Essential Doctrines (Part 6): Resurrection of Jesus Christ

     At the center of Christianity is found a miracle; not just any miracle, but the miracle of all miracles. This miracle is the resurrection of Jesus Christ. This doctrine is unique and sets Christianity apart from every other religion and worldview. If true, this one event changes the dynamic of every aspect of life. If true, this one event brings hope to a despairing world. But what is the resurrection? Why is it essential? Most importantly, are there reasons for believing that it is true? This article will seek to present some basic information on the resurrection of Jesus Christ

 

What is the doctrine?

The resurrection of Jesus Christ is to be understood as the return to life of Jesus after having been dead for 3 days. The resurrection is different than just a return to life as Jesus would remain alive. Here, it would be considered that the ascension would hold great importance. I am writing a paper for a theology class on the ascension which I will share on the website in a few weeks. The resurrection is important because, if true, it would mean that Jesus has defeated the power of death and that all persons would be able to enjoy eternal life with God past this mortal life. In other words, it would prove an “afterlife” and the promise that the body that is possessed by each individual would also be resurrected to eternal perfection in the end times. Some would try to claim that a “spiritual resurrection” is plausible. But, N.T. Wright demonstrates that, “…’resurrection’ always denotes one position within that spectrum. ‘Resurrection’ was not a term for ‘life after death’ in general. It always means reembodiment” (Wright 1998, 111).

 

Why should the doctrine be believed?

Perhaps one of the more important questions that should be asked pertains to the truthfulness of the resurrection. Are there good reasons for believing that the resurrection is true? This article will present five reasons why the resurrection could…and in fact should…be accepted as a historical fact. (For more information on the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ, see the series “Evidence for the Resurrection” in the March 2013 archives on this site.)

Early attestation and chain of authority

One of the earliest gospels written was the Gospel of Mark (circa 55AD). Mark records, “But when they looked up, they saw the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away. As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed. ‘Don’t be alarmed,’ he said. ‘You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid him. But go, tell his disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you (Mark 16:4-7).'” One of the earliest records was a formulation passed on to Paul which dates no later than 35AD. The formulation is recorded in 1 Corinthians 15:3ff which 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 Cephas, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all of the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born (1 Corinthians 15:3-8).”

Not only is there New Testament evidence confirming the resurrection of Jesus, there are also early extra-biblical attestations of the resurrection. Clement of Rome wrote in the late first-century, “There will be a future resurrection” (Clement, “The First Epistle of Clement,” 24). Ignatius of Antioch wrote in AD 105, “And I know that He was possessed of a body not only in His being born and crucified, but I also know He was so after His resurrection, and believe that He is so now” (Ignatius, “Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans,” 3). The great apologist, Justin Martyr, wrote concerning Jesus, “If the resurrection were only spiritual, it was requisite that He, in raising the dead, should show the body lying apart by itself, and the soul living apart by itself. But now He did not do so, but raised the body, confirming in it the promise of life” (Justin Martyr, “On the Resurrection, Fragments,” 9). Irenaeus wrote in the late second-century, “Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord” (Irenaeus, “Against Heresies,” 1.10.1).[1]

 

J. Warner Wallace showed that the chain of information extended from the earliest church to the full documents of the New Testament contained in the Codex Sinaiticus, dating to the early 300s AD. In charts in his book Cold-case Christianity,[2] Wallace shows that Jesus taught Peter (30/33), Peter taught Mark (who wrote the gospel that bears his name) (50), Mark taught Anianus (75), Avilius (95), Kedron (100), Primus (115) and Justus (130), who taught Pantaenus (195), who taught Clement (210), who taught Origen (250), who taught Pamphilus (300), who taught Eusebius (335) which takes us to the Codex Sinaiticus and the Council of Laodicea (350-363). The lineage of Paul can be seen as the following: Paul saw the risen Christ, who taught Linus (70) and Clement of Rome (95), Clement taught Evaristus (100), Alexander (110), Sixtus (120), Telesphorus (130), Hyginus (135), and Pius (150), Pius passed the information to Justin Martyr (160), who taught Tatian (175). The lineage of John is as follows: the apostle John was an eyewitness and was taught by Jesus (30/33), John taught Ignatius (110) and Polycarp (110), Ignatius and Polycarp taught Irenaeus (185), who taught Hippolytus (220). Wallace writes, “Unfortunately Hippolytus was persecuted under Emperor Maximus Thrax and exiled to Sardinia, where he most likely died in the mines. The writings of Hippolytus (like the writings of Irenaeus before him) confirm that the New Testament accounts were already well established in the earliest years of the Christian movement” (Wallace 2013, 221). So what this shows is that the resurrection was not a late legendary development, but rather an accepted fact amongst the earliest Christians. This also shows that the resurrection was not an addition far after the fact, but was a tradition passed on from the eyewitnesses of the risen Jesus.

 Skeptics became believers

Richard Dawkins is a hardcore skeptic. Would it not be a strong case if one like Richard Dawkins claimed to have had an encounter with God and became a believer? Before one scoffs at such a notion, it should be noted that many adversaries of the Christian faith in our day and time are having visions of Christ and are coming to faith.

Now what if I were to tell you that there were two skeptics of Jesus who eventually came to faith in Jesus? What if I were to also tell you that such an occurrence transpired after the resurrection of Jesus? There are two such cases. First, there is James. James was the brother of Jesus. He was skeptical of Jesus’ ministry. John writes, “For even his own brothers did not believe in him” (John 7:5). Yet James is listed among those who saw the risen Jesus in 1 Corinthians 15 and later became the first pastor of the church in Jerusalem.

Second, there was Paul. Paul was a persecutor of the Christian faith. Paul even held the coats of those who stoned the Christian Stephen. What happened? Paul had an encounter with the resurrected Jesus. Paul became a believer and one of the strongest advocates of the faith.

Psychological reasons

It is possible for individuals to die for something they believe in and be wrong. However, it is much more difficult for individuals to die for something they know to be true or false. All except one disciple (John) died gruesome deaths. Not a one of them denied the resurrection of Christ as a historical event. If there was some form of conspiracy, all one would have done is told the scheme to the authorities and Christianity would have been over. Tell the authorities where the body was located. It could be exposed. Christianity would be dead. However, not only did this not occur, the message of the gospel first spread in the land where Jesus had been crucified and buried. That is even more difficult to explain unless it is true.

Numerous resuscitations

For one who claims that dead people simply do not come back to life, then what do you do with the numerous cases of near-death experiences (NDEs) where individuals, some who are badly injured and/or diseased, come back to life? Just a few days ago from the writing of this article, Fox 8 out of Cleveland, Ohio reported the story of Brian Miller. Miller had suffered from a heart condition which left him dead for 45-minutes. Miller experienced a NDE and came back with no brain damage (check out http://fox8.com/2014/02/17/man-shares-near-death-experience-i-started-walking-toward-the-light/ for more information). Granted, there is a difference between resuscitation and a resurrection. Nonetheless, the naturalist is in trouble if one uses a Humean attack in claiming that dead people do not come back to life. Apparently, they do.

 

Why is the doctrine essential?

The resurrection is central to the faith. The New Testament writers state the importance of believing in the resurrection of Christ. Jesus Himself said, “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live, even though they die; and whoever lives by believing in me will never die. Do you believe this” (John 11:25)? Paul writes, “If you declare with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved” (Romans 10:9). Therefore, the resurrection is essential to the Christian faith. Even more, the resurrection gives a person hope in that this life is not the end of our existence. With the resurrection, death has died and life lives on in glorious bliss for eternity. What could be better than that?

 Bibliography

All Scripture, unless otherwise noted, comes from The New International Version. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.

Clement. The First Epistle of Clement.

House, H. Wayne, and Joseph M. Holden. Charts of Apologetics and Christian Evidences. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006.

Ignatius. Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans.

Irenaeus. Against Heresies, 1.10.1

Justin Martyr. On the Resurrection, Fragments.

Stratford, Suzanne. “Heaven and Back? Man Says He ‘Started Walking Toward the Light.'” Fox8.com. (February 17, 2014). http://fox8.com/2014/02/17/man-shares-near-death-experience-i-started-walking-toward-the-light/. Accessed February 24, 2014.

Wallace, J. Warner. Cold-case Christianity. Colorado Springs: David C. Cook, 2013.

Wright, N.T. “Christian Origins and the Resurrection of Jesus: The Resurrection as a Historical Problem.” Sewanee Theological Review, 41:2 (1998): 111.

 

---

[1] Quotes were compiled in H. Wayne House and Joseph M. Holden, Charts of Apologetics and Christian Evidences (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006), Chart 56.

[2] Information in this paragraph comes from J. Warner Wallace, “Were They Accurate,” Cold-case Christianity (Colorado Springs: David C. Cook, 2013), 216-228.

Essential Doctrines (Part 5): Justification through Faith

     Various Christian groups develop the idea of “justification through faith” in various ways. Some may find that justification through faith comes through faith and the taking of sacraments while others see the act as simply placing one’s trust in the crucified Savior without the necessity of sacraments. Nonetheless, the cornerstone of the belief is that one is saved by a placing a trust in Christ and the atoning work accomplished on the cross. This article will seek to answer how justification through faith is defined, why the doctrine should be believed, and why it is considered essential.

What is the doctrine?

John Miley defines “justification” as, “There is one fact of the divine forgiveness which is closely kindred to a forensic justification: the result of forgiveness is a justified state. With respect to the guilt of all past sins, the forgiveness sets the sinner right with the law and with God. That is, by the divine act of forgiveness he is made as completely free from guilt and condemnation, or from amenability to punishment for past sins, as he could be by the most formal judgment of innocence. With this result of forgiveness it may properly be called a justification” (Miley 1893, 311-312).” Millard Erickson states that “justification” is “God’s declarative act by which, on the basis of the sufficiency of Christ’s atoning death, he pronounces believers to have fulfilled all of the requirements of the law that pertain to them” (Erickson 1998, 969).

Therefore, the doctrine stresses that the atoning work performed on the cross is applied to a person’s life by faith. If one were to think of buying a Christmas gift for a friend, the purchase of the gift would be comparable to the work performed on the cross whereas the delivery of the gift to the friend would be seen as the act of justification.

 

Why should the doctrine be believed?

Unlike some of the other doctrines, this doctrine must be accepted upon the statements of Jesus and the early church. This doctrine comes from first establishing other doctrines like the existence of God, the person and work of Christ, and the fallenness of humanity. A person who is shown to be trustworthy can be believed more so than one who is not. Jesus consistently held to an upright moral character. Therefore what Jesus says about the work can be trusted. If Jesus is in fact the Son of God, then one can know that what Jesus says about the Father is also true. So, what does Jesus say about the work of justification?

Jesus said, “As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life” (John 3:14-16, NASB). Jesus also stated, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me” (John 14:6, NLT). Notice that the application comes from one who “believes in Him.” The word “believe” is the Greek term “pisteuo” which represents a trust that one has in someone or something.

Since we have already shown that the historicity of Jesus is a certainty and the fact that Jesus was crucified was a certainty. These two points converge as a trust upon a work done by a person in history. So as many evangelists have stated, “There must be a cross before there is a crown.” A person must deal with the implications of the cross. This leads us to the question, “why is the doctrine essential?”

Why is the doctrine essential?

The doctrine of justification through faith is found to be essential when examining the teachings of the early Christians. Paul states, “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do” (Ephesians 2:8-10, NIV).

Perhaps the clearest example given of the necessity of “justification through faith” comes from Paul’s writing in the book of Romans. Paul writes, “There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished—he did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus” (Romans 3:22-26, NIV).

 The jailer asked Paul and Silas, “What must I do to be saved?” Paul and Silas answered, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household” (Acts 16:31, NIV).

The apostle John wrote, “And this is his commandment: We must believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and love one another, just as he commanded us” (1 John 3:23, NLT). It was not even questioned as to whether one should trust in the person and work of Christ for salvation. It was, in fact, commanded.

Therefore, the application of the atonement to a person’s life, in what we call “justification through faith,” is essential for one to have salvation. It is for this reason that the doctrine of “justification through faith” is considered an essential doctrine.

Still believing in the justification that Christ brings,

Pastor Brian

Bibliography

 Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology, 2^nd Edition. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1998.

Miley, John. Systematic Theology, Volume 2. New York: Hunt & Eaton, 1893.

Scripture noted as (NASB) comes from the New American Standard Bible: 1995 Update. LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation, 1995.

Scripture noted as (NIV) comes from The New International Version. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011.

Scripture noted as (NLT) comes from the New Living Translation, 3rd ed. Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2007.

 

What Camels Teach Us About the Necessity of Apologetics

 It seems that the modern media seeks to undermine the integrity of the Bible or at least create some form of controversy related to the claims of the Bible. This also goes for segments of scholarship. When it comes to biblical scholarship, there are two varieties: progressive or materialists (researchers more willing to dismiss biblical claims…primarily for political and religious reasons due to the fact that the materialist cannot accept miraculous claims), and evangelical or traditional (those seeking to find truth while willing to accept biblical claims).

 Recently, an article was posted on CNN.com and other news outlets proclaiming that recent evidence has dismissed the Bible’s claims that the patriarch’s owned herds of camels. The book of Genesis states, “And when Pharaoh’s officials saw her, they praised her to Pharaoh, and she was taken into his palace. He treated Abram well for her sake, and Abram acquired sheep and cattle, male and female donkeys, male and female servants, and camels” (Genesis 12:15-16, NIV). Note: Abram was given camels while in Egypt. Egypt was known for having camels at a very early time. Drs. Erez Ben-Yosef and Lidar Sapir-Hen of Tel Aviv University’s Department of Archaeology and Near Eastern Cultures recently claimed to have “used radiocarbon dating to pinpoint the moment when domesticated camels arrived in the southern Levant, pushing the estimate from the 12^th to the 9^th century BCE” (AFTAU.org). If true, this would create a problem with the biblical testimony as the text indicates that Abram owned some camels far earlier than the 9^th century BC. Abraham must be dated at least in the 14^th century BC (Elwell and Beitzel 1988, 450-451).

Evangelical archaeologist Ted Wright of Southern Evangelical Seminary shows that such an interpretation is not necessary. Wright states, “…yes – the biblical patriarchs owned camels, but it is not as if they were camel traders or camel herders. Camels played a small part in their lives” (Wright 2014). Wright also quotes Juris Zarins in that, “From 2200-1200 B.C. rock art in Southwest Arabia and possible camel remains from Bir Risisim in the Levant suggest that camels were used for their milk and for transport” (Wright 2014). The 2200-1200 BC range fits well within the time of Abraham and the patriarchs.

Other scholars are skeptical, too. Gordon Govier reports, “Two recent academic papers written by evangelical scholars—Konrad Martin Heide, a lecturer at Philipps University of Marburg, Germany; and Titus Kennedy, an adjunct professor at Biola University—both refer to earlier depictions of men riding or leading camels, some that date to the early second millenium BC. Among other evidence, Kennedy notes that a camel is mentioned in a list of domesticated animals from Ugarit, dating to the Old Babylonian period (1950-1600 BC)” (Govier 2014, www.christianitytoday.com).

Quite frankly, such reports are not surprising. There is a war within biblical historical studies. Some findings, such as evidence purporting King David’s and King Solomon’s palace have been withheld due to political strains. Not too terribly long ago, Professor Yosef Garfinkel announced the discovery of objects in the ruins of Khirbet Qeiyafa that confirmed the religious practices of Israel during the reign of King David (Gedalyahu 2012, www.israelnationalnews.com). Therefore, such findings should be taken with a grain of salt. When the big picture is seen, the evidence normally authenticates the biblical record.

The camel conundrum shows the necessity of apologetics (defending the faith) in modern Christianity. As Peter instructs, “But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear” (1 Peter 3:15, NKJV). It is important to be able to defend the truth of God’s word. Jesus defended the truthfulness of His ministry. The apostle Paul defended the truth of the gospel. We need to stand firm being able to defend the truth, as well. The mind must be open to the truth before the heart will respond. This is something that even camels might just appreciate.

Blessings,

Pastor Brian

 Bibliography

 Elwell, Walter A., and Barry J. Beitzel, Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1988), 450–451.

Gedalyahu, Tzvi Ben. “Evidence of Canaanite Jewish rituals in reign of King David.” IsraelNationalNews.com (February 8, 2012). http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/155579#.Uv7nlPldWa8. (Accessed February 14, 2014).

Govier, Gordon. “The latest challenge to the Bible’s accuracy: Abraham’s anachronistic camels.” Christianity Today.com (February 14, 2014). http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2014/february-web-only/latest-challenge-bible-accuracy-abraham-anachronistic-camel.html?&visit_source=facebook. (Accessed February 14, 2014).

http://www.aftau.org/site/News2/2024116989?page=NewsArticle&id=19673&news_iv_ctrl=-1 (accessed, February 14, 2014).

Scripture identified as (NIV) comes from The New International Version. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011.

Scripture identified as (NKJV) comes from The New King James Version. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1982.

Wright, Ted. “Getting over a hump: Does the lack of camel bones disprove the historicity of the biblical patriarchs?” CrossExamined.org. (February, 2014). http://crossexamined.org/blog/. (Accessed February 14, 2014).

Zarins, Juris. “Camel,” in David Noel Freedman, Editor, The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Volume 1, A-C (New York, London: Anchor Doubleday, 1992), 824-6. In Ted Wright. Wright, Ted. “Getting over a hump: Does the lack of camel bones disprove the historicity of the biblical patriarchs?” CrossExamined.org. (February, 2014). http://crossexamined.org/blog/. (Accessed February 14, 2014).

Essential Doctrines (Part 4): The Atonement Through Christ

   Have you ever noticed the attention Christmas gets and the lack of attention that Easter receives? One of the reasons behind this is due to the confrontational essence found in the doctrine of the atonement. For this doctrine, forces the individual to face his/her sin.

As the list of essential doctrines progresses, one will find that the core “existence of God, sinfulness of humanity, incarnation of Christ” lends itself to some of the other essential doctrines. In order to understand the atonement, one needs to first read the articles on the “existence of God,” “the sinfulness of humanity,” and the “incarnation of Christ.” Because those core doctrines are essential before understanding one of the doctrines that separates Christianity from every other world religion: the doctrine of the atonement.

What is the Doctrine?

The atonement is a theological term that represents Christ’s work of reconciliation between God and humanity through the work completed on the cross. There are a variety of viewpoints on the atonement. This writer holds to the “penal-substitution theory.” Millard Erickson writes of the theory, “By offering himself as a sacrifice, by substituting himself for us, actually bearing the punishment that should have been ours, Jesus appeased the Father and effected a reconciliation between God and humanity” (Erickson 1998, 833). While it is believed that this theory best holds to the teachings of Scripture, it is not the theory that is held as essential as much as the core of the doctrine of the atonement. There are two elements that comprise the doctrine of atonement:

Humanity is Unable to Save Itself

This doctrine is humbling. Quite frankly, it is the humility that is involved in the understanding that humankind cannot save itself that keeps some from coming to the cross. Humans are normally driven to be independent. Most people want to do for his/herself and does not desire to depend upon another person. The truth is, humans have far less control than they would wish. Granted, humans have progressed in technology. However, there are certain things that are beyond the scope of human control. When it comes to the keeping of God’s law (which would require a person to maintain perfection throughout one’s lifetime), this is one of those things that are beyond the scope of human grasp.

James writes, “For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it” (James 2:10). In other words, if a person commits one sin, the person has essentially broken the law and stands condemned. If you say, “Who could ever keep the law?” That’s just the point. No one can. This brings us to the second portion of the doctrine.

 Christ was Perfect Sacrifice

 The second element of the doctrine shows that Christ was the perfect sacrifice. Only God can save humanity. This is exactly what God sought to do. God did for humanity what humanity could not do for itself. God became a human and became the perfect sacrifice. In other words, God created a bridge that humanity could come to Him. This is why one must accept the deity of Jesus. Jesus was the sinless, perfect sacrifice. Peter writes, “For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your ancestors, but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect. He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake” (1 Peter 1:18-20). Jesus Himself said, “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only 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 they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son” (John 3:16-18).

 

Why Should the Doctrine Be Believed?

There are at least three reasons for believing this doctrine:

Sinlessness of Jesus

While it is impossible for one to prove that Jesus was sinless being 2,000 years removed, one can rely upon the testimony of those who knew Him best. Peter wrote, “To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps.  “He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth.” When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly. “He himself bore our sins” in his body on the cross, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; “by his wounds you have been healed” (1 Peter 2:21-24).

John wrote, “But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our sins. And in him is no sin” (1 John 3:5).

Paul, who had been an adversary of the faith, wrote, “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Corinthians 5:21). Ignatius of Antioch wrote around 110 AD, “God incarnate…God Himself appearing in the form of man,” Justin Martyr wrote in the early 100s, “Being the First-Begotten Word of God, is even God” (References from McDowell and McDowell 2010, 164). There is, in fact, no reason for one to believe that the early believers ever viewed Jesus as being anything but the sinless, incarnate Son of God.

Crucifixion of Jesus a Historical Certainty

The crucifixion is among one of the historical certainties of events in ancient antiquity. Let’s refer to Norman Geisler on this issue. Geisler writes,

“According to Julius Africanus (ca. 221), the first-century Samaritan-born historian, Thallus (ca. 52), “when discussing the darkness which fell upon the land during the crucifixion of Christ,” spoke of it as an eclipse (Bruce, 113, emphasis added). The second-century Greek writer, Lucian, speaks of Christ as “the man who was crucified in Palestine because he introduced a new cult into the world.” He calls him the “crucified sophist” (Geisler, 323). The “letter of Mara Bar-Serapion” (ca. a.d. 73), housed in the British Museum, speaks of Christ’s death, asking: “What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise King?” (Bruce, 114). Finally, there was the Roman writer, Phlegon, who spoke of Christ’s death and resurrection in his Chronicles, saying, “Jesus, while alive, was of no assistance to himself, but that he arose after death, and exhibited the marks of his punishment, and showed how his hands had been pierced by nails” (Phlegon, Chronicles, cited by Origen, 4:455). Phlegon even mentioned “the eclipse in the time of Tiberius Caesar, in whose reign Jesus appears to have been crucified, and the great earthquakes which then took place” (ibid., 445).

The earliest Christian writers after the time of Christ affirmed his death on the cross by crucifixion. Polycarp, a disciple of the apostle John, repeatedly affirmed the death of Christ, speaking, for example, of “our Lord Jesus Christ, who for our sins suffered even unto death” (Polycarp, 33). Ignatius (30–107), a friend of Polycarp, wrote, “And he really suffered and died, and rose again.” Otherwise, he adds, all his apostles who suffered for this belief, died in vain. “But, (in truth) none of these sufferings were in vain; for the Lord was really crucified by the ungodly” (Ignatius, 107). In Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, Justin Martyr noted that Jews of his day believed that “Jesus [was] a Galilean deceiver, whom we crucified” (Martyr, 253).

This unbroken testimony from the Old Testament to the early Church Fathers, including believer and unbeliever, Jew and Gentile, is overwhelming evidence that Jesus suffered and died on the cross” (Geisler 1999, 128).

Old Testament Prophecies

The Old Testament (or Hebrew Bible) holds countless prophecies pointing to what one should expect by the Messiah. Josh and Sean McDowell write, “…in one day…no fewer than 29 specific prophecies spoken at least 500 years earlier” (McDowell and McDowell 2010, 195) were fulfilled. They go on to write, “Professor Peter W. Stoner, in an analysis that was carefully reviewed and pronounced to be sound by the American Scientific Affiliation, states that the probability of just eight prophecies being fulfilled in one person is 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000″ (McDowell and McDowell 2010, 197). That Jesus was the perfect sacrifice as identified by the Hebrew Bible is, in this writer’s opinion, undeniable.

 

Why is the Doctrine Essential?

This doctrine is essential for one to become, or be considered, a Christian because this is the crux of the Christian faith. There is a reason why the cross, an instrument of death, became the symbol for the Christian faith. For it was by Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross that individuals have access to the God of eternity. Some would like to think that they can be good enough to earn God’s approval. The problem is that none of us can ever be good enough to equate with the holiness and perfection of God. Forgiveness is needed. Mercy needs to be bestowed. It can only be by God that such forgiveness and mercy can be extended. If Jesus is who the New Testament purports Him to be, then it is by the perfect sacrifice freely offered by Jesus that one can be saved. No one can be a Christian without first confronting the cross.

NOTE: Would you like to cross the bridge to God? Would you like to have your sins forgiven? See the link “How to Know Jesus” on the upper-right side of the website to know how.

Bibliography

All Scripture, unless otherwise noted, comes from The New International Version. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2011.

Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology, 2^nd Ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1998.

Geisler, Norman L. Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, Baker Reference Library. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1999.

McDowell, Josh, and Sean McDowell. The Unshakable Truth: How You Can Experience the 12 Essentials of a Relevant Faith. Eugene: Harvest House, 2010.

Stoner, Peter W., and Robert C. Newman. Science Speaks. Chicago: Moody Press, 1976.

The New International Version (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011),

Reflections on the Ham vs. Nye Debate

     Tonight (February 4th, 2014) from the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky, Bill Nye “The Science Guy” debated Answers in Genesis founder Ken Ham in a debate over evolution. This event was touted as the second coming of the Scopes Monkey Trial. To be honest, the event was as I feared it would be…a disappointment. This event, in this writer’s opinion, was much like the XFL. It was highly promoted, sensationalized, but lacked in substantial content. This is not to say that there were not some good points presented by both participants. It’s just to say that it seemed at times that the content was shrouded in political fervor from both parties.

Both individuals were given time to make their initial statements. Then each were allowed time for a rebuttal and then a counter-rebuttal. Then both had the opportunity to answer questions previously written down on cards from the audience. By the way, the moderator did an excellent job. Ham went first, followed by Nye.

Ham began the event presenting some good information on speciation and showed that the fossil record does not necessarily flow as many evolutionary trees present. Ham presented the development of species according to “kinds.” This was something that Nye did not address. Ham compared what he called “observational science” (science that can be observed) with “historical science” (science of the past). Nye answered this charge in that astronomers, due to the travel of light, are able to observe the past due to the time travel of light. However, Nye did not address the rebuttals of Ham of wood that was found in fossilized rock with both having different carbon dates. (By the way, I thought this was a good point for Ham.) Ham then showed the connection of Genesis with the gospel and made a great evangelical presentation. Nye presented great information concerning the fossil record. Nye also presented equations that caused problems in Ham’s young-earth model. Unfortunately, Ham did not respond to the charge. Nye also presented information concerning the age of the universe and the Big Bang model. Ham briefly addressed Nye’s issues, but fervently went back to the “observational vs. historical science” argument.

Neither individual directly answered questions and both made gross assumptions. For Ham, he assumed that the only interpretation of Genesis was found in the Young Earth Creationist model. Ham mentioned that “yom” was interpreted as a 24-hour period. Yes, it is by some. But, there are many others including those from Reasons to Believe who would dispute that claim. Ham’s only comeback for Nye’s presentation of the Big Bang model reminded me of Kent Hovind’s “Where you there?” approach…but much better assimilated.

Nye was guilty of the same. While Nye was much more gracious than I had anticipated, Nye still made assumptions that Christians, especially Young Earth Creationists, were anti-scientific by possessing cell phones and taking antibiotics. Nye also made gross assumptions pertaining to the expertise of ancient ship-builders. If it was possible for the Egyptians to create an amazing structure like the pyramids, could it not also be possible for an ancient man like Noah to build a massive ship. Nye addressed a massive ship in the early 1900s that twisted and contorted as it sailed. Ham did a great job answering this charge by addressing that Chinese individuals constructed massive ships with interlocking logs. Nye rebutted by referring to his family’s shipbuilding history. Also, Nye assumed that a global flood is the only perspective on the matter. Some scholars believe that a regional flood could have occurred. Does one throw out an event when several ancient documents record it because of a difference in interpretation? In that case, detectives should throw out cold-case investigations. Heaven forbid! Also, Nye made some gross assumptions about intelligent design. He claimed that a the evolutionary process could answer what he determined to be an illusion of design. However, Nye was addressing a process which required design. I am not an evolutionist, but if evolution were true, the process itself would require design.

There is much more that could be said on the matter. Let me add that I do appreciate Nye’s nod to those who find that faith and science can co-exist. I will leave the matter for now as I am sure the internet will be bombarded by blogs, vlogs, and posts concerning this debate. In this writer’s opinion, there were good points made by those on either side. But in the end, the debate was much what I expected it to be…a lot of hype with a lack of hard-hitting content.

(Note: for various Christian interpretations on creation, see my article “6 Views on Creation and Origin” here at pastorbrianchilton.wordpress.com)

Essential Doctrines (Part 3): The Incarnation of Jesus Christ

     The incarnation of Jesus Christ is critical in understanding the person of Jesus Christ and in understanding the salvation that comes from Jesus. It is due to aberrations of the understanding of Jesus’ identity in the movements of Jehovah Witnesses and for many in the LDS church that those two movements are normally not recognized within the umbrella of Christian faith by most evangelicals. For instance, Jehovah Witnesses claim that Jesus was a created being. Charles Taze Russell, the founder of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, claimed that Jesus was the archangel Michael. Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormon church, claimed that Jesus was the first offspring from a Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother. The LDS hymn “O My Father” (LDS Hymnbook #292) refers to a Heavenly Mother. Therefore, Jesus is reduced to a mere offspring and not the God incarnate as identified in Scripture. This article will examine the essential doctrine of the incarnation of Jesus Christ.

 

What is the Doctrine?

The doctrine of the incarnation of Christ has to do with the person of Jesus Christ. It seeks to answer the question that Jesus posed to Simon Peter, “Who do you say that I am” (Matthew 16:15). Who was Jesus? Those who knew Jesus best answered that Jesus had two natures: Jesus was divine and Jesus was human.

The Divinity of Jesus

Christians from the earliest of times have understood that Jesus was divine. This is clear from the early Christian hymn which was preserved in Philippians. The hymn states,       

“who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (Philippians 2:6-11).

This hymn is important because it pre-dates many of the New Testament documents. For instance, Elwell and Beitzel write about the early nature of the incarnation, “As a result, some believe that it represents an earlier stage in the development of the church’s theology, before the doctrine of the incarnation had evolved. That is doubtful for two reasons: incarnation passages like the Philippians hymn (2:6–11) probably antedate Mark’s Gospel; and Mark has a well-developed theology of the two natures of Christ” (Osbourne 1988, 1026). Although John’s gospel was one of the later documents written, John left no room for doubt concerning Jesus’ divine nature as John wrote, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made” (John 1:1-3, NIV). So, it can be seen that Jesus was viewed as divine from the earliest times of church history.

The Humanity of Jesus

Jesus was clearly seen as a human being, as well. This is clear from the Philippians hymn as it was recorded that Jesus “taking the form of a bond-servant…made in the likeness of men.” Jesus was not a theological concept nor was Jesus an intellectual invention. Jesus was in fact a human being. This is evidenced by the fact that Jesus grew in stature (Luke 2:52), became tired (John 4:6), slept (Matthew 8:24), wept (John 11:35), and became hungry (Mark 11:12). All these attributes show that Jesus was in fact human. It is important to keep a good balance of Jesus’ humanity along with Jesus’ divinity.

  

Why should a Person Believe the Doctrine?

There are at least four reasons why an individual should believe that Jesus is both divine and human:

Evidence of Jesus’ Existence

 No reputable historian denies the existence of the historical Jesus. Only those in secular online communities give any weight to the “Jesus is fiction” myth. Jesus’ existence is not only confirmed in the New Testament records, but there are extra-biblical writers who confirm the existence of Jesus of Nazareth (the official historical name for Jesus). It would be irresponsible for this article to seek to offer an exhaustive list of extra-biblical writers, however, a few of the more popular sources will be given.

Tacitus, a reliable Roman historian writes,

“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures of a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty 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 Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular” [Annals 15.44].

 Pliny the Younger wrote a letter to Emperor Trajan in 112 A.D. that said,

“They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to do any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food—but food of an ordinary and innocent kind” [Letters 10:96]

 From these two sources, one can find that there is good and early evidence to support the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth as well as the New Testament documents which must be included.

Evidence of Jesus’ Miracles

 There is also evidence that Jesus performed miracles. Not only was Jesus known by the early Christians for performing great wonders, Jesus was known for doing the same by His opponents. The Babylonian Talmud, compiled from 70 – 200 A.D. has a portion of the Sanhedrin that reads,

“On the eve of Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, “He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf.” But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover” [Sanhedrin 43a, Babylonian Talmud]!

 Obviously “Yeshu” is the Hebrew, or Aramaic, form of “Yeshua” which is translated over to “Jesus” in English. In this text, it is seen that Jesus was hung (another term for crucifixion) on the evening of Passover. Jesus was accused of working sorcery. Obviously this is a link to the miracles performed by Jesus. The greatest miracle of all would be that of the resurrection of Jesus. The resurrection is not mentioned here as it will be addressed in the 6^th installment of this series.

Evidence of Jesus’ Understanding of Himself

 Jesus obviously believed Himself to be the incarnate God. Jesus called Himself “Son of Man.” This was, in fact, Jesus’ favorite term for Himself. The phrase “Son of Man” alludes to the Daniel prophecy pertaining to the one who approached the “Ancient of Days.” The “Son of Man” prophecy alluded to one who would be divine (Daniel 7:13). John records Jesus’ “I Am” teachings. This was a direct reference to divinity as the sacred personal name for God (YHWH) was defined as “I AM WHAT I AM” (Exodus 3:14). So for Jesus to call Himself the “I Am” is a direct reference to His divine nature.

 Evidence of Jesus’ Transforming Power

 This may not be popular with some theologians and apologists, but I believe that the transformation of individuals that comes from a relationship with Christ is to be understood as an important aspect of Jesus’ identity. The fact that people are transformed shows that there is power in the one who was known as Jesus of Nazareth.

  

Why is the Doctrine Essential?

 John writes, “This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God” (1 John 4:2, NIV). It is clear that one must accept Jesus as God come in the flesh is important for one to be identified as a true Christian. Jesus’ divinity is mandatory, as well. Jesus Himself said, “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life” (John 3:16, NASB). This text shows that it is important to understand the divine nature of Jesus in order to be saved from sin. Therefore, it is important to understand that the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history are the one and same person. It is this historical Jesus Christ that can redeem a person from sin and set a person on a right path.

Bibliography

 All Scripture identified as (NASB) comes from the New American Standard Bible: 1995 Update. LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation, 1995.

All Scripture identified as (NIV) comes from The New International Version. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011.

Osborne, Grant R. Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible Edited by Walter A. Elwell and Barry J. Beitzel. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1988, page 1026.

Pliny the Younger. Letters 10.96. In Norman L. Geisler. Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, Baker Reference Library. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1999.

Sanhedrin 43a. Babylonian Talmud. In Norman L. Geisler. Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, Baker Reference Library. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1999.

Tacitus. Annals 15.44. In Norman L. Geisler. Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, Baker Reference Library. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1999.