reason4faith 1 Peter 3:13-16 Colossians 1: Corinthians 10:3-5

reason4faith 1 Peter 3:13-16 Colossians 1:6-10 2 Corinthians 10:3-5
Are faith and reason incompatible and antithetical. Faith is viewed as subjective emotive uneducated unintelligent psychologically crippled non scientific Defending – not a luxury or a task of intellectual vanity – not an optional extra but everyone’s duty. 1 Peter 3: Reason. Gentleness and respect. Clear conscience. Jude 3 Contend for the faith. Philippians 1:27 Conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel … contending as one… FFB – 47% of NT deals with apologetics. Early Church Fathers The Apologists. 2 Corinthians 10:3-5

“ 13Who is going to harm you if you are eager to do good? 14But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed. "Do not fear what they fear; do not be frightened." 15But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, 16keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behaviour in Christ may be ashamed of their slander. 1 Peter 3:13-16 ”

“ 6So then, just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord, continue to live in him, 7rooted and built up in him, strengthened in the faith as you were taught, and overflowing with thankfulness. 8See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ. 9For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, 10and you have been given fullness in Christ, who is the head over every power and authority. Colossians 1:6-10 ”

“ 3For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. 4The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. 5We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ. 2 Corinthians 10:3-5 ”

4 reason faith Knowledge, Tactics, Attitudes God: the arguments
Objections to belief Problem of evil & suffering Religious pluralism Resurrection

Apologetics apologia Positive: presents a rational case for Christian truth claims. Natural theology Christian evidence Negative: deals with objections to those claims. Objections to God’s existence Objections to Christianity in particular A branch of Christian theology that seeks to provide a rational justification for the truth claims of the Christian faith. Christians need to grasp a wider picture of Western thought and culture, rather than concentrate exclusively on their immediate evangelistic contacts. Not the art of saying you’re sorry you are a Christian. Nor is it the art of making the other guy sorry you are a Christian!

Positive Apologetics Natural theology
General revelation not special revelation God has revealed himself in the world apart from his revelation in Scripture. Provides evidence and arguments for God’s existence It seeks to disqualify atheism or pantheism

Positive Apologetics Natural theology
Arguments for the existence of God Cosmological [contingency and temporal] Teleological Moral Ontological Contingency version; anything that exists has to have an explanation for why it exists either in the necessity of its own nature or in some external cause. The thrust here is that the Universe contingently exists it does not exist in the necessity of its own nature so it must have its ground in an external cause or sufficient reason for it existence. Works even if the universe is eternal. Why does it exist? It must have a sufficient reason to exist. Temporal version; Whatever begins to exist has to have a cause. Things don’t just pop into being out of nothing. This argument is dependent on showing that the universe is began to exist. Either good philosophical or scientific reasons for believing that the universe is not eternal in the past and had a beginning. Try to deduce some of the attributes of cause of the universe. Cause of space of time; beginning less, timeless, uncaused, space less, and so immaterial and non physical. Teleological argument – the old design argument. Telos – goal or purpose. Universe exhibits incredible complexity and this cannot be due to physical necessity or due to chance and so the best explanation is that it is due to design. A transcendent intelligent mind much be behind this. Thought to have been dealt a severe blow by the writing of David Hume and the work of Charles Darwin. Recently it has come back with a serious force because of the discovery of the detail of the complex and delicately balanced initial conditions of the universe have to be fine tuned to such a degree that they defy human comprehension. Moral argument – again a family of arguments. Several versions. If God does not exist then objective moral values do not exist. That is values which are binding and valid irrespective of whether anyone believes in them or not. Many atheists agree on that statement. If there is no God – moral values are just the result of evolution and are socially and culturally derived there being no anchor point to assure their objectivity. They are just culturally and socially relative. It is evident that objective values do exist. If they do and they cannot exist without God then the logical conclusion is that God exists. Moral difference between loving and hurting a child. Not indifferent acts. Some who hold to relativism with respect to the first premise that if there is no god then everything is relative. That if and therefore tolerance love and fair play are good bigotry and racist and homophobia are even. They are committed to both the premises of the argument Ontological argument means (Ontos being). Tries to demonstrate the being of god from the concept of god alone. Gods non existence is impossible. The concept of a necessary perfect being. If Gods existence is even possible then he must exist. Needs expanded.

Positive Apologetics Christian evidence
To get beyond mere theism we need to show that the god demonstrated by natural theology is in fact the Christian God. Fulfilled prophecy Jesus of Nazareth Jesus miracles and resurrection

Negative Apologetics Objections to God’s existence
The problem of evil and suffering The logical version The probabilistic version The hidden-ness of God Objections to Christianity in particular Biblical criticism Religious pluralism

Tactical scenarios Ask a question
Detective Columbo approach Ask a question Buy time, get information, take control What do you mean? Why hold that view? Burden of proof How did you come to that conclusion. Tell me a little more about what you mean Lead the discussion. I’m not sure I agree with you, why not think about it this way…

Discussions with those who choose not to believe in God
Believing in God is like believing a fairy story Science has disproved God or at least removed the need for God. The the origin of life has been explained – it all resulted from blind chance. The universe was not created – that is just nonsense – it has always been there.

Darwin sorted out the mystery of life with the theory of evolution. Being a Christian is just believing in stuff which is fanciful, like leprechauns, the Loch Ness monster, Fairies or Santa Claus. There is no real evidence for God’s existence – where is God?

Humans are just part of the animal kingdom – advanced apes! Good and evil are just ideas which arose from human culture. Morality just provides a convenient way to live in harmony. If an all powerful all loving God existed – there would be no pain and suffering in the world.

The Kalām Cosmological Argument
The existence of God The Kalām Cosmological Argument Whatever begins to exist has a cause The universe began to exist Therefore …. Leibniz 1[One version of the so called principle of sufficient reason]. That is to say that it is necessary or contingent. Examples. Numbers exist in the necessity of their own nature. Natural numbers - 0,1,2,3, or sets or functions or geometrical shapes. These do not have any causes. No cause of “3” it simply exists are a necessity of their own nature. Contingent entities such as stars, planets, mountains, people, plants etc. It is a very plausible premise. More plausible than its contradictory. Richard Taylor: Imagine when walking in the woods you came across a growing translucent ball on the forest floor. Wouldn’t you think it’s existence requires an explanation. Imagine it is larger – e.g. building, then continent, planet. Same issue. True for the universe itself. 2 Again a very plausible premise. Logically equivalent premise to one used by atheist. P>Q P implies Q if P then Q. Logically equivalent to Not q > not P. Atheists have often asserted that if God does not exist then the universe has no explanation. Logically to the second premise – same truth value. Even taken on it’s own merits, the second premise is still very plausible. God is the only candidate being for a being which transcend matter, energy, space and time. Beyond space and time – must be immaterial. Only two types of things which can satisfy these conditions. One, abstract objects; numbers, sets, functions which are all immaterial and timeless. The other type of thing is a personal mind, a self consciousness or a soul. Abstract objects cannot cause anything. The explanation must be a transcendent mind. Exactly what theists mead by God. 3 It also has, many unique properties, pressure temperature, density, expansion rate etc. All three are plausible and true. Therefore it follows from 1 and 3. 4 How might the atheist try to escape? In premise 2 we assume that the universe does not exist necessarily (like a number or an empty set) so the atheist may claim that the universe exists necessarily. This is an extraordinarily radical position for an atheist or philosopher to take and some sort of proof would need to offered. The universe has a cause

God exists The existence of God The Moral Argument
If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist Objective moral values do exist Therefore …. God exists

The universe is due to design
The existence of God The existence of God The Design Argument The fine-tuning of the universe is due to either physical necessity, chance, or design. It is not due to physical necessity or chance. Therefore 1. The fine-tuning of the universe is due to either physical necessity, chance, or design. 2. It is not due to physical necessity or chance. 3. Therefore, it is due to design. The universe is due to design

Irreducible complexity
Design in nature Neo-Darwinism Mutation and natural selection Fossil record Origin of life Irreducible complexity Information Key constituent of this substance. DNA. Every single cell in our bodies has an exact copy of our DNA.

Why Christianity is right! and all the other ‘isms are wrong.

God is recognisable in nature and morality
20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. Romans 1 14(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) Romans 2

Pluralism How can I say that Christianity is right and the others are wrong? Because reason and rationality demand it. Truth - in classical philosophy Aristotle contemplating a ust of Homer, Rembrandt, 1653 'to say of what is that it is, and of what is not that it is not, is true.' Aristotle Philosophers get themselves in all sorts of difficulties over this.

The evidence for the historical accuracy of the record of the resurrection.

Rylands Professor of Biblical Criticism, University of Manchester
"Had there been any tendency to depart from the facts in any material respect, the possible presence of hostile witnesses in the audience would have served as a further corrective." FF Bruce Rylands Professor of Biblical Criticism, University of Manchester I claim to be an historian. My approach to Classics is historical. And I tell you that the evidence for the life, the death, and the resurrection of Christ is better authenticated than most of the facts of ancient history . . . E. M. Blaiklock Professor of Classics Auckland University There exists no document from the ancient world, witnessed by so excellent a set of textual and historical testimonies Scepticism regarding the historical credentials of Christianity is based upon an irrational bias. Clark Pinnock McMaster University If the New Testament were a collection of secular writings, their authenticity would generally be regarded as beyond all doubt. FF Bruce Rylands Professor of Biblical Criticism, University of Manchester Historical and textual accuracy Resurrection history Hostile witnesses.

Key facts – Key evidence
12But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. 16For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. 19If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men. 1 Corinthians 15

Key facts – Key evidence
Broken Roman Seal Large stone moved Empty tomb Roman guard - overcome Grave clothes tell a tale Jesus' appearances confirmed … over 500 witnesses Evidence for the Resurrection by Josh McDowell For centuries many of the world's distinguished philosophers have assaulted Christianity as being irrational, superstitious and absurd. Many have chosen simply to ignore the central issue of the resurrection. Others have tried to explain it away through various theories. But the historical evidence just can't be discounted. A student at the University of Uruguay said to me. "Professor McDowell, why can't you refute Christianity?" "For a very simple reason," I answered. "I am not able to explain away an event in history--the resurrection of Jesus Christ." How can we explain the empty tomb? Can it possibly be accounted for by any natural cause? A QUESTION OF HISTORY After more than 700 hours of studying this subject, I have come to the conclusion that the resurrection of Jesus Christ is either one of the most wicked, vicious, heartless hoaxes ever foisted on the minds of human beings--or it is the most remarkable fact of history. Here are some of the facts relevant to the resurrection: Jesus of Nazareth, a Jewish prophet who claimed to be the Christ prophesied in the Jewish Scriptures, was arrested, was judged a political criminal, and was crucified. Three days after His death and burial, some women who went to His tomb found the body gone. In subsequent weeks, His disciples claimed that God had raised Him from the dead and that He appeared to them various times before ascending into heaven. From that foundation, Christianity spread throughout the Roman Empire and has continued to exert great influence down through the centuries. LIVING WITNESSES The New Testament accounts of the resurrection were being circulated within the lifetimes of men and women alive at the time of the resurrection. Those people could certainly have confirmed or denied the accuracy of such accounts. The writers of the four Gospels either had themselves been witnesses or else were relating the accounts of eyewitnesses of the actual events. In advocating their case for the gospel, a word that means "good news," the apostles appealed (even when confronting their most severe opponents) to common knowledge concerning the facts of the resurrection. F. F. Bruce, Rylands professor of biblical criticism and exegesis at the University of Manchester, says concerning the value of the New Testament records as primary sources: "Had there been any tendency to depart from the facts in any material respect, the possible presence of hostile witnesses in the audience would have served as a further corrective." IS THE NEW TESTAMENT RELIABLE? Because the New Testament provides the primary historical source for information on the resurrection, many critics during the 19th century attacked the reliability of these biblical documents. By the end of the 1 9th century, however, archaeological discoveries had confirmed the accuracy of the New Testament manuscripts. Discoveries of early papyri bridged the gap between the time of Christ and existing manuscripts from a later date. Those findings increased scholarly confidence in the reliability of the Bible. William F. Albright, who in his day was the world's foremost biblical archaeologist, said: "We can already say emphatically that there is no longer any solid basis for dating any book of the New Testament after about A.D. 80, two full generations before the date between 130 and 150 given by the more radical New Testament critics of today." Coinciding with the papyri discoveries, an abundance of other manuscripts came to light (over 24,000 copies of early New Testament manuscripts are known to be in existence today). The historian Luke wrote of "authentic evidence" concerning the resurrection. Sir William Ramsay, who spent 15 years attempting to undermine Luke credentials as a historian, and to refute the reliability of the New Testament, finally concluded: "Luke is a historian of the first rank This author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians. "I claim to be an historian. My approach to Classics is historical. And I tell you that the evidence for the life, the death, and the resurrection of Christ is better authenticated than most of the facts of ancient history . . . E. M. Blaiklock Professor of Classics Auckland University BACKGROUND The New Testament witnesses were fully aware of the background against which the resurrection took place. The body of Jesus, in accordance with Jewish burial custom, was wrapped in a linen cloth. About 100 pounds of aromatic spices, mixed together to form a gummy substance, were applied to the wrappings of cloth about the body. After the body was placed in a solid rock tomb, an extremely large stone was rolled against the entrance of the tomb. Large stones weighing approximately two tons were normally rolled (by means of levers) against a tomb entrance. A Roman guard of strictly disciplined fighting men was stationed to guard the tomb. This guard affixed on the tomb the Roman seal, which was meant to "prevent any attempt at vandalizing the sepulcher. Anyone trying to move the stone from the tomb's entrance would have broken the seal and thus incurred the wrath of Roman law. But three days later the tomb was empty. The followers of Jesus said He had risen from the dead. They reported that He appeared to them during a period of 40 days, showing Himself to them by many "infallible proofs." Paul the apostle recounted that Jesus appeared to more than 500 of His followers at one time, the majority of whom were still alive and who could confirm what Paul wrote. So many security precautions were taken with the trial, crucifixion, burial, entombment, sealing, and guarding of Christ's tomb that it becomes very difficult for critics to defend their position that Christ did not rise from the dead. Consider these facts: FACT #1: BROKEN ROMAN SEAL As we have said, the first obvious fact was the breaking of the seal that stood for the power and authority of the Roman Empire. The consequences of breaking the seal were extremely severe. The FBI and CIA of the Roman Empire were called into action to find the man or men who were responsible. If they were apprehended, it meant automatic execution by crucifixion upside down. People feared the breaking of the seal. Jesus' disciples displayed signs of cowardice when they hid themselves. Peter, one of these disciples, went out and denied Christ three times. FACT #2: EMPTY TOMB As we have already discussed, another obvious fact after the resurrection was the empty tomb. The disciples of Christ did not go off to Athens or Rome to preach that Christ was raised from the dead. Rather, they went right back to the city of Jerusalem, where, if what they were teaching was false, the falsity would be evident. The empty tomb was "too notorious to be denied." Paul Althaus states that the resurrection "could have not been maintained in Jerusalem for a single day, for a single hour, if the emptiness of the tomb had not been established as a fact for all concerned." Both Jewish and Roman sources and traditions admit an empty tomb. Those resources range from Josephus to a compilation of fifth-century Jewish writings called the "Toledoth Jeshu." Dr. Paul Maier calls this "positive evidence from a hostile source, which is the strongest kind of historical evidence. In essence, this means that if a source admits a fact decidedly not in its favor, then that fact is genuine." Gamaliel, who was a member of the Jewish high court, the Sanhedrin, put forth the suggestion that the rise of the Christian movement was God's doing; he could not have done that if the tomb were still occupied, or if the Sanhedrin knew the whereabouts of Christ's body. Paul Maier observes that " if all the evidence is weighed carefully and fairly, it is indeed justifiable, according to the canons of historical research, to conclude that the sepulcher of Joseph of Arimathea, in which Jesus was buried, was actually empty on the morning of the first Easter. And no shred of evidence has yet been discovered in literary sources, epigraphy, or archaeology that would disprove this statement." FACT #3: LARGE STONE MOVED On that Sunday morning the first thing that impressed the people who approached the tomb was the unusual position of the one and a half to two ton stone that had been lodged in front of the doorway. All the Gospel writers mention it.There exists no document from the ancient world, witnessed by so excellent a set of textual and historical testimonies Skepticism regarding the historical credentials of Christianity is based upon an irrational bias. Clark Pinnock Mcmaster University Those who observed the stone after the resurrection describe its position as having been rolled up a slope away not just from the entrance of the tomb, but from the entire massive sepulcher. It was in such a position that it looked as if it had been picked up and carried away. Now, I ask you, if the disciples had wanted to come in, tiptoe around the sleeping guards, and then roll the stone over and steal Jesus' body, how could they have done that without the guards' awareness? FACT #4: ROMAN GUARD GOES AWOL 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 wand 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." FACT #5: GRAVECLOTHES TELL A TALE In a literal sense, against all statements to the contrary, the tomb was not totally empty--because of an amazing phenomenon. John, a disciple of Jesus, looked over to the place where the body of Jesus had lain, and there were the grave clothes, in the form of the body, slightly caved in and empty--like the empty chrysalis of a caterpillar's cocoon. That's enough to make a believer out of anybody. John never did get over it. The first thing that stuck in the minds of the disciples was not the empty tomb, but rather the empty grave clothes--undisturbed in form and position. FACT #6: JESUS' APPEARANCES CONFIRMED Christ appeared alive on several occasions after the cataclysmic events of that first Easter . When studying an event in history, it is important to know whether enough people who were participants or eyewitnesses to the event were alive when the facts about the event were published. To know this is obviously helpful in ascertaining the accuracy of the published report. If the number of eyewitnesses is substantial, the event can he regarded as fairly well established. For instance, if we all witness a murder, and a later police report turns out to he a fabrication of lies, we as eyewitnesses can refute it. OVER 500 WITNESSES Several very important factors arc often overlooked when considering Christ's post-resurrection appearances to individuals. The first is the large number of witnesses of Christ after that resurrection morning. One of the earliest records of Christ's appearing after the resurrection is by Paul. The apostle appealed to his audience's knowledge of the fact that Christ had been seen by more than 500 people at one time. Paul reminded them that the majority of those people were still alive and could be questioned. Dr. Edwin M. Yamauchi, associate professor of history at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio, emphasizes: "What gives a special authority to the list (of witnesses) as historical evidence is the reference to most of the five hundred brethren being still alive. St. Paul says in effect, 'If you do not believe me, you can ask them.' Such a statement in an admittedly genuine letter written within thirty years of the event is almost as strong evidence as one could hope to get for something that happened nearly two thousand years ago." Let's take the more than 500 witnesses who saw Jesus alive after His death and burial, and place them in a courtroom. Do you realize that if each of those 500 people were to testify for only six minutes, including cross-examination, you would have an amazing 50 hours of firsthand testimony? Add to this the testimony of many other eyewitnesses and you would well have the largest and most lopsided trial in history. HOSTILE WITNESSES Another factor crucial to interpreting Christ's appearances is that He also appeared to those who were hostile or unconvinced. Over and over again, I have read or heard people comment that Jesus was seen alive after His death and burial only by His friends and followers. Using that argument, they attempt to water down the overwhelming impact of the multiple eyewitness accounts. But that line of reasoning is so pathetic it hardly deserves comment. No author or informed individual would regard Saul of Tarsus as being a follower of Christ. The facts show the exact opposite. Saul despised Christ and persecuted Christ's followers. It was a life-shattering experience when Christ appeared to him. Although he was at the time not a disciple, he later became the apostle Paul, one of the greatest witnesses for the truth of the resurrection.If the New Testament were a collection of secular writings, their authenticity would generally be regarded as beyond all doubt. F. F. Bruce Manchester University The argument that Christ's appearances were only to followers is an argument for the most part from silence, and arguments from silence can be dangerous. It is equally possible that all to whom Jesus appeared became followers. No one acquainted with the facts can accurately say that Jesus appeared to just "an insignificant few." Christians believe that Jesus was bodily resurrected in time and space by the supernatural power of God. The difficulties of belief may be great, but the problems inherent in unbelief present even greater difficulties. The theories advanced to explain the resurrection by "natural causes" are weak; they actually help to build confidence in the truth of the resurrection. THE WRONG TOMB? A theory propounded by Kirsopp Lake assumes that the women who reported that the body was missing had mistakenly gone to the wrong tomb. If so, then the disciples who went to check up on the women's statement must have also gone to the wrong tomb. We may be certain, however, that Jewish authorities, who asked for a Roman guard to be stationed at the tomb to prevent Jesus' body from being stolen, would not have been mistaken about the location. Nor would the Roman guards, for they were there! If the resurrection-claim was merely because of a geographical mistake, the Jewish authorities would have lost no time in producing the body from the proper tomb, thus effectively quenching for all time any rumor resurrection. HALLUCINATIONS? Another attempted explanation claims that the appearances of Jesus after the resurrection were either illusions or hallucinations. Unsupported by the psychological principles governing the appearances of hallucinations, this theory also does not coincide with the historical situation. Again, where was the actual body, and why wasn't it produced? DID JESUS SWOON? Another theory, popularized by Venturini several centuries ago, is often quoted today. This is the swoon theory, which says that Jesus didn't die; he merely fainted from exhaustion and loss of blood. Everyone thought Him dead, but later He resuscitated and the disciples thought it to be a resurrection. Skeptic David Friedrich Strauss--certainly no believer in the resurrection--gave the deathblow to any thought that Jesus revived from a swoon: "It is impossible that a being who had stolen half-dead out of the sepulchre, who crept about weak and ill, wanting medical treatment, who required bandaging, strengthening and indulgence, and who still at last yielded to His sufferings, could have given to the disciples the impression that He was a Conqueror over death and the grave, the Prince of Life,For the New Testament of Acts, the confirmation of historicity is overwhelming. Any attempt to reject its basic historicity, even in matters of detail, must now appear absurd. Roman historians have long taken it for granted. A. N. Sherwin-White Classical Roman Historian an impression which lay at the bottom of their future ministry. Such a resuscitation could only have weakened the impression which He had made upon them in life and in death, at the most could only have given it an elegiac voice, but could by no possibility have changed their sorrow into enthusiasm, have elevated their reverence into worship." THE BODY STOLEN? Then consider the theory that the body was stolen by the disciples while the guards slept. The depression and cowardice of the disciples provide a hard-hitting argument against their suddenly becoming so brave and daring as to face a detachment of soldiers at the tomb and steal the body. They were in no mood to attempt anything like that. The theory that the Jewish or Roman authorities moved Christ's body is no more reasonable an explanation for the empty tomb than theft by the disciples. If the authorities had the body in their possession or knew where it was, why, when the disciples were preaching the resurrection in Jerusalem, didn't they explain: "Wait! We moved the body, see, He didn't rise from the grave"? And if such a rebuttal failed, why didn't they explain exactly where Jesus' body lay? If this failed, why didn't they recover the corpse, put it on a cart, and wheel it through the center of Jerusalem? Such an action would have destroyed Christianity--not in the cradle, but in the womb! THE RESURRECTION IS A FACT Professor Thomas Arnold, for 14 years a headmaster of Rugby, author of the famous, History of Rome, and appointed to the chair of modern history at Oxford, was well acquainted with the value of evidence in determining historical facts. This great scholar said: "I have been used for many years to study the histories of other times, and to examine and weigh the evidence of those who have written about them, and I know of no one fact in the history of mankind which is proved by better and fuller evidence of every sort, to the understanding of a fair inquirer, than the great sign which God bath given us that Christ died and rose again from the dead." Brooke Foss Westcott, an English scholar, said: "raking all the evidence together, it is not too much to say that there is no historic incident better or more variously supported than the resurrection of Christ. Nothing but the antecedent assumption that it must be false could have suggested the idea of deficiency in the proof of it." REAL PROOF: THE DISCIPLES' LIVES But the most telling testimony of all must be the lives of those early Christians. We must ask ourselves: What caused them to go everywhere telling the message of the risen Christ? Had there been any visible benefits accrued to them from their efforts--prestige, wealth, increased social status or material benefits--we might logically attempt to account for their actions, for their whole-hearted and total allegiance to this "risen Christ ." As a reward for their efforts, however, those early Christians were beaten, stoned to death, thrown to the lions, tortured and crucified. Every conceivable method was used to stop them from talking. Yet, they laid down their lives as the ultimate proof of their complete confidence in the truth of their message. WHERE DO YOU STAND? How do you evaluate this overwhelming historical evidence? What is your decision about the fact of Christ's empty tomb? What do you think of Christ? When I was confronted with the overwhelming evidence for Christ's resurrection, I had to ask the logical question: "What difference does all this evidence make to me? What difference does it make whether or not I believe Christ rose again and died on the cross for my sins!' The answer is put best by something Jesus said to a man who doubted--Thomas. Jesus told him: "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me" (John 14:6). On the basis of all the evidence for Christ's resurrection, and considering the fact that Jesus offers forgiveness of sin and an eternal relationship with God, who would be so foolhardy as to reject Him? Christ is alive! He is living today. You can trust God right now by faith through prayer. Prayer is talking with God. God knows your heart and is not so concerned with your words as He is with the attitude of your heart. If you have never trusted Christ, you can do so right now. The prayer I prayed is: "Lord Jesus, I need You. Thank You for dying on the cross for my sins. I open the door of my life and trust You as my Savior. Thank You for forgiving my sins and giving me eternal life. Make me the kind of person You want me to be. Thank You that I can trust You."

A collection of first century Greek documents
The problem is – the Bible is not reliable and you cannot take the content as history. A collection of first century Greek documents No assumption as to their reliability other than the way any sources of ancient history would be regarded. Approach the New Testament writings, not as inspired Scripture, but merely as a collection of Greek documents coming down to us out of the first century, without any assumption as to their reliability other than the way we normally regard other sources of ancient history. We may be surprised to learn that the majority of New Testament critics investigating the gospels in this way accept the central facts undergirding the resurrection of Jesus.

A.D.114 (portions) A.D. 200 (books) A.D. 325 (complete) A.D. 50-100
Author Homer Herodotus Thucydides Caesar Tacitus Pliny Secundus Book Iliad History Gallic Wars Annals Natural History Time Gap c. 400 yrs. c. 1,350 yrs. c. 1,300 yrs. c. 1,000 yrs. c. 750 yrs. Written 800 B.C. B.C. B.C. B.C. A.D. 100 A.D Earliest copy 400 B.C. A.D. 900 A.D. 1100 A.D. 850 New Testament 27 A.D.114 (portions) A.D. 200 (books) A.D. 325 (complete) A.D +50 yrs yrs yrs. Authenticity and accuracy

643 20 Authenticity and accuracy

6000 5366 5000 Homer Herodotus 4000 Thucydides 3000 Caesar Tacitus
2000 Pliny 643 Homer 1000 NT NT Authenticity and accuracy

"In real terms, the New Testament is easily the best attested ancient writing in terms of the sheer number of documents, the time span between the events and the documents, and the variety of documents available to sustain or contradict it. There is nothing in ancient manuscript evidence to match such textual availability and integrity." Ravi Zacharias

1 Accepted fact After his crucifixion, Jesus was buried in a tomb by Joseph of Arimathea. 3For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. 6After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born. 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 1. Jesus’ burial is attested in the very old tradition quoted by Paul in I Cor : For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve. Paul not only uses the typical rabbinical terms “received” and “delivered” with regard to the information he is passing on to the Corinthians, but vv. 3-5 are a highly stylized four-line formula filled with non-Pauline characteristics. This has convinced all scholars that Paul is, as he says, quoting from an old tradition which he himself received after becoming a Christian. This tradition probably goes back at least to Paul’s fact-finding visit to Jerusalem around AD 36, when he spent two weeks with Cephas and James (Gal. 1.18). It thus dates to within five years after Jesus’ death. So short a time span and such personal contact make it idle to talk of legend in this case. 2. The burial story is part of very old source material used by Mark in writing his gospel. The gospels tend to consist of brief snapshots of Jesus’ life which are loosely connected and not always chronologically arranged. But when we come to the passion story we do have one, smooth, continuously-running narrative. This suggests that the passion story was one of Mark’s sources of information in writing his gospel. Now most scholars think Mark is already the earliest gospel, and Mark’s source for Jesus’ passion is, of course, even older. Comparison of the narratives of the four gospels shows that their accounts do not diverge from one another until after the burial. This implies that the burial account was part of the passion story. Again, its great age militates against its being legendary. 3. As a member of the Jewish court that condemned Jesus, Joseph of Arimathea is unlikely to be a Christian invention. There was strong resentment against the Jewish leadership for their role in the condemnation of Jesus (I Thess. 2.15). It is therefore highly improbable that Christians would invent a member of the court that condemned Jesus who honors Jesus by giving him a proper burial instead of allowing him to be dispatched as a common criminal. 4. No other competing burial story exists. If the burial by Joseph were fictitious, then we would expect to find either some historical trace of what actually happened to Jesus’ corpse or at least some competing legends. But all our sources are unanimous on Jesus’ honorable interment by Joseph. For these and other reasons, the majority of New Testament critics concur that Jesus was buried in a tomb by Joseph of Arimathea. According to the late John A. T. Robinson of Cambridge University, the burial of Jesus in the tomb is “one of the earliest and best-attested facts about Jesus.”

1 Accepted fact After his crucifixion, Jesus was buried in a tomb by Joseph of Arimathea. This probably goes back at least to Paul’s fact-finding visit to Jerusalem around AD 36, when he spent two weeks with Peter and James. 18Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Peter and stayed with him fifteen days. 19I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord's brother. 20I assure you before God that what I am writing you is no lie. Galatians 1 1. Jesus’ burial is attested in the very old tradition quoted by Paul in I Cor : For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve. Paul not only uses the typical rabbinical terms “received” and “delivered” with regard to the information he is passing on to the Corinthians, but vv. 3-5 are a highly stylized four-line formula filled with non-Pauline characteristics. This has convinced all scholars that Paul is, as he says, quoting from an old tradition which he himself received after becoming a Christian. This tradition probably goes back at least to Paul’s fact-finding visit to Jerusalem around AD 36, when he spent two weeks with Cephas and James (Gal. 1.18). It thus dates to within five years after Jesus’ death. So short a time span and such personal contact make it idle to talk of legend in this case. 2. The burial story is part of very old source material used by Mark in writing his gospel. The gospels tend to consist of brief snapshots of Jesus’ life which are loosely connected and not always chronologically arranged. But when we come to the passion story we do have one, smooth, continuously-running narrative. This suggests that the passion story was one of Mark’s sources of information in writing his gospel. Now most scholars think Mark is already the earliest gospel, and Mark’s source for Jesus’ passion is, of course, even older. Comparison of the narratives of the four gospels shows that their accounts do not diverge from one another until after the burial. This implies that the burial account was part of the passion story. Again, its great age militates against its being legendary. 3. As a member of the Jewish court that condemned Jesus, Joseph of Arimathea is unlikely to be a Christian invention. There was strong resentment against the Jewish leadership for their role in the condemnation of Jesus (I Thess. 2.15). It is therefore highly improbable that Christians would invent a member of the court that condemned Jesus who honors Jesus by giving him a proper burial instead of allowing him to be dispatched as a common criminal. 4. No other competing burial story exists. If the burial by Joseph were fictitious, then we would expect to find either some historical trace of what actually happened to Jesus’ corpse or at least some competing legends. But all our sources are unanimous on Jesus’ honorable interment by Joseph. For these and other reasons, the majority of New Testament critics concur that Jesus was buried in a tomb by Joseph of Arimathea. According to the late John A. T. Robinson of Cambridge University, the burial of Jesus in the tomb is “one of the earliest and best-attested facts about Jesus.” John Arthur Thomas Robinson (1919 in Canterbury, England–December 5, 1983) was a New Testament scholar, author and a former Anglican Bishop of Woolwich, England. He was a lecturer at Trinity College, Cambridge, and later Dean of Trinity College until his death in 1983 from cancer Robinson was considered a major force in shaping liberal Christian theology. Along with Harvard theologian Harvey Cox, he spearheaded the field of secular theology and, like William Barclay, he was a believer in universal salvation.

“one of the earliest and best attested facts about Jesus”
1 Accepted fact After his crucifixion, Jesus was buried in a tomb by Joseph of Arimathea. Earliest account – Mark Smooth continuously running narrative. Age lends authenticity. As a member of the Jewish court that condemned Jesus, Joseph of Arimathea is unlikely to be a Christian invention. No other competing burial story exists! “one of the earliest and best attested facts about Jesus”

2 Accepted fact Jesus’ tomb was found empty by a group of his women followers. The fact that women’s testimony was discounted in first century Palestine stands in favour of the women’s role in discovering the empty tomb. 1. The empty tomb story is also part of the old passion source used by Mark. The passion source used by Mark did not end in death and defeat, but with the empty tomb story, which is grammatically of one piece with the burial story. 2. The old tradition cited by Paul in I Cor implies the fact of the empty tomb. For any first century Jew, to say that of a dead man “that he was buried and that he was raised” is to imply that a vacant grave was left behind. Moreover, the expression “on the third day” probably derives from the women’s visit to the tomb on the third day, in Jewish reckoning, after the crucifixion. The four-line tradition cited by Paul summarizes both the gospel accounts and the early apostolic preaching (Acts ); significantly, the third line of the tradition corresponds to the empty tomb story. 3. The story is simple and lacks signs of legendary embellishment. All one has to do to appreciate this point is to compare Mark’s account with the wild legendary stories found in the second-century apocryphal gospels, in which Jesus is seen coming out of the tomb with his head reaching up above the clouds and followed by a talking cross! 4. The fact that women’s testimony was discounted in first century Palestine stands in favor of the women’s role in discovering the empty tomb. According to Josephus, the testimony of women was regarded as so worthless that it could not even be admitted into a Jewish court of law. Any later legendary story would certainly have made male disciples discover the empty tomb. 5. The earliest Jewish allegation that the disciples had stolen Jesus’ body (Matt ) shows that the body was in fact missing from the tomb. The earliest Jewish response to the disciples’ proclamation, “He is risen from the dead!” was not to point to his occupied tomb and to laugh them off as fanatics, but to claim that they had taken away Jesus’ body. Thus, we have evidence of the empty tomb from the very opponents of the early Christians. One could go on, but I think that enough has been said to indicate why, in the words of Jacob Kremer, an Austrian specialist in the resurrection, “By far most exegetes hold firmly to the reliability of the biblical statements concerning the empty tomb.” Testimony of women was regarded as so worthless that it could not even be admitted into a Jewish court of law. [Josephus] Any later legendary story would certainly have made male disciples discover the empty tomb.

2 Accepted fact Jesus’ tomb was found empty by a group of his women followers. The earliest Jewish allegation that the disciples had stolen Jesus’ body (Matt 28:15) confirms that the it was missing. 1. The empty tomb story is also part of the old passion source used by Mark. The passion source used by Mark did not end in death and defeat, but with the empty tomb story, which is grammatically of one piece with the burial story. 2. The old tradition cited by Paul in I Cor implies the fact of the empty tomb. For any first century Jew, to say that of a dead man “that he was buried and that he was raised” is to imply that a vacant grave was left behind. Moreover, the expression “on the third day” probably derives from the women’s visit to the tomb on the third day, in Jewish reckoning, after the crucifixion. The four-line tradition cited by Paul summarizes both the gospel accounts and the early apostolic preaching (Acts ); significantly, the third line of the tradition corresponds to the empty tomb story. 3. The story is simple and lacks signs of legendary embellishment. All one has to do to appreciate this point is to compare Mark’s account with the wild legendary stories found in the second-century apocryphal gospels, in which Jesus is seen coming out of the tomb with his head reaching up above the clouds and followed by a talking cross! 4. The fact that women’s testimony was discounted in first century Palestine stands in favor of the women’s role in discovering the empty tomb. According to Josephus, the testimony of women was regarded as so worthless that it could not even be admitted into a Jewish court of law. Any later legendary story would certainly have made male disciples discover the empty tomb. 5. The earliest Jewish allegation that the disciples had stolen Jesus’ body (Matt ) shows that the body was in fact missing from the tomb. The earliest Jewish response to the disciples’ proclamation, “He is risen from the dead!” was not to point to his occupied tomb and to laugh them off as fanatics, but to claim that they had taken away Jesus’ body. Thus, we have evidence of the empty tomb from the very opponents of the early Christians. One could go on, but I think that enough has been said to indicate why, in the words of Jacob Kremer, an Austrian specialist in the resurrection, “By far most exegetes hold firmly to the reliability of the biblical statements concerning the empty tomb.” The location of Jesus burial place would have been common knowledge in Jerusalem. “most exegetes hold to the reliability of the biblical statements about the empty tomb.”

3 Accepted fact Multiple post mortem appearances of Jesus
he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. 6After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8and last of all he appeared to me also, 1 Cor 15 On multiple occasions and under various circumstances, different individuals and groups of people experienced appearances of Jesus alive from the dead. This is a fact which is almost universally acknowledged among New Testament scholars, for the following reasons: 1. The list of eyewitnesses to Jesus’ resurrection appearances which is quoted by Paul in I Cor guarantees that such appearances occurred. These included appearances to Peter (Cephas), the Twelve, the 500 brethren, and James. 2. The appearance traditions in the gospels provide multiple, independent attestation of these appearances. This is one of the most important marks of historicity. The appearance to Peter is independently attested by Luke, and the appearance to the Twelve by Luke and John. We also have independent witness to Galilean appearances in Mark, Matthew, and John, as well as to the women in Matthew and John. 3. Certain appearances have earmarks of historicity. For example, we have good evidence from the gospels that neither James nor any of Jesus’ younger brothers believed in him during his lifetime. There is no reason to think that the early church would generate fictitious stories concerning the unbelief of Jesus’ family had they been faithful followers all along. But it is indisputable that James and his brothers did become active Christian believers following Jesus’ death. James was considered an apostle and eventually rose to the position of leadership of the Jerusalem church. According to the first century Jewish historian Josephus, James was martyred for his faith in Christ in the late AD 60s. Now most of us have brothers. What would it take to convince you that your brother is the Lord, such that you would be ready to die for that belief? Can there be any doubt that this remarkable transformation in Jesus’ younger brother took place because, in Paul’s words, “then he appeared to James”? Even Gert Lüdemann, the leading German critic of the resurrection, himself admits, “It may be taken as historically certain that Peter and the disciples had experiences after Jesus’ death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen Christ.” It may be taken as historically certain that Peter and the disciples had experiences after Jesus’ death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen Christ.” Gert Lüdemann

4 Accepted fact Disciples believed that Jesus was risen from the dead
“some sort of powerful, transformative experience is required to generate the sort of movement earliest Christianity was ” Luke Johnson, Emory University 1. Their leader was dead. And Jews had no belief in a dying, much less rising, Messiah. The Messiah was supposed to throw off Israel’s enemies (= Rome) and re-establish a Davidic reign—not suffer the ignominious death of criminal. 2. According to Jewish law, Jesus’ execution as a criminal showed him out to be a heretic, a man literally under the curse of God (Deut ). The catastrophe of the crucifixion for the disciples was not simply that their Master was gone, but that the crucifixion showed, in effect, that the Pharisees had been right all along, that for three years they had been following a heretic, a man accursed by God! 3. Jewish beliefs about the afterlife precluded anyone’s rising from the dead to glory and immortality before the general resurrection at the end of the world. All the disciples could do was to preserve their Master’s tomb as a shrine where his bones could reside until that day when all of Israel’s righteous dead would be raised by God to glory. Despite all this, the original disciples believed in and were willing to go to their deaths for the fact of Jesus’ resurrection. Luke Johnson, a New Testament scholar from Emory University, muses, “some sort of powerful, transformative experience is required to generate the sort of movement earliest Christianity was ”4 N. T. Wright, an eminent British scholar, concludes, “that is why, as a historian, I cannot explain the rise of early Christianity unless Jesus rose again, leaving an empty tomb behind him.”5 In summary, there are four facts agreed upon by the majority of scholars who have written on these subjects which any adequate historical hypothesis must account for: Jesus’ entombment by Joseph of Arimathea, the discovery of his empty tomb, his post-mortem appearances, and the origin of the disciples’ belief in his resurrection. “that is why, as a historian, I cannot explain the rise of early Christianity unless Jesus rose again, leaving an empty tomb behind him.” NT Wright

Accepted facts Jesus was buried by Joseph of Arimathea
Jesus’ tomb was found empty Multiple post mortem appearances Disciples believed that Jesus was risen

Alternative ideas Swoon theory Twin theory Hallucination theory
Wrong tomb Stolen body Legend Quranic account

But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him. Acts 2:24 1. It has great explanatory scope: it explains why the tomb was found empty, why the disciples saw post-mortem appearances of Jesus, and why the Christian faith came into being. 2. It has great explanatory power: it explains why the body of Jesus was gone, why people repeatedly saw Jesus alive despite his earlier public execution, and so forth. 3. It is plausible: given the historical context of Jesus’ own unparalleled life and claims, the resurrection serves as divine confirmation of those radical claims. 4. It is not ad hoc or contrived: it requires only one additional hypothesis: that God exists. And even that needn’t be an additional hypothesis if one already believes that God exists. 5. It is in accord with accepted beliefs. The hypothesis: “God raised Jesus from the dead” doesn’t in any way conflict with the accepted belief that people don’t rise naturally from the dead. The Christian accepts that belief as wholeheartedly as he accepts the hypothesis that God raised Jesus from the dead. 6. It far outstrips any of its rival hypotheses in meeting conditions (1)-(5). Down through history various alternative explanations of the facts have been offered, for example, the conspiracy hypothesis, the apparent death hypothesis, the hallucination hypothesis, and so forth. Such hypotheses have been almost universally rejected by contemporary scholarship. None of these naturalistic hypotheses succeeds in meeting the conditions as well as the resurrection hypothesis.

But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him. Acts 2:24 It has great explanatory scope It has great explanatory power It is plausible It is not ad hoc or contrived It is in accord with accepted beliefs It far outstrips any of its rival hypotheses 1. It has great explanatory scope: it explains why the tomb was found empty, why the disciples saw post-mortem appearances of Jesus, and why the Christian faith came into being. 2. It has great explanatory power: it explains why the body of Jesus was gone, why people repeatedly saw Jesus alive despite his earlier public execution, and so forth. 3. It is plausible: given the historical context of Jesus’ own unparalleled life and claims, the resurrection serves as divine confirmation of those radical claims. 4. It is not ad hoc or contrived: it requires only one additional hypothesis: that God exists. And even that needn’t be an additional hypothesis if one already believes that God exists. 5. It is in accord with accepted beliefs. The hypothesis: “God raised Jesus from the dead” doesn’t in any way conflict with the accepted belief that people don’t rise naturally from the dead. The Christian accepts that belief as wholeheartedly as he accepts the hypothesis that God raised Jesus from the dead. 6. It far outstrips any of its rival hypotheses in meeting conditions (1)-(5). Down through history various alternative explanations of the facts have been offered, for example, the conspiracy hypothesis, the apparent death hypothesis, the hallucination hypothesis, and so forth. Such hypotheses have been almost universally rejected by contemporary scholarship. None of these naturalistic hypotheses succeeds in meeting the conditions as well as the resurrection hypothesis.

reason4faith Are faith and reason incompatible and antithetical. Faith is viewed as subjective emotive uneducated unintelligent psychologically crippled non scientific Defending – not a luxury or a task of intellectual vanity – not an optional extra but everyone’s duty. 1 Peter 3: Reason. Gentleness and respect. Clear conscience. Jude 3 Contend for the faith. Philippians 1:27 Conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel … contending as one… FFB – 47% of NT deals with apologetics. Early Church Fathers The Apologists.

What atheists cannot explain …
The origin of the universe out of nothing The design of the universe The source of the fine tuning in the universe The explanation of the numerous constants The laws of logic The laws of mathematics The laws of causality The origin of objective moral values The origin of human rights The origin and design of life The origin of intelligence The origin of love The origin of beauty The resurrection of Jesus from the dead Questions for the atheist They can’t explain.. a whole host of things that a good world view has to explain.

31For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead." Acts 17:29-31

Why do you believe what you believe?
Because it makes sense of the world How do you show that what you believe is true? Evidence and reason

reason4faith 1 Peter 3:13-16 Colossians 1: Corinthians 10:3-5

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "reason4faith 1 Peter 3:13-16 Colossians 1: Corinthians 10:3-5"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

reason4faith 1 Peter 3:13-16 Colossians 1: Corinthians 10:3-5

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "reason4faith 1 Peter 3:13-16 Colossians 1: Corinthians 10:3-5"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback