A Sign For You Now

Aim of this step: To further consider the historical evidences of the New Testament and whether the accurate copy that we have may be the truth or a lie.

 

Question 2: Do we have an accurate copy of the truth or a lie? Is the New Testament historically reliable?

​

In answering this, we are seeking to discover if the major events described in the New Testament documents really happened. Specifically, was there really a Jewish man 2000 years ago by the name of Jesus who taught profound truths, performed miracles, was crucified by Roman and Jewish authorities for claiming to be God, and who appeared to many witnesses after rising from the dead three days later?

​

There are seven lines of evidence (“historical tests”) that are used to determine whether the new testament writers are telling the truth.

​

1. Early Sources – generally, the earlier the sources the more accurate the testimony.

E.g. no serious reputable ancient historian denies that the Temple in the city of Jerusalem was not destroyed in in 70 AD. No one denies this.

2. Eyewitness Details – details only eyewitnesses would know.

3. Embarrassing Stories – they never would have invented

4. Excruciating Deaths – they could have saved themselves by saying it never happened.

5. Elaborate Testimony – proof that they are not inventing this when they could not have known what the other writer was writing.

6. Expected Predictions – Old Testament prophesy.

7. Extra-biblical writers – not just non-Christian but Christian writers who are not apostles who affirm what the New Testament writers say.

​

Documents that meet most or all of these historical tests are considered trustworthy beyond a reasonable doubt. How do the New Testament documents fare? Historians must discover past events just like police and forensic scientists do – by piecing together evidence and interviewing eyewitnesses.

​

It is also worth raising the question of what power did the New Testament writers gain by asserting that Jesus rose from the dead? What possible motive did they have to make up the resurrection story if it wasn’t true? I don’t believe there is any. All they got was persecution, torture, death and submission. They had every earthly motive to deny the resurrection rather than proclaim it. It certainly appears that there cannot be a motive or incentive to make up the New Testament story line as many of them died for their belief which they would have known first hand was a lie if they were making it up.

​

We must remember that all of the New Testament writers (with the possible exception of Luke) were Jews who firmly believed they already had the one true religion. And that nearly 2000 year-old religion asserted that they, the Jews, were the chosen people of God. Why would the Jews who converted to Christianity risk persecution, death, and perhaps eternal damnation to start something that 1) wasn’t true and 2) elevated non-Jews into the exclusive relationship they claimed to have with the Creator of the Universe?

 

And unless the Resurrection actually happened why would they, almost immediately, stop observing the Sabbath, circumcision, the Law of Moses, and other Old Testament teachings? The New Testament writers had to have witnessed some very strong evidence to turn away from those ancient beliefs and practices that had defined who they and their forebears were for nearly 2,000 years.

 

​

 1. Early Sources – Are the New Testament documents early?

​

All New Testament Books were written before AD 100 (About 70 years after Jesus death)

​

Most, if not all of these books were written before AD 70 (About 40 years after Jesus death).

​

Many New Testament Books were composed before AD 62 (About 30 years after Jesus death).

​

Some New Testament Books were penned in the 40s and 50s AD, with sources from the 30s (only a few years after Jesus death).

​

Even some radical critics, such as atheist John A. T. Robinson, admit the New Testament documents were written early. Known for his role in launching the “Death of God” movement, Robinson wrote a revolutionary book titled “Redating the New Testament”, in which he posited that most New Testament books, including all four Gospels, were written sometime between AD 40 and 65.

​

The great and once liberal archaeologist William F. Albright, after seeing how well the New Testament fit with the Archaeological and historical data, wrote, “We can already say emphatically that there is no longer any solid basis for dating any book of the New Testament after about AD 80.” Elsewhere Albright said, “In my opinion, every book of the New Testament was written by a baptized Jew between the 40s and the 80s of the first century (very probably sometime between about AD 50 and 75).

​

So we know beyond a reasonable doubt that most if not all the New Testament documents are early.

 

 2. Early Testimony – Do we have eyewitness testimony about Jesus?

​

The New Testament contains at least four to six lines of early, independent eyewitness written testimony which is determined by:

​

• The major New Testament writers record the same basic events with diverging details and some unique material

• They cite at least thirty real historical figures who have been confirmed by ancient non-Christian writers and various archaeological discoveries

• Luke peppers the second half of Acts with at least 84 historically confirmed eyewitness details and includes several others in his Gospel

• Luke’s proven trustworthiness affirms that of Matthew and Mark because they record the same basic story

• John includes at least 59 historically confirmed or historically probable eyewitness details in his Gospel

• Paul and Peter provide the fifth and sixth written testimonies to the Resurrection.

 

Since this early, independent eyewitness testimony is within one generation of the events, the New Testament events cannot be considered legendary. So there’s no question that real historical events are at the core of the New Testament.

 

 

3. Embarrasing Stories – Did the New Testament writers tell the truth?

​

* the New Testament writers included embarrassing details about themselves

* the New Testament writers included embarrassing details and difficult sayings of Jesus

* the New Testament writers left in demanding sayings of Jesus

* the New Testament writers carefully distinguished Jesus words from their own

* the New Testament writers include events related to the Resurrection that they would not have invented. E.g. All four Gospels say women were the first witnesses of the empty tomb and the first to learn of the Resurrection but women in general were not considered reliable witnesses in the first-century culture (as mentioned earlier).

* the New Testament writers include more than thirty historically confirmed people in their writings

* the New Testament writers include divergent details strengthening the fact that they are recording their eyewitness accounts

* the New Testament writers challenge their readers to check out verifiable facts, even facts about miracles

* the New Testament writers describe miracles like other historical events: with simple, unembellished accounts

* the New Testament writers abandoned their long-held sacred beliefs and practices, adopted new ones, and did not deny their testimony under persecution or threat of death. The New Testament martyrs were eyewitnesses of the resurrected Christ and believed it to be true, which is different to a martyr who believes and is prepared to die for something which is not true.