even those names
can be roughly corroborated.
Now we can also test
the accuracy of the eyewitnesses
in other ways too,
aside from references to people.
We can examine geographic references
in the New Testament.
This map shows dozens of locations
mentioned in the New Testament.
And guess what?
The New Testament correctly locates all of them.
It's even correct about little towns
near and around Jerusalem,
like Arimathea and Bethlehem.
And it's also correct about villages in Galilee,
even tiny fishing villages
around the Sea of Galilee,
like Capernaum.
Remember back then,
folks didn't have maps or atlases
or the internet or encyclopedias
to look up little places like this.
The only way to know about
an insignificant fishing village
was if you were actually there
or you knew someone who was.
And the New Testament gets them right.
And this is in great contrast
to other documents we've mentioned
in past courses,
some of those false gospels.
They will mention villages and towns
that seem to have no bearing
with historical reality.
But let's go even smaller.
The Gospel of John in chapter four
mentions Jacob's well.
Here it is.
The Gospel of John speaks of the pool of Siloam,
where Jesus tells a man to go and wash.
There it is.
The Gospel of John mentions huge stone water jars.
Now, this is kind of strange
because you think of water jars as smaller
and not made out of stone,
made out of clay.
But these are big and made out of stone.
But apparently that's not what they used to do
in first century Judea,
because here we go.
We still have some of them.
John did know what he was talking about.
And we could continue doing this for hours
about New Testament events, customs,
contemporary beliefs,
various historical phenomenon,
and all sorts of other things
that the New Testament reports
is occurring in the first century.
And you'll see that
when the New Testament talks about events,
we're able to historically verify them.
It seems then that the authors
were not in the habit of making up information.
It also implies that
the original New Testament documents
must have been well preserved,
because if later scribes were in the habit
of messing about with them,
then these historical claims
would have tended to have been altered
and therefore would have tended
to not be so precise.
But they are precise.
Now, it must be said
that there are a handful of instances
where historical claims in the New Testament
seem to be contradicted
by what we know from other sources.
And I would say that the most prominent,
the most egregious example of this
is with Theudis the Galilean,
whom Luke mentions in the book of Acts,
chapter 5.
And Luke seems to clearly date this guy
to before 39 AD.
The problem with this
is that the ancient Jewish historian Josephus,
he also mentions Theudis,
but he dates him several decades later.
But rather than concluding
that Luke and the New Testament are wrong,
I would caution us to withhold judgment,
given how accurate the New Testament is elsewhere.
Perhaps there was a second Theudis,
or perhaps Josephus himself was wrong.
And in fact, we know Josephus is often wrong.
Josephus actually talks about,
he wrote multiple books,
and he talks about the same period of time,
three different times,
so you can compare his own reports to one another.
And he contradicts himself several times.
So in fact,
since the advent of modern scholarship,
there's always been some historical claims
in the New Testament
that skeptical scholars dismissed as wrong,
or made up,
or otherwise fictitious.
They would seize on these
and argue
that the New Testament authors
were historically incorrect,
and that they were fabricating information,
and therefore untrustworthy.
But time and again,
later discoveries have proved
the New Testament right,
and the skeptical scholars wrong.
Let me show you what I mean.
Back in the day,
certain scholars believed
that Nicodemus,
who came to Jesus by night
in the Gospel of John,
they believed that he was fabricated
by the Gospel of John.
Some of them claimed
that John must have made up
the name Nicodemus
to function as an allegory,
because Nicodemus
literally means ruler of the people.
And these skeptical scholars
thought that John wanted
to make a kind of greater point
about how even rulers of the people
were coming to Jesus,
so he made up this guy named Nicodemus.
Now John gives six data points
about Nicodemus.
He tells us that Nicodemus
was a member of the ruling class,
that he was a Pharisee,
that he was a teacher of the law,
that he was very wealthy,
that he was associated with Jerusalem,
and that he lived
in the early first century.
And certain scholars thought
that this was nonsense,
and that there was no Nicodemus.
But then,
other scholars
started realizing
that according to
ancient Jewish literature,
there was, in fact,
a rich,
ruling family in Jerusalem
in the first century
that did have Pharisees
and teachers of the law
as members,
and do you know
what name
was popular
for men
in that family?
Nicodemus.
It may also be
that the Jewish Babylonian Talmud
mentions Nicodemus' execution
as a disciple of Jesus.
The Talmud seems,
this is a little tentative,
but the Talmud seems
to use a nickname
for Nicodemus,
a nickname that we know
is used for people
with the name Nicodemus.
So we can't be totally sure
of that one.
But in either case,
no scholar can really
truthfully claim
that Nicodemus never existed
because he seems like
an entirely plausible
historical person.
Let me give you
some more examples.
In the Book of Acts,
Luke tells us
that there was
an empire-wide famine
during the reign
of Emperor Claudius.
For a long time,
scholars dismissed this
as a pious exaggeration.
There was one
or two local famines,
but no famine gripped
the whole Roman Empire
during the reign
of Claudius,
they said.
Yet archaeological excavations
discovered ancient records
on papyrus in Egypt
documenting the annual
flooding of the Nile
when the Nile
would irrigate farmland.
Now, it's important to know
that Egypt was the breadbasket
of the Roman Empire.
That's where they got
most of their food from
when the Nile
would do its annual flood
and irrigate all the farmland.
And it would provide
incredibly fertile ground
for crops.
Well, it turns out
that during the reign
of Claudius,
these papyrus records
document that in one year
the Nile badly overflooded,
which would have invariably
caused the destruction
of the crops of Egypt
and invariably would have caused
a severe famine
throughout the empire.
In fact, one scholar,
Ken Sperber Gap,
he says that the official documents
found amongst the papyri in Egypt,
quote,
so supports Luke's count
of the universal famine
that the accuracy
of the statement
can no longer be challenged.
We can keep going.
The Pool of Bethesda,
mentioned in John chapter 5,
John says that it had five sides,
each equipped
with an overhanging porch.
Now, this is kind of weird.
Normally, when you think of a pool,
you think of four sides
or you think of a circular pool.
And this one is extra special
because each side
had like an overhanging porch.
For a long while,
scholars accused John
of making up
this piece of information
because we had no
archaeological record
of its existence.
Scholars said
that the five porches
were fictitiously crafted
by John
to represent
five stratas of society
or the five books of Moses
or some other thing like that.
But then,
in 1948,
archaeologists found this,
a pool that scholars
now admit
is the Pool of Bethesda
and indeed
had five sides.
The picture is showing
one half of the pool
and the archaeological
reconstruction,
you can see that
it actually is
a four-sided pool,
but then it has
a porch going between it,
making five porches.
So, four on the outside,
one through the middle,
just like John reported.
Or,
we could talk about Galio.
Galio
was the man
to whom Paul
had a trial before
in the book of Acts.
Scholars routinely claim
that Luke's chronology
in the book of Acts
was, quote,
hopeless and false
regarding Paul's trial
before Galio
in Acts chapter 18.
Other scholars insisted
that Luke,
the author,
most likely placed
this trial
somewhere between
51 and 54 AD.
But these scholars
were dismissed.
But then,
in 1913,
this inscription
was found
which mentions Galio
and precisely dates him
to 51 or 52 AD
exactly as Luke claimed.
Here's another one.
Sergius Paulus,
Acts chapter 13,
verse 7.
Another guy
whom Paul preached before.
Scholars for many years
said there was no evidence
that Sergius Paulus
was a proconsul in Cyprus
like Luke claims
in the book of Acts.
But then,
this inscription
was discovered.
And then this one.
And these clearly show
that a Sergius Paulus
was proconsul in Cyprus
sometime in the first century.
Exactly like Luke claims.
Skeptical scholars
also accused Luke
of making up the census
mentioned in Luke chapter 2
when Mary and Joseph
went to Bethlehem
to be registered
for Jesus' birth.
Our historical sources
tell us
that the census
actually happened
years later.
Skeptical scholars
said Luke
was wrong.
But other scholars
thought maybe
there was more
than one census.
But they were ignored.
But then we found
this inscription
which was shown
to clearly speak
about not one census
but many censuses.
And Luke
was vindicated.
The same happened
with Quirinius.
Skeptical scholars
also said that Luke
was wrong about
the governorship
of Quirinius
in Luke chapter 2.
The ancient historian
Josephus
placed his governorship
years later
than Luke did.
Some scholars
tried to solve this
by hypothesizing
that perhaps Quirinius
was governor
more than once.
But this seemed
like special pleading.
But then
this inscription
was deciphered
and then this one
and it showed
that there was
a governor
in the very,
very early part
of the first century A.D.
or the end
of the first century B.C.
there was a governor
of Syria
who did have
two terms
that were not consecutive
and that the most
likely candidate
for this governor
was in fact Quirinius
who therefore
seems to have been
governor more than once.
Luke was right again.
And by the way
that was not
an uncommon thing
in the ancient world.
People were often
being shuffled in and out.
We can say
the same thing
about Luke's reference
to Lysanius the Tetrarch
in Luke chapter 3.
Scholars said
for many years
that Luke
contradicted
the historical record
by placing Lysanius
some 50 or 60 years
after he really existed.
Some faithful scholars
suggested that
maybe there was
more than one
Lysanius the Tetrarch.
But again,
this seemed like
special pleading.
But then in 1912
we found this inscription
and it proved
that there actually
were two
Lysanius the Tetrarchs.
And Luke was right
again.
And once more
that's not all that
unusual in the ancient world.
You'll have someone
who's a ruler
or a governor
or a powerful figure
and they often name
their son the same name
and that son often
goes on
or grandson goes on
to do the same job.
So it's not unusual
to find situations
like this.
You can for instance
see this
with the Roman emperors
where every single
Roman emperor
adopts the name
Augustus or Caesar.
So they all have
the same names
all dozens of them
again and again.
same thing happened
in other parts
of the world too.
All right.
These instances
teach us
that it is
never wise
to bet
against the
historical reliability
of the authors
of the New Testament.
It is true
that Luke
and Josephus
contradict one another
about the dates
of that guy
Theutis
I mentioned to you.
But we may yet
find evidence
that Luke
was right
about Theutis
and that Josephus
was the one
who was wrong
or we may find
that both were right
and there were two
figures of the same name.
After all
it's happened before
hasn't it?
But I have to say
about Theutis
that if it turns out
that Luke
is the one
who's incorrect
would this one
minor error
concerning a minor
marginal figure
really undermine
the overall credibility
of the New Testament
given how historically
reliable it is
with its other claims
especially
its important claims.
Indeed
the historical reliability
of the New Testament
is so strong
that
by some measurements
it gets better
every year.
Just a few years ago
a ring
was found
inscribed
with the name
Pontius Pilate
dating to the first century
in Jerusalem
and this once again
supports the New Testament
narrative
and it once again
bolsters the reliability
of the New Testament.
Like I say though
Pontius Pilate
is a well established
historical figure
even if we were missing
the ring
and the inscription
I showed you
he's mentioned
in many historical sources
other than those.
And this is similar
to what we saw
with the preservation
of the New Testament
where every year
every few years
we make more discoveries
that enhance
our confidence
in the preservation
of the New Testament
the same thing
happens with the accuracy
of the New Testament
also.
Okay
so let me summarize
we can be sure
that the New Testament
is true and accurate
because it is based
off of eyewitness testimony
and those eyewitnesses
were reliable
because they don't
seem to have gained
anything
from their claims
and therefore
had no motive
to lie
in fact
they gained suffering
and persecution
because of their claim
about the resurrection
of Jesus
yet they persisted
in maintaining
that Jesus
actually was resurrected
and furthermore
their disciples
suffered the same things
and even non-Christians
admit to much of this
as we saw with writers
like Celsus
and Porphyry
and Julian the Apostate
and lastly
we've just seen
how we can historically
verify dozens
if not hundreds
of the claims
that the New Testament
writers make
showing that the authors
of the New Testament
were not in the habit
of making up information
but were quite accurate
in their reports
and this even includes
instances
where scholars
charged the New Testament
with being wrong
and sometimes
they would maintain
these claims
for decades
or generations
but time and again
the New Testament
has been proven correct
through various
archaeological
and historical
discoveries
but let's do better
than this
all I've been doing
so far
is showing
that the New Testament
authors made
accurate claims
about mundane
normal
everyday events
and activities
but mundane evidence
gives only so much reason
to believe
super mundane things
the New Testament
is right
regarding normal
natural claims
but what about
supernatural claims
we want
extraordinary evidence
for extraordinary claims
can we
I wonder
can we
corroborate
the miracles
attributed to Jesus
yes I think
we can
this is because
the miracles
of Jesus
were so
impressive
and so indisputable
so beyond doubt
that non-Christians
and even
anti-Christians
admitted
that Jesus
and his disciples
worked miracles
let me show you
what I mean
and
what we're going to do here
is I'm going to
walk you through
some claims
from some
non-Christian writers
about Jesus
and we're going to go
in sort of
reverse chronological order
starting with the latest
and then getting
to the earliest
so we'll start with
a document called
the Toldoth Yeshu
scholars agree
this was probably
compiled
around
600 A.D.
it's a
Jewish account
of Jesus
however
we can track
the information
in the Toldoth Yeshu
and that information
matches up
with early
2nd century
claims about Jesus
made by other
Jewish sources
so in other words
this document
seems to have been
compiled
around 600 A.D.
but it's compiled
from earlier traditions
and those traditions
go way way earlier
if that makes sense
well the Toldoth Yeshu
it's very interesting
it's a highly
negative
account
of Jesus
trying to portray him
as a
terrible
terrible person
but it explicitly
admits
that Jesus
had the power
to raise the dead
and that his
disciple
Peter
was able to
heal
in the name
of Jesus
or this source
the Jewish Talmud
this is earlier
200 to 400 A.D.
again it has
traditions that are
probably even earlier
the Jewish Talmud
speaks about Jesus
and it mentions
that he had the power
to heal people
porphyry
now we're moving
from Jewish
into pagan territory
porphyry
wrote around the year
300 A.D.
we can date him
pretty precisely
and he was a
virulent
anti-Christian writer
he also
was perhaps
the most famous
philosopher
in the Roman Empire
at that time
and he wrote
an entire work
against Christians
he called
for Christians
to be persecuted
but in his writings
he also admitted
that Jesus
worked wonders
just like
the Bible
says
around the same
time
Heracles
was writing
as well
he was not
a philosopher
he was a
Roman governor
he was a very
powerful man
he called for
Christians to be
persecuted
and as a Roman
governor
he actually
had them
arrested
and executed
and he
like Porphyry
also wrote a book
against the Christians
and in this
just like with
Porphyry
he too
acknowledges
that Jesus
seems to have
worked
miracles
and let's
keep going
the Tosephtha
this is an
early Jewish
manual of
traditions
it talks
of a certain
James
whom it
calls
a disciple
of Jesus
who claimed
that he could
heal
in the name
of Jesus
and it
relates a
story
about how
a rabbi
desperately
tried to
get to
James
in order
to be
healed
because
he was
convinced
that James
truly had
this power
or the
oracle
of Hecate
Hecate
was a
goddess
a
Greco-Roman
goddess
and these
oracles
would
give out
statements
people would
come to
them
and make
an offering
and the
oracle
would give
out
advice
and the
oracle
Hecate
confessed
that Jesus
was immortal
it's one of
those oracles
that have been
preserved for
us
Celsus
writing around
the year
175
here's another
anti-Christian
writer
he wrote
an entire
book
against the
Christians
and in it
he acknowledges
that Jesus
worked wonders
and that early
Christians had
authority
over demons
if we go to
the year
137
to 140
Phlegon
is a
Greco-Roman
writer
he's a
chronographer
he's also
the fancy term
is also
a paradoxographer
he liked
cataloging
unusual
mysterious
or supernatural
happenings
and he's
writing in
137
or 140
but he
talks about
a strange
an unusual
darkness
as well as
an earthquake
that occurred
in 33
AD
just like
the gospels
say happened
at the
crucifixion of
Jesus
Phlegon also
says elsewhere
he mentions
Jesus
and he says
that Jesus
correctly predicted
the future
again
just like
the gospels
say
moving earlier
around the year
95
Josephus
he's a
Jewish historian
I've mentioned
his name
several times
he's got
a paragraph
about Jesus
and in it
he says
that Jesus
worked
miracles
and we
could perhaps
go even
a little
earlier
with a guy
named
Thalos
he wrote
between 50
and 100
AD
we're a little
unsure
of his
dates
and he
also reports
an unusual
darkness
and we
don't know
the context
of this
one
so this
one's a
little tentative
but he
seems to
have placed
this
around
the time
or around
the year
of Jesus'
crucifixion
as well
but we
still have
to talk
about
one of
the earliest
critics
of Christianity
and one
of the
greatest
someone
who murdered
Christians
and then
who became
a Christian
himself
and I'm
speaking
of someone
you all
know
of Saul
of Tarsus
he says
in his own
words that he
was trying
to destroy
the followers
of Jesus
but then
Jesus
appeared
to him
and demonstrated
his miraculous
power
and after
this Saul
of Tarsus
changed his
name to
Paul
and he
went on
to write
many of
the letters
of the
New Testament
and there
Paul talks
about how
he was a
persecutor
of Christians
and how
he was a
violent man
and how
he was a
witness of
the resurrected
Jesus
and after
many years
of ministry
and suffering
for the name
of Jesus
Paul was
executed
for his
faith in
Jesus
and we
can say
similar
things
about
others
who did
not
believe
in
Jesus
but then
changed
their
mind
after
Jesus
appeared
to them
people
like James
and Jude
whom the
Bible
testifies
did not
believe
in Jesus
when he
was
ministering
but who
were
persuaded
after
Jesus
was
resurrected
and he
appeared
to them
and these
two men
also went
on to
write
letters
in the
New
Testament
this
is
extraordinary
remember
that
ancient
authors
were
more
than
capable
of
denying
miracles
we see
this
for instance
with
Cicero
with the
Epicureans
with the
Atomists
the followers
of Democritus
with the
Jewish
Sadducees
all of whom
denied many
or even
all
supernatural
things
but Jesus
his
miracles
seem to
have been
so beyond
question
that non-Christians
and even
hostile
anti-Christians
admitted
that they
occurred
and some
of them
even seem
to have
become
Christians
themselves
so can
we trust
that the
New Testament
is true
and accurate
yes we
can
the New
Testament
is based
off of
eyewitness
testimony
and we
can trust
these
eyewitnesses
because they
don't seem
to have
a worldly
motive
to lie
they had
nothing
to gain
in fact
they risked
persecution
for their
claims
and
furthermore
their
own
disciples
suffered
the
same
and on
top of
that
the
claims
of the
eyewitnesses
can be
historically
verified
and we
can even
verify
their
miraculous
claims
and even
non-Christian
sources
admit
to many
of these
facts
but
if
this is
not
enough
for you
then
you
yourself
contest
the
authenticity
of Jesus
miraculous
powers
all
you
have
to
do
is
look
around
the
world
right
now
and
this
is
because
the
prophecies
of Jesus
Christ
contained
in the
New
Testament
are
being
remarkably
and
miraculously
fulfilled
among
us
for example
Jesus
predicted
in Matthew
24
14
he says
this
gospel
of the
kingdom
will be
preached
in the
whole
world
as a
testimony
to
all
nations
and
if
we
examine
our
world
today
we
see
that
there
is
no
other
message
on
earth
that
has
reached
so
many
people
there
is
no
message
that
has
gone
to
so
many
nations
and
so
many
countries
there
is
no
message
except
the
message
of
Jesus
that
has
been
translated
into
so
many
languages
and
has
been
adopted
by
so
many
cultures
and
has
changed
so
many
lives
Jesus
is
prophecy
is
being
to
this
and
keep
in
mind
that
when
Jesus
said
this
he
was
not
famous
or
powerful
or
popular
or
influential
when
he
predicted
these
things
he
was
a
member
of
the
underclass
a
carpenter
from
a
backwater
in
Galilee
and
he
predicted
that
his
message
would
go
into
all
the
world
and
so
far
it
has
spread
farther
than
any
other
and
against
all
odds
his
prophecy
is
being
fulfilled
Jesus
predicted
many
other
things
correctly
he
said
that
many
false
prophets
and
false
Christs
would
come
in
his
name
and
if
you
look
through
history
I
don't
think
there's
a
single
person
who
has
existed
who's
had
more
people
come
in
their
name
and
say
they
represent
them
or
they
are
them
Jesus
said
that
his
followers
would
be
brought
before
kings
and
rulers
and
all
these
things
have
happened
so
many
times
it
is
beyond
counting
and
Jesus
predicted
all
of
this
when
he
was
still
an
obscure
carpenter
from
Galilee
and
he
was
right
so
my
friends
I've
been
giving
many
reasons
why
the
New
Testament
is
worthy
of
our
trust
and
if
you're
interested
I'd
be
happy
to
talk
about
these
matters
afterwards
or
share
my
sources
of
information
with
you
as
well
but
if
you're
here
today
and
you're
still
wondering
about
the
person
of
Jesus
let
me
give
you
one
final
test
to
conduct
concerning
the
authenticity
of
Jesus
and
the
New
Testament
and
this
is
a
test
recommended
by
Jesus
himself
he
says
in
the
gospel
of
John
anyone
who
chooses
to do
the
will
of
God
will
find
out
whether
my
teaching
comes
from
God
or
whether
I
speak
on
my
own
my
friends
if
you
choose
to
do
the
will
of
God
Jesus
has
promised
that
you
will
find
that
his
teaching
comes
from
God
and
that
you
will
know
that
he
is
worthy
of
your
trust
let
me
end
in
prayer
and
then
we'll
take
some
questions
father
in
heaven
we
thank
you
that
you
sent
your
son
Jesus
to
minister
on
this
earth
to
preach
and
teach
to
work
miracles
and
signs
and
wonders
Lord
but
above
all
to
suffer
for
us
in
order
to
forgive
our
sins
we
thank
you
Lord
that
he
died
was
buried
and
three
days
later
rose
again
and
that
he
promises
that
he
will
raise
us
up
on
that
day
when
he
comes
in
glory
with
his
holy
angels
father
I
pray
that
you
would
increase
our
trust
in
your
word
that
you
would
help
us
to
grow
in
it
Lord
to
grow
in
the
fruits
that
Lord
help
us
to
forsake
evil
and
to
cling
to
what
is
good
to
repent
of
our
sins
to
minister
to
others
and
to
lay
our
lives
down
just
like
Jesus
did
for
us
we
pray
this
in
his
mighty
name
amen
all right
folks
we've
got
I
went
faster
than
I
thought
so
we've
got
we've
got
time
for
questions
if you
want
we
can
also
I
can
also
answer
questions
about
any
for
the
persecution
of
Christians
during
Rome
what
was
the
flash
point
about
why
the
Romans
persecuted
Christians
was it
charge
substitution
because
they
wouldn't
bow down
to the
the
Emperor
Augustus
and his
statues
was it
they were
scapegoating
them for
the fall
of Rome
what was
the reason
why
Christians
were
universally
despised
great
question
questions
why
were
the
Christians
persecuted
in
Rome
the
answer
is
kind
of
all
of
the
above
it
varies
at
different
times
in
different
places
so
the
Rome
we
think
of
Rome
as
this
dictatorship
where
everybody
follows
the
same
set
of
laws
and
that's
not
really
the
case
Roman
governors
had
a lot
of
latitude
and
there
were
local
customs
that
were
obeyed
and
even if
there were
certain
laws
Roman
governors
could
break
them
so
it
really
depends
but
in
general
there
were
a
number
of
reasons
so
one
was
that
there
were
a lot
of
vicious
rumors
circulating
about
Christians
they
Christians
were accused
of
cannibalism
of
incest
of
things
like
that
they
seem
like
bizarre
claims
but
when
you
think
when
people
hear
rumors
about
the
Eucharist
and
communion
and
how
people
eat
the
body
and
blood
of
Jesus
it
makes
a little
more
sense
why
those
rumors
would
go
out
as
far
as
incest
goes
Christians
would
counter-culturally
call
other
Christians
their
brother
or
sister
sometimes
you know
if
your
wife
or
husband
was
a
Christian
they
would
also
be
your
sister
or
brother
and
so
that
seems
to
be
where
those
claims
of
incest
came
from
these
of course
are
completely
unfounded
and
absurd
but
the
rumor mill
swirls
people
start
viewing
these
folks
as
terrible
and
in fact
we have
some
testimonies
there's
some
ancient
Christian
philosophers
who
say
I think
it's
Justin
the
philosopher
Justin
the
martyr
where
he
says
he
heard
all
these
horrible
things
about
Christians
and
how
terrible
they
were
but
then
he
saw
them
being
led
to
death
and
refusing
to
deny
their
faith
in
Jesus
and
he
realized
these
do not
who
would
be
doing
these
horrible
things
and
he
became a
Christian
to sacrifice
to the
Roman
gods
this
was
expected
of
all
people
in
Rome
now
sometimes
it
wasn't
a big
deal
sometimes
you
just
don't
go to
the
festival
where
they're
sacrificing
and
you're
just
viewed
as
kind
of
weird
but
other
times
you
could
get
in
really
severe
trouble
for
this
and
usually
for
most
people
it
wasn't
a
problem
because
they
would
just
even
if
they
worshipped
another
set
of
gods
they
were
polytheists
are
generally
okay
with
just
throwing
other
gods
into
the
mix
and
so
they
have
no
problem
worshipping
a
deified
Caesar
or
worshipping
Zeus
or
Jupiter
or
what
have
you
but
Christians
would
say
no
we
won't
do
that
and
that
would
get
them
into
a
lot
of
trouble
sometimes
the
only
other
group
that
seems
to
have
refused
to
do
that
the
only
other
large
group
were
the
Jews
but
Jews
often
had
like
an
agreement
with
the
Romans
that
they
didn't
have
to
do
that
and
at
the
same
time
Christians
would
be
refusing
to
do
it
often
you
have
Jewish
communities
loudly
proclaiming
that
these
Christians
were not
Jewish
and
were
doing
terrible
things
and
so
it
just
was
this
cyclic
effect
there
were
other
things
like
when
earthquakes
or
famine
would
hit
Rome
people
would
say
it's
the
Christians
the
Christian
to
the
lion
the
Christians
to
the
lion
and
they
would
round
them
up
similar
things
would
happen
that
remember
most
people
in
the
Roman
Empire
unless
you
were
a
male
citizen
which
in
the
early
part
of
the
Roman
Empire
was
you
were
a
great
minority
unless
you
were
a
male
citizen
you
didn't
really
have
many
rights
and
if
you
were
a
woman
or
you
were
the
wife
or
the
daughter
or
the
son
of
someone
who
is
not
yet
of
age
or
you
were
a
slave
then
your
father
had
authority
over
life
and death
and so
could
pretty
if
you
became
a
Christian
and
the
head
of
your
household
didn't
like
that
you
were
in
real
big
trouble
and
that
was
many
people
if not
most
people
could be
caught up
in that
and so
the
empire
wide
persecutions
where
you
have
this
empire
wide
scale
event
those
don't
happen
until
later
in
Christian
history
those
first
start
happening
around
the
year
250
and
there's
several
empire
wide
persecutions
where
the
emperor
says
everybody's
got a
sacrifice
if not
you can
be
tortured
or
executed
and
you
actually
would
have
to
go
get
a
certificate
and
we
actually
have
some
of
these
certificates
today
still
remain
where
people
have
a
certificate
or
receipt
that
they
sacrifice
but
before
250
there
were
more
local
persecutions
by
governors
or
mobs
or
things
like
that
so
it was
very
yes
what
about
the
Old
Testament
what
about
it
so
it depends
what you
mean
by
big
part
of
the
problem
with
the
Old
Testament
is
that
later
you
get
in
history
the
less
historical
sources
we
have
and
so
the
Old
Testament
goes
back
so
far
so
for
instance
Herodotus
is
usually
thought of
as
the
earliest
historian
to
write
and
he
wrote
in
like
450
BC
or
something
like
that
and
that's
when
the
Old
Testament
ends
so
the
Old
Testament
goes
so
far
back
that
we
only
have
limited
number
of
historical
sources
to
use
some
of
them
are
good
like
in
certain
parts
of
Babylon
or
Egypt
we've
got
good
sources
but
in
most
parts
of
the
ancient
world
we
don't
have
hardly
any
and
so
there's
also
if you
carefully
read
the
Old
Testament
there's
huge
swaths
of it
like
in
Genesis
like
Abraham
Isaac
Jacob
these
are
just
semi
nomads
going
around
in
the
desert
I
mean
we
wouldn't
expect
to
find
anything
about
someone
like
that
from
4,000
3,000
years
ago
so
in
some
ways
we
do
have
some
fantastic
archaeological
discoveries
that
corroborate
certain
parts
of the
Old
Testament
we
also
have
gaps
where
we
just
don't
have
other
sources
the
sources
don't
really
exist
and
that's
to be
expected
I
mean
any
part
of
the
world
you
would
expect
that
in
3000
BC
or
1500
BC
but
then
we
do
have
places
where
the
big
one
is
probably
the
exodus
in
Egypt
where
the
Bible
talks
about
Hebrews
being
enslaved
by the
Egyptians
and then
these
terrible
plagues
coming
on
and then
hundreds
of
thousands
or even
like
a million
Hebrew
slaves
coming
out
of
Egypt
and
the
problem
is
that
we
don't
we
do
have
evidence
that
there
were
Semitic
or
West
Asian
slaves
in
Egypt
who
worked
as
bricklayers
and
so
roughly
there's
a
corroboration
there
we
do
have
other
bits
and
pieces
of
suggestive
evidence
there's
a
papyrus
from
Egypt
that
talks
about
these
terrible
plagues
being
visited
upon
them
that
sound
roughly
like
what
we
find
but
it's
hard
to
date
the
papyrus
it's
hard
to
know
it's
being
talked
about
and
then
to
have
a
million
people
going
through
the
desert
is
you
would
think
sources
would
mention
that
more
than
they
do
although
again
this
is
so
long
ago
so
there's
a couple
possibilities
one
is
that
the
Hebrew
in
the
Hebrew
Bible
the
numbers
that
are
used
sometimes
ancients
didn't
use
numbers
like
we
do
like
they
did
use
them
for
math
but
sometimes
they
had
deeper
meanings
like
the
number
40
in
the
Bible
sometimes
it's
like
maybe
that's
not
a
mathematical
term
it's
a
general
term
so
some
people
think
that's
what
can
also
be
translated
as
clan
or
family
and
so
it
could
be
that
what's
going
on
here
is
that
it's
meant
to
say
600
families
or
600
clans
which
is
significantly
less
than
a
million
people
so
but
these
are
things
we're
still
waiting
to
discover
you've
seen
in
the
New
Testament
I
mean
if
we
gave
this
talk
100
years
ago
Lysanius
the
Tetrarch
the
pool
of
Bethesda
all of
these
things
that
would
be
explicitly
contradicted
seemingly
by the
historical
record
but
later
excavations
have
discovered
that
actually
we've
either
misinterpreted
the
historical
record
or
sometimes
most of
the time
we've
interpreted
it
correctly
it's
just
there
was
another
event
or
there
was
something
else
that
happened
that
we
didn't
know
about
so
I
would
say
that
for
the
Old
Testament
it's
very
good
by
very
ancient
historical
standards
but
it's
not
as
good
as
the
New
Testament
which
is
you
would
expect
a
higher
level
of
corroboration
given
that
it's
earlier
in
time
yeah
so
we're
just
going
to
have
to
trust
God
guys
that
he's
faithful
yeah
you know
if it
was
good
enough
for
Jesus
it's
good
enough
for
me
yeah
you
mentioned
really
at
the
beginning
this
talk
about
the
resurrection
as
an
event
that
banks
extraordinary
evidence
is
there
any
plan
down
the
pipe
for
a
class
about
that
oh
we
could
do
that
yeah
it's
class
about
the
resurrection
yes
I
love
looking
at
the
five
or
six
accounts
of
the
resurrection
that
we
have
in
the
Bible
I
didn't
have
time
to
bring
that
up
but
people
will
often
claim
that
when
you
read
the
accounts
of
Jesus
resurrection
so
you
get
Matthew
Mark
Luke
and
John
give
an
account
Paul
gives
an
account
and
Luke
gives
an
account
again
in
the
book
of
Acts
so
there's
kind
of
six
of
these
and
people
will
claim
that
these
are
irreconcilable
with
one
another
and
they
are
inherently
contradictory
and
I
think
actually
it's
quite
the
opposite
I
think
they
actually
work
together
very
well
and
are
what
you
would
expect
if you
watch
true
crime
shows
and
detective
stories
and
people
have
different
versions
of
events
it
sounds
exactly
like
that
where
people
are
saying
stuff
and
the
way
they're
portraying
events
is
individual
from
their
perspective
but
they
also
complement
one
another
very
well
we
can
talk
more
about
that
if
five
people
for
me
are
saying
the
same
thing
exactly
word
for
word
for
me
they're
lying
they're
colluding
I know
there's
a great
if we
do a
class
I'll
bring
this
up
there's
a
wonderful
article
do you
remember
that
famous
picture
it's
called
the
tank
man
picture
in
Tiananmen
square
in
the
80s
where
that
man
is
standing
in
front
of
the
tanks
well
the
New
York
Times
did
a
30
or
four
pictures
by
four
different
photographers
of
that
man
and
they
all
show
slightly
different
perspectives
and
the
New
York
Times
went
and
interviewed
each
of
those
photographers
like
30
years
later
and
was
like
tell
us
what
happened
and
then
they
each
wrote
a
paragraph
or two
about
what
happened
and
comparing
these
four
together
it
was
amazing
like
one
of
them
says
the
police
came
and
took
them
away
another
says
people
from
the
crowd
came
and
took
the
man
away
another
says
it
was
the
secret
police
that
came
and
took
him
away
and
you
start
thinking
like
well
if it
was
the
secret
police
they
would
have
looked
like
people
from
the
crowd
and
one
guy
says
he
was
holding
bags
another
says
he
was
only
holding
a
bag
you
know
plural
verse
singular
and
you
look
at
the
pictures
and
some
pictures
it
looks
like
he
is
holding
one
bag
but
other
pictures
it
is
like
no
he
has
a
clump
of
bags
right
there
and
so
all
of
these
they
work
together
and
it's
exactly
I
think
it
lines up
with
those
photographers
in Tiananmen
Square
I
think
the
testimony
ends
up
like
that
where
they
compliment
and
actually
inform
one
another
instead
of
contradict
one
another
there
was
a
tank
there
was
a
guy
and
there
was
a
tank
yeah
exactly
yeah
exactly
yeah
other
questions
Amos
so you
talk a lot
about how
there's
corroboration
between
the Bible
and
early
secular
and
Christian
writers
and
in terms
of
what
they
said
helps
establish
the
credibility
of the
New
Testament
from
independent
review
perspective
but I'm
wondering
is there
content
from those
other
sources
where we
might learn
interesting
things
that are
credible
about
Jesus
or the
early
Christians
that
would be
interesting
not on
par with
the New
Testament
which
might
there
are more
stories
about
Jesus
or the
apostles
that
stated
without
putting it
on par
with the
New
Testament
but which
in principle
one could
do
maybe a
sermon
on it
or
I don't
know
yeah
so the
question is
do we have
other information
about the
New Testament
or New
Testament
people
outside of
the New
Testament
that we
could
that would
be edifying
for us
or useful
for us
to some
degree
yes
there is
and I
would say
that those
come in
two forms
so one
way
is that
sometimes
we get
evidence
from these
external
sources
which
doesn't
give us
new
information
about
something
or a
person
or something
that actually
happened
but helps
us understand
an event
in the New
Testament
better
so for
example
this is
an easy
example
if you
read
the
ancient
historian
Josephus
he
covers
the
history
of the
Jewish
people
in the
first century
AD
he also
was from
the first
century
AD
and you'll
notice
that something
he talks
about
again
and again
is that
the Jewish
people
were horribly
oppressed
by taxes
they're
constantly
arguing
about them
how should
we pay
this
should
we not
pay
this
it's a
huge
hot
button
issue
and you
take that
and you
read
where you've
got these
Pharisees
these sneaky
Pharisees
coming up
to Jesus
trying to
trap him
with this
question
about should
I pay
taxes to
Caesar
or not
and you
realize
that they
are asking
him like
the most
loaded
possible
question
in public
to try
and catch
him
and there's
numerous
examples
of that
where we
will find
that
something
that we
understand
I mean
we know
they were
trying to
catch him
with that
tax
question
but it
really
brings
up the
level of
tension
when you
read that
so there's
various things
like that
that help
us
but in
terms of
like do
we have
more
information
about
Jesus
or the
disciples
that we
don't
have
in the
New
Testament
that
so I
had that
quote
it's
many slides
ago
so I
probably
won't be
able to
get there
but that
quote by
Ignatius
of Antioch
where he
that was
I lost
the whole
thing
where
he talks
about
Jesus
appearing
to
Peter
that
is
probably
some of
the closest
we'll get
to a
story
about
Jesus
that
may not
be in
the New
Testament
but that
may actually
be accurate
although
you could
say that
he's
here talking
about what
John or
Luke talked
about
because
John or
Luke
especially
Luke talks
about something
pretty similar
to this
but Ignatius
may not be
getting it
from Luke
at all
he may
just be
telling it
like he
heard
from
Peter
there's
another
example
so
if you
read
really
carefully
through
the
Bible
in the
resurrection
sequence
there's
a mention
where
no
it's in
1 Corinthians
Paul mentions
that Jesus
appeared to
James
but we
don't have
any account
of that
at all
and
there is
a document
that just
talks about
how it
happened
I don't
know if we
should trust
that though
it might be
like a
much later
legend
that's trying
to fill
in the
accounts
we do
have
we do
have
I'm just
scanning my
brain for more
Jesus stuff
before I move
to the
disciples
okay here's
another one
there's another
ancient Christian
writer
his name is
Justin the
philosopher
Justin Martyr
whom I
mentioned once
he mentions
that when
Jesus was
baptized
that there
was a light
that appeared
also
so sometimes
you get these
little things
like I
don't know
the spirit
comes down
like a
dove
and then
this light
is on the
water
I don't
know
I mean
maybe
maybe that
happened
most of the
extra stuff
we know
is about
the disciples
and that's
where we get
more stuff
for instance
according to
very early
Christian tradition
Simon the
magician
Simon Magus
that was not
the end of
Simon Magus
in the book
of Acts
he went on
to oppose
the apostles
especially Peter
he even went
to Rome
to track
Peter down
that's said
again and
again
we know
that John
the disciple
the apostle
went to
Ephesus
and
Irenaeus
gives us
a story
about John
Irenaeus
was a disciple
of Polycarp
who was a
disciple of
John
if that makes
sense
and so
he's telling
us this
kind of
second hand
story
that he
heard about
John
about how
he was
going into
you know
in the Roman
Empire
they would
have these
communal
bath houses
where you
would go
in and
bathe
and that
John
was in
there
and this
heretic
named
Serentis
showed up
and he
quickly ran
out and
said we
got to
get away
from this
guy
so stuff
like that
you know
they do
they are
interesting
these stories
about the
apostles
you know
you have
to be
careful
because so
many of
these stories
are much
later
and we
just don't
know if
they're
accurate
or not
so what
is the
problem
in simple
words with
the Gnostic
Gospels
you should
have come
to the
class two
weeks ago
you didn't
make the
cut
yes
great
question
so the
problem with
them
is that
first of all
the Gnostics
most people
aren't aware
of this
the Gnostics
accepted
the canon
of the
mainstream
church
they just
added to
it
so they're
not really
rejecting
stuff
they're just
adding to
this
the problem
with it
is that
they don't
seem to
have any
grounding
whatsoever
in first
century
Jewish
history
they seem
to be
written
like
Jesus
from a
much later
Greek
philosophical
background
so all
the stuff
that we
just did
with the
New Testament
where we're
looking at
names,
dates,
places,
events,
happenings
can't do
that with
the Gnostic
Gospels
another thing
is that
contrary to
popular
perception
the vast
majority
of Gnostic
Gospels
are not
even
accounts
of Jesus
life
they don't
even
pretend
to be
they're
dialogues
of a
risen
savior
where he
has this
extended
dialogue
or it's
just a
sermon
or it's
a letter
so most
of them
don't even
claim to
be accounts
of Jesus
life
they are
just
theological
musings
other
reasons
why
is that
there's
no evidence
that the
people who
the titles
of the
Gospels
are ascribed
that they
actually wrote
them
so like
Gospel of
Mary
Gospel of
Peter
there's no
evidence that
they wrote
these
scholars are
united
in believing
these are
from the
second or
third
centuries
and in
fact
that
ancient
critic
Porphyry
whom I've
mentioned a
bunch of
times
he talks
about the
Gnostics
and he
says
oh yeah
they're just
making up
false titles
for these
things
but then
when he's
dealing with
the four
Gospels
and the
writings of
the New
Testament
he doesn't
say that
he seems
to accept
that they're
accurate
so
they don't
seem rooted
in Judaism
at all
to any
degree
they can't
be historically
verified
they seem
to be
written
at a
very late
date
they follow
they're all
united
behind this
Gnostic
myth
about how
you need
to have
this
knowledge
in order
to come
to salvation
and
it contradicts
Judaism
I mean
most of
them have
this idea
that
the creator
God
is evil
and
when you
read
Genesis
God
makes
everything
good
they've
got to
do a lot
of
hermeneutical
running around
to get around
that
or they'll
just reject
the passage
and it
just seems
the idea
that Jesus
or the
apostles
these Jews
from first
century
Palestine
would have
believed
that the
Old Testament
God
was bad
it just
doesn't
make sense
it seems
much more
like
someone
who's
following
Platonic
philosophy
who believes
the material
world is
evil
that's what
seems like
what's going
on here
and I think
that is what's
going on
is that
they're trying
to take
the teachings
of Jesus
and mash
them together
with Greek
philosophy
and this
is kind
of what
what's
coming out
yes
that's a
great question
let me make
a comment
first I
just want to
emphasize
how privileged
and blessed
we are
if you go
back even
100 years
ago people
didn't know
the stuff
we know
if you go
back 500
years ago
the only
test you
could do
was that
last test
that Jesus
said
if you
choose to
do the
will of
God you
will know
that I
come from
the Father
because if
you're living
in the
middle of
some far
off place
and you
can't read
or write
there's really
nothing you
can do
when you're
presented with
the gospel
message
other than
seek God's
guidance
directly
and so
we're in
this position
where we
have all
this stuff
that most
Christians
throughout most
of history
didn't have
some of the
earlier ones
might have had
this kind of
stuff
but they were
facing horrible
persecution and
death and
everything
so it brings up
a good question
of like what
do we do
and I think
we follow
Jesus
we see what
he wants
us to
do
what is
our
we each
have our
own
callings
and we
discern from
the Lord
what that
is and we
carry our
cross as best
we can
humbly
knowing that
I think
God is
going to
hold us
to the
standard of
the things
he's given
to us
and he's
given us
a lot
I also
think that
we should
always be
careful
I've mentioned
this a couple
times in my
other classes
but that
this information
that I presented
I mean it's
great it's
wonderful this
is my career
like I love
this stuff
but this
this doesn't
really get
at Jesus
directly in
order to get
at Jesus
directly you
got to know
him and
that's what
matters and
so some of
this information
can be extremely
helpful for
people and
can bolster
their faith but
other people
work differently
for others
you know it
doesn't it's
not exciting
for them
and ultimately
God
following Christ
is not about
how much you
know or even
how certain
you are of
these little
facts it's
you know
Jesus on that
day he's
going to ask
do you know
me and
that's what we
want to keep
in mind
seek him
and this
is a
important
these are
important things
but they're
only stepping
stones to
the ultimate
goal
yeah
yes absolutely
absolutely
yeah
I agree with
that
we've gone
over
I'm happy to
answer more
questions but if
you got to go
but otherwise
thanks for
coming I
think we
have one
more class
right John
what's the
topic on it
we're going to
be looking at
given all these
things about the
scriptures how
how do they come
to make a
difference in our
lives so we're
going to look
particularly at
how the word of
Christ the
gospels can come
to dwell in us
richly and
transforming us
particularly at
meditation it's
kind of the
capstone in
application of
these things so
yeah all right
stay tuned how
to have the word
of Christ come
to the world
we wish
all right thank
you so much
everyone