Historical Evidence for the Christian Faith

sherlockThe historical basis for Christianity is a subject I have returned to several times on my blog. As a young adult, I set out to prove or disprove once and for all the faith I was raised in. If God wasn’t real, why set limits on my behavior? If the tenants of faith could be disproven, why adhere to them? I wanted to know if the gospel story really was true. So I began researching historical evidence. I soon found out Christianity is not a blind faith at all.

So what proofs did I uncover? I’ll list them here under three main headings: The Person of Christ, The Canon of Scripture, and Prophecy.

The Person of Christ

Jesus is the central figure of the Bible and the key to the Christian faith. If he can be discredited, the entire house of cards falls down. It is the logical place to start an investigation into the authenticity of Christianity. So who was he? What did he do? Why is he so important?

The Claims of Christ

Jesus Christ made it abundantly clear who he thought he was. He believed he was the Messiah sent by God to provide atonement for the sin of mankind. That’s a pretty huge claim. Here are two examples of his own statements:

I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though  he dies: and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. (John 11:25)

I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. (John 14:6)

Jesus claimed to be the Son of God. There are only three logical responses to it. Either Christ was a liar, or He was crazy, or He was who He said He was.

Liar, Lord, or Lunatic

If you read the rest of the gospels, you’ll see right away that the first option just doesn’t jive. Christ preached against lying and for a moral lifestyle based on God’s law. It makes no sense that he would lie. Nor would he sacrifice his life for a lie. And you can’t argue that he was simply killed. He didn’t have to enter Jerusalem where it was widely known the religious establishment was plotting against him. But he did. He could have made a very good case for himself before Pilate, but he didn’t. He chose to die. Would a man die for a lie? That’s ridiculous.

So could he have been crazy? A crazy man might die for believing a falsehood. But that doesn’t make sense either. Jesus profoundly influenced the world with his teaching and his life. His ideas are succinct, wise, and highly regarded universally. Is this in keeping with an unsound mind? Did his actions at all imply imbalance? I just don’t buy it.

That leaves only one option. Jesus Christ was who he said he was.

The Miracles of Christ

Next, let’s look at what Christ accomplished. We are going to assume for the moment that the gospels are historically accurate (we’ll prove it momentarily) and that the miracles they relate really happened. What miracles were they? Jesus healed the blind and the lame. He caused the mute to speak and the deaf to hear. He cast out demons, fed thousands with a small lunch–twice–turned water to wine, and healed a variety of illnesses. He even raised the dead.

Have you ever heard of any other human ever accomplishing these things? Of course not. They are supernatural occurances that attest to the authenticity of Jesus. The miracles prove the message. They are divine references, if you will. The testimony of God himself to the accuracy of Christ’s claims.

The Resurrection

The resurrection of Christ from the dead is the grandaddy miracle of them all. If it’s true, it verifies Christ’s claim and forms the substance of the Christian religion. In it are tied up faith, love, forgiveness, atonement, and hope through this conquering of death. But it’s so crazy! So unprecedented! So unnatural! Can it really be true? What are the evidences?

The Disciples

Jesus chose twelve young men to be his disciples, and you have to admit they weren’t too impressive. When Jesus was teaching, they always seemed to miss the mark. They argued among themselves. They asked ridiculous questions. And they turned out to be real cowards when Christ was arrested.

But after Christ’s death, that all changed. These men, with the exception of Judas, became vocal proponents for Christ’s message. They took on the Jewish leaders. They traveled to foreign lands. They won converts, started churches, bucked established pagan religions, endured jail time, suffered beatings, and according to tradition, all of them but John died for their faith.

These guys firmly believed Christ’s message. Something substantial made them change. But what? How’d they go from coward to martyr? The only possible answer is that they were witnesses to the very real miracle of the Resurrection.

The Jewish Leaders, Roman Soldiers, and the Lack of a Body

Since Jesus had said ahead of time that he would rise from the dead, the Jewish religious leaders took precautions. They wanted to nip that idea in the bud. More Christian converts meant less power for them! They wanted Christ’s body firmly in the ground as proof that he was a counterfeit. So they asked Roman soldiers to guard the tomb.

These soldiers were the most well-trained, effective army in the world. They were career soldiers, hardened men who didn’t flinch in battle. No one was getting by them. Yet something happened. They scattered. They ran away frightened. What could cause this but a supernatural event? Even an unlikely overpowering force of men wouldn’t send them scurrying but would cause a battle there’d be some record of. They simply scattered. Why?

The Roman guards fled. They left their place of responsibility. How can their attrition he explained, when Roman military discipline was so exceptional? Justin, in Digest #49, mentions all the offenses that required the death penalty. The fear of their superiors’ wrath and the possibility of death meant that they paid close attention to the minutest details of their jobs. One way a guard was put to death was by being stripped of his clothes and then burned alive in a fire started with his garments. If it was not apparent which soldier had failed in his duty, then lots were drawn to see which one would be punished with death for the guard unit’s failure. Certainly the entire unit would not have fallen asleep with that kind of threat over their heads. Dr. George Currie, a student of Roman military discipline, wrote that fear of punishment ‘produced flawless attention to duty, especially in the night watches. –Josh McDowell, Evidence for the Resurrection

And where was the body? If it was a hoax, wouldn’t the Jewish leaders move heaven and earth to lay hold of the body and squash rumors of a resurrection? But they couldn’t produce it.

Witnesses

And what about the hundreds of recorded witnesses who also claimed to see the risen Christ? Not only the disciples and the women saw Jesus. Cleopas and another disciple saw him on the road to Emmaus. And I Corinthians says Jesus “appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living.” Christ’s Resurrection was not done in secret. Hundreds saw him firsthand and testified to it. This was the news story of the day. One that the temple leaders would have hushed if they could, but it was too widely known. They could not refute so many witnesses.

Canon of Scripture

After understanding and proving that Jesus was a historical figure and his Resurrection was a historical event, I set out to prove or disprove the Bible as a reliable source. I started with learning how it came to be in its present form.

Who decided which books would be included in the Bible?

Early Christian leaders were actually Jewish rabbis. Jesus Christ was Jewish, and this new religion was born out of the ancient one. It wasn’t really a new religion at all, if you understand the correlation between Old and New Testaments, rather a fulfilling of the old. But as many Jews didn’t agree that Christ was truly the Messiah, Judaism and Christianity are today held as two separate religions. Nevertheless, the first church authorities were Jews, the men who walked and talked with and learned under Jesus. These were the men who heard his words, recorded them, and taught them to others. Their combined message was incredibly consistent. It was this consistency and first-hand experience that prompted their books and letters to be universally regarded as the authority among early leaders. Theirs was, in essence, the message preached by Christ.

As time passed, the church grew and spread and Gentiles took up leadership in their own congregations, heresies began to arise. There came into existence documents claiming new revelation, new doctrine. The need for a cohesive, authoritative collection (canon) became apparent. So a variety of councils were held in the first four centuries after Christ to decide which literature should be included.

What criteria were used to determine inclusion?

At the time these leaders met, the Old Testament scriptures were firmly established and widely accepted. It was primarily the New Testament collection they were debating. A variety of factors were used to decide which documents could be considered authoritative of church doctrine and added to biblical canon and which could not. Was the book written by an apostle or someone with a close association to them? (In other words, did they a have proper first-hand witness?) Were they consistent in their message? Did they contain high moral and spiritual values? Were they widely accepted by the early church? Did they contain errors?

This process of evaluation is very mindful of the methods scholars use today to determine the authenticity of historical literature, or even how testimony is evaluated in a legal case. New Testament scripture was held to a high standard, and if any document could not pass muster, it was discarded. In essence, this process whittled down the selection to only the books that were consistent with the message of Jesus Christ. As I already fully satisfied myself of his deity, provided the scriptural source documentation checked out, I’d say that’s a pretty reliable basis.

24,000 Manuscripts

One way historians judge the reliability of an antique text is by the number of ancient copies available, the accuracy between them, and the length of time from the text’s origin to the date of the oldest copy. There are 643 copies of Homer’s Iliad, a number that has universally satisfied historians as to its authenticity, even though there is a 500 year gap between the publication date and the oldest copy. We have over 24,000 copies of the New Testament from antiquity. 24,000! And the earliest copy is less than 100 years away from the original. Satisfactory? I think so.

But what about the Old Testament?

Just because they were already established, do we simply take those books on faith? Not at all. They had to meet similar criteria. Were the authors prophets or known men of God? Are their words without error? Have prophecies been confirmed? Have miraculous events verified the authors? Are they consistent in their messages?  The Old Testament books were reaffirmed by the early church councils. In fact, the Old Testament has been tested and reaffirmed much longer than the New Testament. Jesus himself attests to their reliability all through the gospels. 

Dead Sea Scrolls

One singular archaeological find did more to reaffirm the Old Testament’s historicity than any other find. In 1947, shepherd boys discovered the Dead Sea Scrolls. They include manuscripts or partial manuscripts of every book of the Bible except Esther. And they were written nearly one thousand years earlier that any previously known copies. The differences between the documents, even after one thousand years, were minimal, verifying that God has indeed preserved his Word over time.

Prophecy

One final subject I delved into to prove or disprove Chist and the Bible was prophecy. Prophecy, of course, is the predicting of events before they happen. Supernatural for sure. I wanted to satisfy myself that the prediction dates and later fulfillments were authentic.

Purpose

Messianic prophecies were given throughout the Old Testament so we would recognize the Messiah when he came. Some told what he would do, some described his birth, others revealed what would happen to him at the hands of others. Many are details that could in no way be manipulated by a counterfeit.

Authenticity

All of the messianic prophecies in the Bible were foretold between 400 and 1,000 years before Christ was born. How can we know they were written that long ago? Maybe someone just wrote them down after-the-fact. Three words: Dead Sea Scrolls. These ancient documents are widely believed to date back two centuries before Christ’s birth. They not only verify the accuracy of biblical transcription, but they also prove the Messianic prophecies were written long before Jesus was actually born.

Quantity

There are over 300 Messianic prophecies. Different scholars and translations give a range of actual numbers, from 365-456, and some of them can get pretty obscure, but the fact remains, there are at least 365 prophecies that everybody agrees on. That’s a pretty impressive number. Now the really cool part. Jesus fulfilled them all! That adds some veracity to the claims he made about Himself, doesn’t it?

Probability as Mathematical Proof

What’s the probability that one person (Jesus) could fulfill multiple prophecies?

Peter Stoner, Professor Emeritus of Science at Westmont College, with the help of 600 students, worked out the probability that one man could fulfill only eight prophecies. His numbers were widely reviewed by scientists and skeptics alike and found to be sound. The chance he came up with? One in 10 to the 17th power. That’s a one with seventeen zeros. To help us wrap our brains around that figure, he provided this analogy:

Suppose that we take 10 to the 17th silver dollars and lay them on the face of Texas. They’ll cover all of the state two feet deep. Now mark one of these silver dollars and stir the whole mass thoroughly, all over the state. Blindfold a man and tell him that he can travel as far as he wishes, but he must pick up one silver dollar and say that this is the right one. What chance would he have of getting the right one? Just the same chance that the prophets would’ve had of writing these eight prophecies and having them all come true in any one man, from their day to the present time, providing they wrote them in their own wisdom.

You have to admit, those are pretty incredible odds. Almost hints at some intelligent choreography, doesn’t it?

My Conclusion

When faced with this much proof, I had to admit the faith my parents taught me was authentic. God is real. Christ is divine. And the Bible is reliable. My mission now is to share these finds with others. Think how many lives would change if everyone knew this stuff?

Is there anyone you can share this post with?

Advertisements

The Gospel in Plain English

No formidable words are needed to simply and concisely summarize what the Bible’s says. The message is not complex, but it is anathema to those who desire no authority beyond their own intellect. If there is a God, however, the opinions of men cannot negate his existence. A better use of human intelligence might be to judge scripture in light of the possibility that God does exist.

The Bible starts with an all-powerful God who created everything within the universe, including life, natural laws of order and mathematics and logic, and a moral code. Mankind chose to rebel against it. God is love, but he is also holy, and as Creator he has the authority to judge sin. He must, or he would undermine his own laws. The payment for sin is death.

But God in his compassion and creativity devised a way to take that judgment upon himself. He came to Earth in the person of Jesus, who was fully human and fully divine. He lived a perfect life and therefore was undeserving of death. Because he was human, and because he was perfect, his sacrifice is counted as a substitute payment for the sin of all mankind. Anyone seeking reconciliation with God need only claim this payment. We will still die physically, but Christ’s resurrection has proven his power over death. The Bible promises that the dead will rise. Those who claim Jesus will live in a recreated world free of sin and its effects. Those who reject him will suffer eternal, physical punishment.

Some things to think about:

Would any of this prove too hard for a Creator God? What objective does God’s plan meet? Is it unreasonable that he would share it with men? Is any part of this unfair? Is God inconsistent in character or action? Does history bear out the person and accomplishments of Christ? Does this explanation account for the presence of suffering and death? What does this plan imply about the value of human life? What makes the Bible reliable? Do I care enough to do further research, or am I content with what I think is true? What do I base my beliefs on? And finally, what if it’s true?

 

 

My Opinion on Furry Souls

I’ll probably take a lot of flack for this post, but I really don’t care. For years I’ve quietly disagreed with the leaders of mainstream Christian denominations who tell us animals will not live beyond this life because they don’t have a soul in the sense that a human does. The truth is, that’s all opinion and speculation. The Bible does not specifically address this issue, and for good reason. The Bible is God’s message of redemption for mankind, not animal kind. So its pages only hint at his intention toward animals. Therefore, my opinion on this matter is as valid as theirs. And from what I understand of scripture, my opinion makes a lot more sense.

Now I totally agree that humans and animals are different. God made man in his image and gave him a special ability to commune with him. Man holds the highest place in all creation. Yet God made animals, too, and he called them “very good.” They pleased him. And they had purpose: he made them for the companionship of man and for his own glory. God also demonstrates his concern for animals throughout scripture by providing the ark and by ordaining laws for their humane care. He provides for the wild ones. He sees them when they fall. It’s clear God loves them as part of his creation. And as you’ll see, they were meant to be an eternal part of that eternal creation.

God made three distinct groups of living creatures: angels, man, and animals. All three he created immortal. In the beginning, there was no death. Angels had a choice to follow God or not. Some did. Some didn’t. They do not taste death. Some will live forever with God; others live forever in torment, according to their choices. God made no way to redeem angels.

Man was also given the choice to love or reject God. One man’s choice doomed all mankind to death (though it is true we each reject him individually). Man also doomed all creation with himself. God provided a way of redemption for mankind which we can choose or reject. He also promised to renew all creation.

God also created animals with the intention that they would live forever. But when mankind fell, animals were doomed to death as well. They were innocent victims of man’s sin. Their innocence is accentuated by the fact that it was their blood that was shed for the remission of sin until the innocent Son of God, whom animals pictured, shed his blood once and for all. Animals did not reject God and therefore have no need of redemption. God promised to renew all creation, of which animals are a part.

Christian leaders tell us animals don’t have souls. It is true they don’t commune with God in the way mankind does. But to say they just end seems a stretch to me. Animals were created with the same unique life that men and angels share. They have emotion, spirit, personality. They love, they feel, they think, they suffer. The same Hebrew word is used to describe the unique life of men and animals. They’re animate. They live just as man does, unlike rocks, trees, or stars. In the beginning that life was intended to continue indefinitely, even though they couldn’t commune with God as man could. Why would that difference exclude them now? Why would their spirit not continue as it was meant to? How could it not, if their life was created as an eternal essence? How could the unique life God gave them just uncreate?

Also, we know there are animals in heaven. The lion and the ox, the wolf and the lamb, the white horse. I’ve been told those can’t be the same animals created on earth. Why not? If God created angels to live forever, and they do, and if God created humans to live forever, and they do, and if God created animals to live forever, and obviously they do too, why would God create new ones for heaven and uncreate the originals? That’s just not in keeping with what I understand about God’s plan for his creation or his plan for other eternal lives. Even wicked men and angels continue. Why would God not renew the original animals when all creation is renewed?

Let me emphasize one more time that man is more precious to God than animals. God strongly desires that men turn to him. That is why he gave us the Bible. That’s why he sent his Son. Man is the epitome of his creation. Animals are subservient to man. God eventually gave man permission to kill animals, to eat them, to sacrifice them. Animals turned fearful, turned predator. We are all fallen together. Yet animals are one of only three classes of creatures that God gave spirit, that he gave life. Nowhere in scripture do I see that God revoked this original intention. Everywhere I see that the original will be restored. Animals were a part of God’s eternal plan for creation in the beginning, they still are, and they will continue to be beyond the borders of this present, fallen age. Animals were created to live.

How’d we Arrive at the Biblical Canon?

No, not that kind of cannon!

I had a lot of question about the collection of books we call the Holy Bible. The Bible is supposed to be inspired, so why did men decide which books to include? Who exactly decided this anyway? And why are the Catholic and Protestant Bibles different? So I did some research and found a lot of answers.

A canon, to begin with, is an authoritative collection of literature. In this case, the biblical canon includes books and letters widely regarded as the revelation of God’s ultimate truth. It is held by Christians as the living, unchanging and final Word of God, inspired and preserved by God himself and applicable for all situations and all time. I don’t have any trouble believing that God could have orchestrated such a collection. He is God, after all. But I needed solid reasoning behind why these books are acceptable and others are not. So I did some research of my own, and I am pleased to have found that inclusion was based on very logical grounds.

Who decided which books would be included in the Bible?

Early Christian leaders were actually Jewish rabbis. Jesus Christ was Jewish, and this new religion was born out of the ancient one. It wasn’t really a new religion at all, if you understand the correlation between Old and New Testaments, rather a fulfilling of the old. But as many Jews didn’t agree that Christ was truly the Messiah, Judaism and Christianity are today held as two separate religions. Nevertheless, the first church authorities were Jews, the men who walked and talked with and learned under Jesus. These were the men who heard his words, recorded them, and taught them to others. Their combined message was incredibly consistent. It was this consistency and first-hand experience that prompted their books and letters to be universally regarded as the authority among early leaders. Theirs was, in essence, the message preached by Christ.

As time passed, the church grew and spread and Gentiles took up leadership in their own congregations, heresies began to arise. There came into existence documents claiming new revelation, new doctrine. The need for a cohesive, authoritative collection (canon) became apparent. So a variety of councils were held in the first four centuries after Christ to decide which literature should be included.

What criteria were used to determine inclusion?

At the time these leaders met, the Old Testament scriptures were firmly established and widely accepted. It was primarily the New Testament collection they were debating. A variety of factors were used to decide which documents could be considered authoritative of church doctrine and added to biblical canon and which could not. Was the book written by an apostle or someone with a close association to them? (In other words, did they a have proper first-hand witness?) Were they consistent in their message? Did they contain high moral and spiritual values? Were they widely accepted by the early church? Did they contain errors?

This process of evaluation is very mindful of the methods scholars use today to determine the authenticity of historical literature, or even how testimony is evaluated in a legal case. New Testament scripture was held to a high standard, and if any document could not pass muster, it was discarded. In essence, this process whittled down the selection to only the books that were consistent with the message of Jesus Christ. As I’m already fully convinced of his deity, I’d say that’s a pretty reliable basis.

But what about the Old Testament? Just because they were already established, do we simply takes those books on faith? Not at all. They had to meet similar criteria. Were the authors prophets or known men of God? Are their words without error? Have prophecies been confirmed? Have miraculous events verified the authors? Are they consistent in their messages?  The Old Testament books were reaffirmed by the early church councils. In fact, the Old Testament has been tested and reaffirmed much longer than the New Testament!

So why do Catholic and Protestant Bibles differ?

The answer to this question is quite simple and even political in nature. The books in question are called the Apocrypha. Though they are highly regarded, these books contain historical errors and inconsistencies in doctrine.

Over time the church grew in political power and added to its beliefs, traditions and doctrines. We’re all familiar with Calvin and Luther and the Protestant Reformation that took place in the 1500′s to combat this drift. As a direct result of the Reformation, the Catholic Church officially canonized the Apocrypha because it supports Catholic beliefs and practices that are not in agreement with the original canon (like praying to saints, giving alms as atonement, etc.). But the books of the Apocrypha do not measure up to a stringent evaluation process. A whole study could be done on the their shortcomings. My examination wasn’t as thorough as the ones done by fourth century councils who originally rejected them, but I gleaned enough to agree, they don’t jive with the most reliable recordings of the teachings of Christ.

Is the Protestant canon free of debate?

No. As you’ve already seen, opinions are split on the Apocrypha. Others have debated Esther and Song of Solomon. Luther himself wanted to remove Hebrews from the canon. The debates will probably endure as long as the text, and I think that’s a good thing. Yet the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments have been consistently reaffirmed by the majority of scholars despite rigorous testing by generation after generation. Yes, the canon has been assembled by men, but the consistent message they preach originated with God. It’s almost like men discovered the canon.

I have been reassured by my study, as unscholarly and brief as it may seem to others who have gone before me, that the books of the biblical canon are reliable. And I’m convinced that God intended that we use our brains to discover what literature is consistent, accurate and authoritative. And I think God had his hand inspiring and guiding all of it.

Prophecy – The Numbers Don’t Lie

Photo by Ulner at Photoxpress

Christianity is not a blind faith. It’s supported by a good deal of evidence. Last time, I laid out some of the reasons I believe Jesus truly is the Son of God. Here’s another big one: 300+ prophecies. I’ve found a range of actual numbers, from 365-456, as given by different scholars and organizations. I’ve read many of them for myself, and I admit some can get pretty obscure, but the fact remains, there are at least 365 prophecies that everybody agrees on. That’s a pretty impressive number.

Let’s back up. Messianic prophecies were given throughout the Old Testament so we would recognize the Messiah when he came. Some told what he would do, some described his birth, others revealed what would happen to him at the hands of others. Many are details that could in no way be manipulated by a counterfeit. And all of them were foretold between 400 and 1,000 years before Christ was born. Four hundred years! That’s like making a predictions about the governor of Michigan in 2512!

How can we know they were written that long ago? Maybe someone just wrote them down after-the-fact. Three words: Dead Sea Scrolls. These ancient documents found in the 1940’s and 50’s are widely believed to date back two centuries before Christ’s birth. They not only verify the accuracy of biblical transcription, but they also prove the Messianic prophecies were written long before Jesus was actually born.

Now the really cool part. Jesus fulfilled them all! That adds some veracity to the claims he made about Himself, doesn’t it?

I’m not going to get into the chapter and verse of individual prophecies. I’ll let you look them up for yourself. There are some excellent websites that present these much better than I could. Here’s one, and here’s another. I am, however, going to relate an astounding statistic concerning the scientific probability that Jesus could fulfill multiple prophecies.

Peter Stoner, Professor Emeritus of Science at Westmont College, with the help of 600 students, worked out the probability that one man could fulfill only eight prophecies. His numbers were widely reviewed by scientists and skeptics alike and found to be sound. The chance he came up with? One in 10 to the 17th power. That’s a one with seventeen zeros. To help us wrap our brains around that figure, he provided this analogy:

“Suppose that we take 10^17 silver dollars and lay them on the face of Texas. They’ll cover all of the state two feet deep. Now mark one of these silver dollars and stir the whole mass thoroughly, all over the state. Blindfold a man and tell him that he can travel as far as he wishes, but he must pick up one silver dollar and say that this is the right one. What chance would he have of getting the right one? Just the same chance that the prophets would’ve had of writing these eight prophecies and having them all come true in any one man, from their day to the present time, providing they wrote them in their own wisdom.”

You have to admit, those are pretty incredible odds. Almost hints at some intelligent choreography, doesn’t it?

The reason why prophecy is an indication of the divine authorship of the Scriptures, and hence a testimony to the trustworthiness of the Message of the Scriptures, is because of the minute probability of fulfillment. – David Williams, mathematician

Why Do I Believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God?

I’ve been sorting through some of the foundations of my faith, identifying them and putting them into words. Writing always helps me get a handle on things, and if one is going to stake her life to a belief, I think she ought to have a pretty good handle on it. So I’m in the process of some internal spring cleaning, sorting and proving and tucking back away.

Christ’s Claims

One of the basic tenets of my faith is that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Why? Well, first of all, because he said his is! Do I believe everyone who makes that claim? Of course not. So why do I believe this one? I guess you have to look at the whole package.

Jesus Christ made it abundantly clear who He thought He was. Read through the book of John and you’ll see what I mean. He believed He was the Messiah sent by God to provide atonement for the sin of mankind. That’s a pretty huge claim. And there are only three logical responses to it. Either Christ was a liar, or He was crazy, or He was who He said He was.

If you read the rest of the gospels, you’ll see right away that the first option just doesn’t jive. Christ preached against lying and for a moral lifestyle based on God’s law. It makes no sense that He would lie. Nor would he sacrifice His life for a lie. And you can’t argue that He was simply killed. He didn’t have to enter Jerusalem where it was widely known the religious establishment was plotting against Him. But He did. He could have made a very good case for Himself before Pilate, but He didn’t. He chose to die. Would a man die for a lie? That’s ridiculous.

So could He have been crazy? A crazy man might die for believing a falsehood. But that doesn’t make sense either. Jesus profoundly influenced the world with his teaching and his life. His ideas are succinct, wise, and highly regarded universally. Is this in keeping with an unsound mind? Did his actions at all imply imbalance? I just don’t buy it.

That leaves only one option. Jesus Christ was who He said He was.

Eleven Good Reasons

A second reason I believe Jesus is the Son of God is the change that occurred in His followers. Jesus chose twelve young men to be his disciples, and you have to admit they weren’t too impressive. When Jesus was teaching, they always seemed to miss the mark. They argued among themselves. They asked ridiculous questions. And they turned out to be real cowards when Christ was arrested.

But after Christ’s death, that all changed. These men, with the exception of Judas, became vocal proponents for Christ’s message. They took on the Jewish leaders. They traveled to foreign lands. They won converts, started churches, bucked established pagan religions, endured jail time, suffered beatings, and according to tradition, all of them but John died for their faith.

These guys firmly believed Christ’s message. Something substantial made them change. But what? How’d they go from coward to martyr?

The Resurrection

The eleven remaining disciples were witness to the most astonishing event in history, Christ’s resurrection. It’s the number one reason I believe Jesus is the Son of God. It changes everything. It verifies Christ’s claim, and it forms the substance of the Christian religion. In it are tied up faith, love, forgiveness, atonement, and hope through this conquering of death. But it’s so crazy! So unprecedented! So unnatural! Can it really be true?

Would the cowardly disciples give their lives if it wasn’t?

But aside from the change in these witnesses, there are other things that convince me that, no, the Resurrection was not a hoax. Since Jesus had said ahead of time that he would rise from the dead, the Jewish religious leaders took precautions. They wanted to nip that idea in the bud. They wanted Christ’s body firmly in the ground as proof that he was a counterfeit, so they asked for Roman soldiers to guard the tomb.

These soldiers were the most well-trained, effective army in the world. They were career soldiers, hardened men who didn’t flinch in battle. No one was getting by them. Yet something happened. They scattered. They ran away frightened. What could cause this but a supernatural event? Even an unlikely overpowering force of men wouldn’t send them scurrying but would cause a battle there’d be some record of. They simply scattered. Why?

And where was the body? If it was a hoax, wouldn’t the Jewish leaders move heaven and earth to lay hold of the body and squash rumors of a resurrection? But they couldn’t produce it.

And what about the hundreds of recorded witnesses who also claimed to see the risen Christ? Could this all be false? Is it all a hoax? If so, it’s the most elaborate, perfect one in the history of men. But I don’t think it’s a hoax at all. I think the Resurrection is the pivotal moment in which God displayed His power. It’s the centerpiece of a cohesive, premeditated plan. I think Jesus really was who He said He was.

I willingly admit much of my material today was taken from Josh McDowell’s book, More Than a Carpenter. I read it many years ago, but I did not reread it before writing this post. I wanted to take stock of the ideas and reasons I’ve assimilated as my own. I plan to reread it now, and I highly recommend it for anyone who wants more information on this subject. It has so much more content than my little post.