Chapter Notes for the book The Case For Christ by Lee Strobel

June 22, 2003

The following notes present what I think are the most significant points from chapters 1-15. I have also added some editorial comments, which I have identified as such. This book contains a lot of information from all angles and really presents a solid case for the truthfulness of the Biblical record and the sureness of Jesus Christ’s life, death, burial, and resurrection. It also presents strong evidence that Jesus Christ is God, not a mere man.

1. The Eyewitness Evidence – Can the Biographies of Jesus Be Trusted?

 

The two earliest biographies of Alexander the Great were written by Arrian and Plutarch more than 400 years after Alexander’s death in 323 BC, yet historians consider them to be generally trustworthy.

 

The gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were written after almost all the letters of Paul. If AD 33 was the Crucifixion, Paul’s conversion was about AD 35. His ministry began in the late 40s and most of his letters appeared during the 50s. Acts, written by Luke, ends apparently unfinished. Paul is the central figure and he is under house arrest in Rome. With that the book abruptly ends. What happens to Paul? We don’t find out from Acts, probably since it was written before Paul’s death. That means Acts cannot be dated any later than AD 62. Since Acts is the 2^nd of a two-part work, we know the 1^st part – the gospel of Luke – must have been written earlier. Since Luke incorporates parts of Mark, this means Mark is even earlier, either the late 50s or no later than AD 60, thus a maximum gap of 27 years between Christ’s crucifixion and the eyewitness written documentation. Going back even further, in Phil 2:6-11 and Col 1:15-20, Paul’s writings, are famous creeds which describe Jesus as being ‘in very nature God’ and ‘the image of the invisible God’, who created all things. These creeds go way back to early church practices soon after the Resurrection. Note in Col 1:15 ‘firstborn’ is translated better ‘supreme heir’. It does not connote that he was the first born or created since you need to take this verse in context with the author’s description in Col 2:9 where Jesus contains all the fullness of Deity in bodily form. This means he has eternity and could not be born.

 

Matthew 14:22-33 and Mark 6:45-52 give the account of Jesus walking on water. "Fear not, it is I." is better translated "Fear not, I am." like in John 8:58, when he took upon himself the divine name ‘I AM’, which is the way God revealed himself in the burning bush to Moses in Ex 3:14.

 

Jesus Christ’s most common title in the gospels, Son of Man, does not refer to his humanity but his divinity, Daniel 7:13-14. Now, Son of God refers to his humanity. Thus, people have it turned around.

 

 

2. Testing the Eyewitness Evidence – Do the Biographies of Jesus Stand Up to Scrutiny?

 

Honest and accurate testimony will withstand scrutiny, while false, exaggerated, or misleading testimony will be exposed.

 

The Intention Test – Did the writers record history accurately? See Luke 1:1-4.

 

The Ability Test – Did the writers have the ability to record history accurately? How could they remember accurately, for say, 30 years? Remember the culture of the day was word of mouth. People memorized a great deal and checked out what they had memorized until it was accurate. Rabbis became famous for having the entire Hebrew Scriptures committed to memory.

 

The Character Test – Was it in the character of the writers to be truthful? No reasonable evidence to suggest they were anything but people of great integrity. They were willing to live out their beliefs even to the point of ten of the 11 remaining disciples being put to grisly deaths, which shows great character.

The Consistency Test – Are there irreconcilable discrepancies among the various gospel accounts? Remember to judge these accounts by the ancient standard that allowed for paraphrase, abridgment, explanatory additions, selections, and omission. Thus, the gospels are extremely consistent. Also, remember if they were too consistent this would show the authors conspired. This would invalidate them and you would have only one testimony that everyone else is parroting.

The Bias Test – Did the gospel writers have any biases that would have colored their work? Did they have any vested interest in skewing the material they were reporting on? They had nothing to gain except criticism, ostracism, and martyrdom and nothing to gain financially.

The Cover-up Test – Did they conveniently leave out embarrassing or hard to explain material? No, there is plenty of embarrassing material about the disciples. Mark’s perspective of Peter is pretty unflattering and Peter is the ringleader.

The Corroboration Test – When the gospels mention people, places, and events, do they check out to be correct in cases in which they can be independently verified? Within the last hundred years archaeology has unearthed discoveries that have confirmed specific references in the gospels. (Editorial note: The ossuary/tomb of Caiaphas, the high priest who turned Jesus over to the Romans, was uncovered in 1990. In October 2002 it was reported that the ossuary/tomb of James, the brother of Jesus, was discovered. It was dated to approximately AD 63. An inscription in the ossuary reads "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus.")

The Adverse Witness Test – Were others present who would have contradicted or corrected the gospels that they had been distorted or were false? Many enemies had reason to discredit the Christian movement and its Bible, but they didn’t. They didn’t say Jesus did not do miracles. They just disputed the divine source of his powers.

 

3. The Documentary Evidence – Were Jesus’ Biographies Reliably Preserved for Us?

Do the copies of the Bible’s New Testament today bear any resemblance to what the original authors wrote? In addition, do the four biographies in the four gospels tell the whole story?

 

Compared to other ancient writings/manuscripts in the area of 1) the time span from the original documents to the oldest copies and 2) the number of these copies, the New Testament is in a class of its own.

 

Consider Tacitus, the Roman historian who wrote his Annals of Imperial Rome in about AD 116. His first six books exist today in one manuscript that was copied in AD 850.

 

For Josephus, the first century historian, we have 9 Greek manuscripts of his work The Jewish War, and these copies were made in the 10^th, 11^th, and 12^th century. There is a Latin translation from the 4^th century and medieval Russian materials from the 11^th and 12^th century.

 

Homer’s Iliad, which was the bible of ancient Greeks and was composed about 800 BC, has fewer than 650 Greek manuscripts of it today. Some are fragments. These copies come from the 2^nd and 3^rd century. The Iliad is the runner up to the Bible’s New Testament in number of copies.

 

For the New Testament, the oldest copy is a portion John’s gospel on a papyri fragment dating around 100 to 150 and possibly even 98-117. While papyrus manuscripts represent the earliest copies of the New Testament, there are ancient copies written on parchment, which was made from the skins of cattle, sheep, goats, and antelope. We have 306 Greek uncial manuscripts, which are written in all-capital Greek letters, dating back as early as the 3^rd century. There are 2856 Greek minuscule (more cursive in nature) manuscripts dating around AD 800. There are also 2403 lectionaries, which contain New Testament Scripture. These lectionaries were read in the early churches at appropriate times during the year. Thus, a total of 5664 Greek manuscripts exist. In addition to Greek documents, there are 8000 to 10000 Latin Vulgate manuscripts, plus a total of 8000 in Ethiopic, Slavic, and Armenian. In all, there are about 24000 manuscripts in existence.

 

What about copying variations? Copies may vary in word order, but this does not change the meaning in Greek since the subject, verb, and object are distinguishable. These variants probably crept in due to reading the text and remembering the word order incorrectly. Spelling variations also occur. However, when you consider the number of doctrines of the church that are in jeopardy due to these variations, you arrive at zero. For example, the Jehovah’s Witnesses come to your door and say, your Bible is wrong in the King James version of 1 John 5:7-8, where it talks about the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and the three are one. They’ll say, that’s not in the earliest manuscripts and they are correct. These words are found in only 7 or 8 Latin copies of the Vulgate, all from the 15^th or 16^th century. But that does not dislodge the firmly witnessed testimony of the Bible to the doctrine of the Trinity. At the baptism of Jesus, the Father speaks, his beloved Son is baptized, and the Holy Spirit descends on him. At the ending of 2 Corinthians Paul says "May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all." There are many places where the Trinity is represented. So the variations, when they occur, tend to be minor rather than substantive.

 

Now, concerning the question "Does the NT contain the whole story"? Have some writings been left out that should be included? This is the question of the "canon", a term that comes from the Greek word meaning "rule", "norm", or "standard" and that describes the books that have become accepted as official and included in the NT. Three rules were used: 1) must have apostolic authority – written by apostles, who were eyewitnesses, or followers of apostles 2) was the book in agreement with the basic Christian tradition that the church recognized and normative 3) did the book have continuous acceptance and usage by the church at large. The canon is a list of authoritative books more that it is an authoritative list of books. These books did not derive their authority from being selected; each was authoritative before anyone gathered them together. The early church merely listened and sensed that these were authoritative accounts.

 

4. The Corroborating Evidence – Is There Credible Evidence for Jesus outside His Biographies?

Corroborate means to make more certain; confirm. In the case of the gospels, are there writings outside the Bible that affirm or support any of the essentials about Jesus and early Christianity?

 

Josephus, a 1^st century historian, was born in AD 37 and wrote most of his four works toward the end of the 1^st century. His most ambitious work was called The Antiquities, which was a history of the Jewish people from Creation until his time. He probably completed it in AD 93. Editorial note about The Antiquities: In Paul L. Maier’s book Josephus The Essential Writings the most famous passage of Antiquities XVIII,63 is taken from the Arabic 10^th century manuscript by the Melkite historian Agapius found in 1972 by Professor Schlomo Pines of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. This copy is considered more accurate than the standard text, which is quoted by Lee Strobel, since Josephus was not a Christian.

 

At this time there was a wise man called Jesus, and his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. Many people among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive. Accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets have reported wonders. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day.

 

The standard text for this passage is as follows and you can see that it has been trumped up a little. As early as Eusebius (c. AD 324) it was worded as such.

 

About this time lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was the achiever of extraordinary deeds and was a teacher of those who accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah. When he was indicted by the principal men among us and Pilate condemned him to be crucified, those who had come to love him originally did not cease to do so; for he appeared to them on the third day restored to life, as the prophets of the Deity had foretold these and countless other marvelous things about him. And the tribe of Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day.

 

In AD 115 Tacitus, a 1^st century Roman historian, stated that Nero persecuted the Christians as scapegoats to divert suspicion away from himself for the great fire that had devastated Rome in AD 64.

 

Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty (Editorial note: This is a reference to crucifixion.) during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome…

 

Pliny the Younger the Roman governor of Bithynia in NW Turkey references Christians he arrested in his correspondence to his friend, Emperor Trajan. Written in AD 111, the following extract attests to the rapid spread of Christianity and to the high ethical standards Christians kept.

 

I have asked them if they are Christians, and if they admit it, I repeat the question a second and third time, with a warning of the punishment awaiting them. If they persist, I order them to be led away for execution; for, whatever the nature of their admission, I am convinced that their stubbornness and unshakable obstinacy ought not to go unpunished…

 

They also declared that the sum total of their guilt or error amounted to no more that this: they had met regularly before dawn on a fixed day to chant verses alternately amongst themselves in honor of Christ as if to a god, and also to bind themselves by oath, not for any criminal purpose, but to abstain from theft, robbery, and adultery…

 

This made me decide it was all the more necessary to extract the truth by torture from two slave-women, whom they called deaconesses. I found nothing but a degenerate sort of cult carried to extravagant lengths.

 

Thallus in AD 52 wrote about the darkness that fell on the earth during the time of the Crucifixion. Julius Africanus in about AD 221 quoted Thallus. Thallus explained this darkness away as an eclipse of the sun, but Julius Africanus argues that it couldn’t have been an eclipse, given when the Crucifixion occurred. (Editorial note: The Crucifixion occurred during Jewish Passover. Passover always occurs during a full moon. Solar eclipses only occur during a new moon, when the moon comes between the earth and sun. Thus, Julius Africanus is correct.) Paul Maier said about the darkness in his 1968 book Pontius Pilate:

 

This phenomenon, evidently, was visible in Rome, Athens, and other Mediterranean cities. According to Tertullian … it was a "cosmic" or "world event." Phlegon, a Greek author from Caria writing a chronology soon after AD 137 reported that in the 4^th year of the 202^nd Olympiad (i.e., 33 AD) there was "the greatest eclipse of the sun" and that "it became night in the 6^th hour of the day (i.e. noon) so that the stars even appeared in the heavens. There was a great earthquake in Bithynia, and many things were overturned in Nicaea."

 

5. The Scientific Evidence – Does Archaeology Confirm or Contradict Jesus’ Biographies?

 

One prominent archaeologist examined Luke’s references to 32 countries, 54 cities, and 9 islands, finding not a single mistake. If Luke was so painstakingly accurate in his historical reporting on what basis may we assume he was credulous or inaccurate in his reporting of matters that were far more important, not only to him but to others as well?

 

In 1947 the Dead Sea Scrolls were found 20 miles east of Jerusalem in caves in the hills west of the Dead Sea. There are hundreds of manuscripts dating from 250 BC to AD 68. A strict sect of Jews called the Essenes, before the Romans destroyed their settlement, apparently had placed them there. One manuscript called 4Q521 could tell us something about who Jesus was claiming to be. The gospel of Matthew describes how John the Baptist, imprisoned and wrestling with lingering doubts and Jesus’ identity, sent his followers to ask Jesus this monumental question: "Are you the one who was to come, or should we expect someone else?" (Matt. 11:3). Through the centuries, Christians have wondered about Jesus’ rather enigmatic answer. Instead of directly saying yes or no, Jesus replied, "Go back and report to John what you hear and see: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is preached to the poor" (Matt. 11:4-5). Jesus’ response was an allusion to Isaiah 61. But for some reason Jesus included the phrase "the dead are raised," which is conspicuously absent from the Old Testament text. This is where 4Q521 comes in. This non-biblical manuscript, written in Hebrew, dates back to 30 years before Jesus was born. It contains a version of Isaiah 61 that does include this missing phrase, "the dead are raised." So when Jesus gives his response to John, Jesus was not being ambiguous at all. John would have instantly recognized Jesus’ words as a distinct claim that Jesus was the Messiah.

 

6. The Rebuttal Evidence – Is the Jesus of History the Same As the Jesus of Faith?

 

Rebuttal evidence is defined as any proof that is offered to explain, counteract, or disprove a witness’s account.

 

A self-selected group, called the Jesus Seminar, concludes Jesus did not say 82% of what the gospels attribute to him. Most of the remaining 18% is considered somewhat doubtful, with only 2% of Jesus’ sayings being determined authentic. They assume that the later church put sayings into the mouth of Jesus. That assumption is rooted in their suspicion of the gospels, and that comes from their assumption that the supernatural can’t occur. Historians usually operate with the burden of proof on the historian to prove falsity or unreliability, since people are generally not compulsive liars. Without that assumption we would know very little about ancient history. The Jesus Seminar turns this on its head and says you’ve got to prove affirmatively that a saying came from Jesus. Then they come up with questionable criteria to do that. One is called double dissimilarity. This means they can believe Jesus said something if it doesn’t look like something a rabbi or the later church would say. Otherwise they assume it got into the gospels from a Jewish or Christian source. The obvious problem in this criterion is that Jesus was Jewish and he founded the Christian church, so it shouldn’t be surprising if he sounds Jewish and Christian. Yet they have applied this criterion to reach the negative conclusion that Jesus didn’t say a whole lot. A second criterion they use is called multiple attestation which means we can only be sure Jesus said something if it’s found in more than one source. Now, this can be a helpful test in confirming a saying. However, why argue in the other direction – if it’s only found in one source, it’s not valid. In fact, most of ancient history is based on single sources. Generally, if a source is considered reliable, it should be considered credible, even if it can’t be confirmed by other sources.

 

7. The Identity Evidence – Was Jesus Really Convinced That He Was the Son of God?

 

Without dialoguing with Jesus how can we possibly delve into his mind to determine what his motivations, intentions, and self-understanding were? How do we know who he thought he was and what he understood his mission to be? If we want to figure out whether Jesus thought he was the Messiah or Son of God – or merely consider himself to be a rabbi or prophet – we need to look at what he did, what he said, and how he related to others. The question of what Jesus thought about himself is a critical issue.

 

In the ending notes on Chapter 1, it was pointed out that Jesus said he was "I am", meaning he claimed to be God. He also claimed to be the Son of Man, which says he claimed to be deity.

 

In his relationships with others, look at his relationship with his disciples. Jesus has twelve disciples; yet notice that he is not one of the Twelve. If the Twelve represent a renewed Israel, where does Jesus fit in? He is not just part of Israel, not merely part of the redeemed group, he is forming the group – just as God in the Old Testament formed his people and set up the twelve tribes of Israel. That is a clue about what Jesus thought of himself.

 

Jesus says, "If I, by the finger of God, cast out demons, then you will know that the kingdom of God has come upon you." Jesus sees his miracles as being about something unprecedented – the coming of God’s dominion. He doesn’t merely see himself as a worker of miracles; he sees himself as the one in whom and through whom the promises of God come to pass. And that is not-too-thinly-veiled claim of transcendence.

 

His followers called him Rabbi. Doesn’t this imply that he merely taught like the other rabbis of his day? No, Jesus taught in a radical new way. He begins his teachings with the phrase "Amen I say to you," which is to say, "I swear in advance to the truthfulness of what I am about to say." This was absolutely revolutionary. In Judaism you needed the testimony of two witnesses, so witness A could witness the truth of witness B and vice versa. But Jesus witnesses to the truth of his own sayings. Instead of basing his teaching on the authority of others, he speaks on his own authority.

 

So here is someone who considered himself to have authority above and beyond what the Old Testament prophets had. He believed he possessed not only divine inspiration, but also divine authority and the power of direct divine utterance.

 

8. The Psychological Evidence – Was Jesus Crazy When He Claimed to Be the Son of God?

Psychologists say that people suffering from delusional psychosis may appear rational much of the time yet can have grandiose beliefs that they are superlative individuals. People with psychological difficulties will often claim to be somebody they are not. However, psychologists don’t just look at what a person says. They’ll go much deeper than that. They’ll look at a person’s emotions, because disturbed individuals frequently show inappropriate depression, or they might be vehemently angry, or perhaps they’re plagued with anxiety. In looking at Jesus, he never demonstrated inappropriate emotions. For instance he cried at the death of his friend Lazarus – that’s natural for an emotionally healthy individual. At times he did get angry with people taking advantage of the downtrodden; this was a righteous reaction against injustice and the blatant mistreatment of people.

 

Other deluded people will have misperceptions. They think people are watching them or are trying to get them when they are not. They misperceive the actions of other people and accuse them of doing things they have no intention of ever doing. Again, we don’t see this in Jesus. He was in contact with reality. He wasn’t paranoid, although he rightfully understood that there were some very real dangers around him.

 

People with psychological difficulties may have thinking disorders – they can’t carry on a logical conversation, they’ll jump to faulty conclusions, they’re irrational. We don’t see this in Jesus. He spoke clearly, powerfully, and eloquently. He was brilliant and had absolutely amazing insights into human nature.

 

Another sign of mental disturbances is unsuitable behavior, such as dressing oddly or being unable to relate socially to others. Jesus’ behavior was quite in line with what would be expected, and he had deep and abiding relationships with a wide variety of people from different walks of life.

 

Jesus was loving but didn’t let his compassion immobilize him; he didn’t have a bloated ego, even though he was often surrounded by adoring crowds; he maintained balance despite an often demanding lifestyle; he always knew what he was doing and where he was going; he cared deeply about people, including women and children, who weren’t seen as being important back then; he was able to accept people while not merely winking at their sin; he responded to individuals based on where they were at and what they uniquely needed.

 

Jesus didn’t just claim to be God – he backed it up with amazing feats of healing, with astounding demonstrations of power over nature, with transcendent and unprecedented teaching, with divine insights into people, and ultimately with his own resurrection from the dead. Some people try to shoot down these miracles that authenticate Jesus’ claim to be God. They say the healings were psychosomatic. Often a psychosomatic healing takes time; Jesus’ healings were spontaneous. Many times people who are healed psychologically have their symptoms return a few days later. In Jesus’ healings we don’t see any evidence that this occurred. Note Jesus healed conditions like lifelong blindness and leprosy, for which a psychosomatic explanation isn’t very likely. On top of that, he brought people back from the dead – and death is not a psychologically induced state. Plus you have all his nature miracles – the calming of the sea, turning water into wine. They defy naturalistic answers. However, some will now say he hypnotized people so they would think that a miracle occurred, such as the turning of water into wine. But how do you hypnotize a whole bunch of people. In the case where Jesus multiplied the bread and the fish, there were 5000 witnesses. How could he have hypnotized them all? Hypnosis doesn’t generally work on people who are skeptics and doubters. So how did Jesus hypnotize his brother James, who doubted him, but later believed in the resurrected Christ?

 

9. The Profile Evidence – Did Jesus Fulfill the Attributes of God?

 

God is described as omnipresent, or existing everywhere in the universe; as omniscient, or knowing everything that can be known throughout eternity; as omnipotent, or all-powerful; as eternal, or being both beyond time and the source of all time; as immutable, or unchanging in his attributes; loving; holy; righteous; wise; and just. Jesus claims to be God, but does he fulfill these characteristics of deity?

 

Apart from these attributes of God, it is interesting to note that Jesus forgave sins. If you do something against me, I have the right to forgive you. However, if you do something against me and somebody else comes along and says, ‘I forgive you.’ The only person who can say that sort of thing meaningfully is God himself. So along comes Jesus and says to sinners, ‘I forgive you.’ The Jews immediately recognize the blasphemy of this. They react by saying, ‘Who can forgive sins but God alone?’

 

Even though the New Testament clearly states that Jesus has the attributes of omnipresence, omniscience, and omnipotence, he generally didn’t exhibit them in his earthly existence. To go from formless, bodiless, omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent Spirit to a finite, touchable, physical, time-bound human form is the mystery of the incarnation. It is not surprising that our finite minds cannot totally comprehend it.

 

God is an uncreated being who existed from eternity past. John 3:16 calls Jesus the ‘begotten’ Son of God and Colossians 1:15 says he was the ‘firstborn over all creation.’ It appears that these verses clearly imply that Jesus was created, as opposed to being the Creator. In John 3:16 the correct rendering of ‘begotten’ really means ‘unique one.’ The way it was usually used in the first century is ‘unique and beloved.’ So John 3.16 is simply saying Jesus is the unique and beloved Son. In Colossians 1:15 ‘firstborn’ by the second century before Christ had in places lost any notion of actual begetting or of being born first but connoted the idea of authority that comes with the position of being the rightful heir. A better translation for ‘firstborn’ in Col 1:15 is ‘supreme heir.’ If you are going to quote Colossians 1:15, you have to keep it in context by going on to Colossians 2:9, where the very same author stresses, ‘For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form.’ The author wouldn’t contradict himself. So the term ‘firstborn’ cannot exclude Jesus’ eternality, since that is part of what it means to possess the fullness of the divine.

 

Jesus said in John 14:28, "The Father is greater than I." Some people look at this and conclude that Jesus must have been a lesser God. In John 14, the disciples are moaning because Jesus has said he is going away. Jesus says, "If you loved me, you’d be glad for my sake when I say I’m going away, because the Father is greater than I." Due to the limitations of the incarnation, Jesus is currently lesser in the sense that he cannot fully exhibit his Godly attributes, however when he returns to the Father he will not be lesser, but equal. Later on in John 17:5 Jesus prayed, "And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began." (Editorial note: In Luke 22:69 Jesus said, "But from now on, the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the mighty God." To be seated at the right hand of God really means you are equal to God.)

 

The Bible says that the Father is loving. The New Testament affirms the same about Jesus. But can they really be loving, while at the same time sending people to hell? After all, Jesus teaches more about hell than anyone in the entire Bible. Doesn’t that contradict his supposed gentle and compassionate character? (Editorial note: But remember besides the attribute of love, God also is perfect justice. He cannot compromise his justice and not send people to hell who have not placed their faith and trust in what Jesus Christ did for them on the cross. On the cross Jesus paid the price for their sin. God in his justice paid the price himself. The question now is do you believe that Jesus did this for you and that he is God. If you do, God in His love says you will go to heaven. However, if you do not believe in who Jesus is and his salvation work on the cross, God in love and justice cannot let you into heaven. You are on your way to hell unless you change your mind before your last gasp of air and die. John 3:16-18 says, "For God so loved the world that he gave his unique and beloved Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s unique and beloved Son.")

 

10. The Fingerprint Evidence – Did Jesus— and Jesus Alone—Match the Identity of the Messiah?

 

In the Jewish Scriptures, which Christians call the Old Testament, there are over 48 major prophecies about the coming of the Messiah. In effect, these predictions formed a figurative fingerprint that only Messiah or Anointed One (The Greek word for Messiah is Christ) would be able to match. This way, the Israelites could rule out any imposters and validate the credentials of the authentic Messiah. These prophecies were written hundreds of years before he was born.

 

Isaiah 53, written 700 years before Jesus, pictures a Messiah who would suffer and die. Isaiah 7:14 revealed the manner of the Messiah’s birth (of a virgin); Micah 5:2 pinpointed the place of his birth (Bethlehem); Genesis and Jeremiah specified his ancestry (a descendent of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, from the tribe of Judah, the house of David); the Psalms foretold his betrayal, his accusation by false witnesses, his manner of death (pierced in the hands and feet, although crucifixion hadn’t been invented yet), and his resurrection (he would not decay but would ascend on high).

 

Some have objected to these prophetic events by saying that they just happened by accident. This is rather impossible when you calculate the odds. See the editorial note and table at the end of this section. The table at the end of this section only looks at 11 out of the 48 prophecies. Peter Stoner, a mathematician has calculated the odds for all 48 to be 10 to the 117^th power, that is 1 followed by 117 zeros. (Editorial note: In mathematics I recall that a number larger than 10 to the 80^th power is considered absurd, unreasonable, or ridiculous.)

 

Some also say the gospel writers fabricated details to make it appear that Jesus fulfilled the prophecies. Remember the gospels were written within 30 years of Christ’s death and eyewitnesses would have objected to such statements if they were not true.

 

Some skeptics have asserted that Jesus merely maneuvered his life in a way to fulfill the prophecies. But how could he arrange his ancestry let alone his parents, his place of birth, or when he was born.

 

Editorial Note: From Grant Jeffrey’s book Armageddon Appointment with Destiny, he takes 11 of these predictions that were made more than 400 years before they were fulfilled. He assigns the odds for each prediction. The odds he assigns are arbitrary but they are reasonable. The following table presents these predictions, Scripture verses where they are predicted and fulfilled, and then an assigned odds. The combined probability that all were fulfilled by chance by one person is calculated by multiplying all the individual odds together. For this table the combined probability is 10 billion times a billion or in mathematical scientific notation 10 to the 19^th power.

 

 

To see just how "lucky" the biblical prophets had to be to predict by chance those 11 significant events; imagine that someone dropped a diamond ring from a plane somewhere over one of the oceans. You enter a bet that you can locate it with just one try, using a long line and a fishhook. You wander over the earth’s oceans (197,000,000 square miles of surface) in your boat for as long as you like. When you feel lucky, stop, drop the line and try to hook the diamond ring that is lying thousands of feet below you on the ocean floor. You only get one chance. Your odds of finding the lost ring are precisely equal to the odds against the biblical prophets correctly predicting by chance those 11 specific details in the life of Jesus Christ, the promised Messiah.

 

11. The Medical Evidence – Was Jesus’ Death a Sham and His Resurrection a Hoax?

 

Some claim that Jesus fainted from exhaustion on the cross (swoon theory) and that he was later revived by the cool, damp air of the tomb. They say he was resuscitated and not resurrected.

 

If you consider the flogging Christ received before going to the cross, it alone was enough to kill him. Roman floggings usually consisted of 39 lashes with a whip of braided leather thongs with metal balls woven into them. When the whip would strike the flesh, these balls would cause deep bruises, which would break open with further lashes. The whip also had pieces of sharp bone as well, which would cut the flesh. The back would be so shredded that part of the spine was sometimes exposed by the deep cuts. The whipping would have gone all the way from the shoulders to the back of the legs. The victim would experience tremendous pain and lose a large amount of blood. This loss of blood does four things: 1) the heart races to try to pump blood that isn’t there; 2) the blood pressure drops, causing fainting or collapse; 3) the kidneys stop producing urine to maintain what blood volume is left; 4) the person becomes very thirsty as the body craves fluids to replace the lost blood volume.

 

Jesus did survive the flogging and was within a few hours nailed to the cross. Crucifixion is a slow agonizing death by asphyxiation. Hanging puts stresses on the muscles and diaphragm so that the chest is put into the inhaled position. To exhale, one must push up on his feet so the tension on the muscles would be eased for a moment. The person could then relax and inhale. Each push up and relaxation would tear the feet a little more and the wounded back from the flogging would rub and tear on the coarse wood of the cross. This would go on and on until complete exhaustion would take over, and the person wouldn’t be able to push up and exhale anymore.

 

Before Jesus died from asphyxiation on the cross, he died willing. However, if he had not died willing, there was no way he was coming down alive from the cross. If the Roman soldier in charge of the operation allowed the victim to survive, that soldier would be put to death himself. That is why, when the Roman soldier saw that Jesus had died, he thrust a spear into Jesus’ side to make sure he was dead.

 

Now, lets say Jesus did come down alive from the cross. A person in his physical condition could never have inspired his disciples to go out and proclaim that he’s the Lord of life who had triumphed over the grave. After suffering that horrible abuse, with the blood loss and trauma, he would have looked so pitiful that the disciples would never have hailed him as a victorious conqueror of death; they would have felt sorry for him and tried to nurse him back to health. So it is preposterous to think that if he had appeared to them in this awful state, his followers could have been prompted to start a worldwide movement based on the hope that someday they too would have a resurrection body like his.

 

12. The Evidence of the Missing Body – Was Jesus’ Body Really Absent from His Tomb?

 

Before looking at whether the tomb of Jesus was empty, lets establish whether his body had been there in the first place. History tells us as a rule, crucified criminals were left on the cross to be devoured by birds or were thrown in a common grave. If you look at the evidence in the gospels and especially Luke 23:50-56 Joseph of Arimathea requested Pilate to authorize that he could have the body of Jesus. He took the body of Jesus to a tomb and the women that had come with Jesus from Galilee followed along and saw the tomb and how his body was laid in it. Joseph was a member of the Jewish council called the Sanhedrin, however he had not consented to their decision to condemn Jesus. The significant point about Joseph of Arimathea is he would not be the sort of person who would have been invented by Christian legend or Christian authors. Given the early Christian anger and bitterness toward Jewish leaders, who instigated the crucifixion of Jesus, it’s highly improbable that they would have invented a Jewish leader who did the right thing by giving Jesus an honorable burial – especially while all of Jesus’ disciples deserted him. Besides, they wouldn’t make up a specific member of specific group, whom people could check out for themselves and ask about this. So Joseph is undoubtedly a historical figure. If this burial by Joseph were a legend that developed later, you’d expect to find other competing burial traditions about what happened to Jesus’ body. However, you don’t find these at all. As a result, the majority of New Testament scholars today agree that the burial account of Jesus is fundamentally reliable.

 

Now, some say that the body remained in the tomb and the resurrection was only spiritual. This is contrary to Jewish belief that resurrection was physical. So when the early Christian creed in 1 Corinthians 15:3-7 states Jesus was buried and then raised on the third day, it’s saying implicitly but quite clearly: an empty tomb was left behind. This creed was in existence within 2 to 8 years of the resurrection and is very reliable. Some say the evidence in support of the creed is so strong that it may be considered as a statement of eyewitnesses.

 

The chief witnesses to the empty tomb were women. Women’s testimony was regarded as so worthless that they weren’t even allowed to serve as legal witnesses in a Jewish court of law. Any later legendary account would have certainly portrayed a male as discovering the empty tomb, for example Peter or John. This shows that the gospel writers faithfully recorded what happened, even if it was embarrassing.

 

Now, some say the disciples stole the body. However, people do not die for what they believe in if they know it is a lie. Most of them were executed in torturous ways, so they didn’t steal the body. Jesus’ enemies didn’t steal the body either. If they had, they would have drug the body out and stopped in its tracks the Christian movement that flourished like a whirlwind.

 

13. The Evidence of Appearances – Was Jesus Seen Alive after His Death on the Cross?

 

The creed in 1Corinthians 15:3-7 states "For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than 500 of the brothers at the same time, most of who are still alive, though some have fallen asleep (Editorial note: died). Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles."

 

Some say these appearances were legendary, but legends do not start when you have living eyewitnesses. Some also say the appearances were hallucinations. Hallucinations are individual occurrences. By their very nature only one person can see a given hallucination at a time. So to explain away the appearances as hallucinations is ridiculous since there are repeated accounts of Jesus appearing to multiple people who reported the same thing. Now some say it was subtler than hallucinations and say it was examples of group think, in which people talk to each other into seeing something that doesn’t exist. A person full of religious zeal may see what he or she wants to see, not what is really there. This argument cuts two ways. Christians believe because they want to, but atheists don’t believe because they don’t want to.

 

14. The Circumstantial Evidence – Are There Any Supporting Facts That Point to the Resurrection?

 

Circumstantial evidence is made up of indirect facts from which inferences can be rationally drawn. Its cumulative effect can be every bit as strong – and in many instances even more potent – than eyewitness accounts.

 

Exhibit A: The disciples died for their beliefs.

 

When Jesus was crucified, his followers were discouraged and depressed. They no longer had confidence that God had sent Jesus, because they believed anyone crucified was accursed by God. They also had been taught that God would not let his Messiah suffer death. So they dispersed. The Jesus movement was all but stopped in its tracks.

 

Then, after a short time period of time, we see them abandoning their occupations, regathering, and committing themselves to spreading a very specific message – that Jesus Christ was the Messiah of God who died on the cross, returned to life, and was seen alive by them.

 

They were willing to spend the rest of their lives proclaiming this, without any payoff from a human point of view. It’s not as though there were a mansion awaiting them on the Mediterranean. They faced a life of hardship. They often went without food, slept exposed to the elements, were ridiculed, beaten, and imprisoned. And finally, most of them were executed in torturous ways. For what? For good intentions? No, because they were convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that they had seen Jesus Christ alive from the dead. What you can’t explain is how this particular group of men came up with this particular belief without having had an experience of the resurrected Christ.

 

Now, Muslims are willing to die for their belief that Allah revealed himself to Muhammad, but this revelation was not done in a publicly observable way. They may sincerely think it is true, but they can’t know for a fact.

 

However, the apostles were willing to die for something they had seen with their own eyes and touched with their own hands. They were in a unique position not just to believe Jesus rose from the dead but also to know for sure. And when you’ve got eleven credible people with no ulterior motives, with nothing to gain and a lot to lose, who all agree they observed something with their own eyes – now you’ve got some difficulty explaining that away.

 

Exhibit B: The conversion of skeptics.

 

There were hardened skeptics who didn’t believe in Jesus before his crucifixion who turned around and adopted the Christian faith after Jesus’ death. There is no good reason for this apart from them having experienced the resurrected Christ. Consider the lives of James, the brother of Jesus, and Saul of Tarsus, who became the apostle Paul.

 

The gospels tell us James didn’t believe in him. In ancient Judaism it was highly embarrassing for a rabbi’s family not to accept him. Therefore the gospel writers would have no motive for fabricating this skepticism if it weren’t true. Later the historian Josephus tells us that James, who was the leader of the Jerusalem church, was stoned to death because of his belief in his brother.

 

For the life of the apostle Paul, he hated anything that disrupted the traditions of the Jewish people and worked out his frustration by executing Christians when he had the chance. Suddenly he doesn’t just ease off Christians, but joins their movement. How did this happen? Well, everyone agrees Paul wrote Galatians, and he tells us himself in that letter what caused him to take a 180-degree turn and become the chief proponent of the Christian faith. He said he saw the risen Christ in a public event that was witnessed by others, even though they didn’t understand it. Paul also backed up his claim to being an apostle (eyewitness to the risen Christ) by performing miracles. Now, some say if you count Paul’s conversion as being evidence for the truth of the Resurrection, you should count Muhammad’s conversion to Islam as being evidence for the truth that Jesus was not resurrected, since Muslims deny the Resurrection. However, if you look at Muhammad’s conversion, no one knows anything about it. Muhammad claims he went into a cave and had a religious experience in which Allah revealed the Koran to him. There’s no other eyewitness to verify this and Muhammad offered no publicly miraculous signs to certify anything.

 

Exhibit C: Communion and baptism.

 

It is only natural that religions create their own rituals and practices, but what is odd is that these early followers of Jesus didn’t get together to celebrate his teachings or how wonderful he was, but to remember his death and resurrection in the ritual of communion. Think about this in modern terms. If a group of people loved John F. Kennedy, they might meet regularly to remember his confrontation of Russia, his promotion of civil rights, and his charismatic personality. But they’re not going to celebrate the fact that Lee Harvey Oswald shot him. This is analogous to what the early Christians did in communion, except Christ’s murder wasn’t the last word – the last word was that he had conquered death for all of us by rising from the dead. The early Christians celebrated his execution because they were convinced that they had seen him alive from the tomb.

 

In the area of baptism, the early church adopted a form of baptism from their Jewish upbringing, called proselyte baptism. When Gentiles wanted to take upon themselves the laws of Moses, the Jews would baptize those Gentiles in the authority of the God of Israel. But in the New Testament, people were baptized in the name of the God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit – which meant they had elevated Jesus to the full status of God. Not only that, but baptism was a celebration of the death of Jesus, just as communion was. By going under the water, you’re celebrating his death, and by being brought out of the water, you’re celebrating the fact that Jesus was raised to newness of life.

 

Exhibit D: The emergence of the Church.

 

The rapid spread of Christianity that reached Rome in around 20 years. (Editorial note: Rome burned in AD 64 and Nero blamed it on the Christians. Paul arrived in Rome during the spring of AD 61. This rapid spread of Christianity without the aid of planes, cars, radio, TV, etc. is unparalleled in addition to that people believed this gospel message.)

 

Conclusion: Given these four uncontested exhibits, only the physical resurrection of Jesus makes sense of them all.

 

15. Conclusion: The Verdict of History – What Does the Evidence Establish—And What Does It Mean Today?

 

In light of all the convincing facts, Lee Strobel said it would require much more faith for him to maintain his atheism than to trust in Jesus Christ, who is God, and who offers forgiveness and eternal life as a free gift that cannot be earned. It is called grace – amazing grace, unmerited favor. It’s available to anyone who accepts this free gift.

 

When I was 14, I remember looking at the expansiveness of the stars while riding in the back seat of my Uncle Marion’s car. During my childhood, I had gone to Sunday school, but I wasn’t sure if I was good enough to get to heaven. So that night in the back seat I said if there is a God out there I want to know what makes life tick? What is all about? So I started my quest, but not as thorough as Lee Strobel’s. While a freshman at the University of Washington in January 1964, the gospel was made clear to me by a Lutheran pastor with the last name of Lunder. He said that Jesus Christ had paid the full price for my sins and they were no longer the issue for me going to heaven. The only thing I had to do was believe that Jesus had done this for me and place my faith and trust in him as savior and God. Well, that was welcome news to me. No longer wondering if my good works outweighed my failures. I accepted Jesus Christ’s free gift of salvation that night. He had done it all. There was no doing required by me, just faith in His Hlife, death, and resurrection.

Send mail to kd7gav@arrl.net with questions or comments about this web site.
Copyright © 2003 Matson Family
Last modified: July 29, 2003