Posted on 03/26/2002 4:00:55 AM PST by xzins
Replying to some of my information about faith in Christ, he sent this article and said that "myth" and "lack of historical evidence" explain away any support for the Christian faith.
I believe that the huge friendship of Christians on FR can remember details and arguments that I never could. In light of that, please assist me in witnessing to him by debunking this anti-christian article.
Thanks to all who uphold the name of Jesus.
Luke 2:2 This was the first census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria. And everyone went to his won town to register.
I looked up several notes on this verse and they all seem to agree that Quirinius was possibly in office for two terms. First 6-4 BC and then 6-9 AD. This verse is referring to his first term. King Herod, or Herod the Great was king from 37-4 BC. 4 BC seems to be the year.
I see no discrepancy with this point he tried to make. I'll be back later.
Deuteronomy 29:29 The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our children forever.....
Cornelius Tacitus: He was a Roman historian who lived from 55 to 120 CE and wrote a book Annals, circa 112 CE.
Suetonius: He was the author of The Lives of the Caesars circa 120 CE.
Flavius Josephus: He was a Jewish historian who was born in 37 CE.
The Talmud states that Jesus lived in the 2nd century BCE.
Like I said earlier, the assertion that Jesus is not a historical figure or that he did not live in the early 1st century CE is held by a very small number of academics. There were just too many eye-witnesses to his life, death, and resurrection.
I still think Josh McDowell's Evidence That Demands A Verdict (volumes 1 and 2) is still the best reference to give to someone who denies the obvious. And the best tool to use with the individual in such a state of spiritual blindness is prayer.
The Romans pretty much didn't care who you worshipped as long as you behaved yourself. The Jews knew prophesy that a "King" was coming. They thought the messiah was going to establish an earthly kingdom, and get them out from under Roman rule. Up until the day he died, that's what his own disciples thought. They didn't understand what Jesus was here to do. I think that’s one of the reasons why they left him, bless their hearts. They were scared to death for one thing, but as the hours passed, they realized their “dream” of an earthly Kingdom was coming to an end. It took them a few days or weeks to put the pieces together.
The Pharisees and Sadducees hated Jesus because of his power and the following he had, among other things. They were the only authority on the scriptures, and along comes a plan Jewish carpenter, a NO BODY, telling them what to do. They were legalistic hand washers and only perfect people could go into the temple, meaning them. Jesus wanted everyone to have access to God. The symbolism of the curtain in the temple ripping when he died, is significant.
If you will remember, there was a strong and powerful group of Jews who HATED the Romans. HATED THEM!!!!!! They were the Zealots, right? There were Zealots in Jesus' following. The Romans were terrified of them and the trouble they could possibly cause. Pilot was under a great deal of pressure to keep the peace in his area. When dangerous mobs of Zealots are screaming "Crucify him", he did it because he was afraid, I would assume. His wife told him not to do it, but he didn't listen to her.
Romans may have been civilized, but crucifixion was a common execution. Another thing this writer needs to understand is some of the "story" may seem weird, but it HAD to happen the way it did, to fulfill prophecy.
I hope I’m not too far off here, because it all came from my head without looking any of it up. Correct me if I’m wrong.
Amen
Among the writings of Antiquity, nobody challenges Homer's existence, or that he wrote these works. It is commonly accepted as historical fact. And this comparatively abject acceptance is based upon a couple hundred surviving copies of his ancient texts.
Now to the person Jesus Christ.
There are over 10,000 authenticated historical texts documenting the fact that Jesus lived, and that he performed the miracles described in The New Testament. Yet people insist on quetioning it.
Even Pharaoh's scribes documented tha historic fact of the Plagues of Egypt which preceded the Jews' deliverance from slavery. Yet people question continue to this.
The Old and New Testaments made thousands of predictions and prophecies. There remain only a handful of major Biblical prophecies un-fulfilled. Every other one has happened just as predicted.
Among them was that the Light of God would come into the world, but that men would hate the light, because they prefer darkness. They mistakenly believe that it hides their evil deeds, and the sins in their hearts.
And Jesus said in the book of John (Chapter 12, verse 48):
"He who rejects me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him — the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day."
Let all who have ears hear, and all who have eyes see. Amen.
These inane critics can't even get their facts straight. The stuff in this article is recycled garbage from a hundred years ago. It would take hours to refute all the idiotic statements in the article like the one about the dating of the Gosepels above. It is the height of arrogance for those who, twenty centuries after the fact, presume to know more than the people who witnessed the events at the time, who claimed to be witnesses, and who gave their lives in martyrdom for their testimony. People will sometimes willingly die for what they believe to be true, but seldom will you see anyone willingly die for what he knows is false and maintain that hoax to the end. The idea that the gospels are fiction or a hoax is absurd.
There are thousands and thousands of pieces of evidence of the most convincing types that the accounts in Scripture were written or confirmed by eyewitnesses to the events.
Here is a small sample of evidence from Chuck Colson:
A few years ago, people exploring caves outside Jerusalem came across the find of a lifetime: an ancient burial cave containing the remains of a crucified man.
This find is only one in a series of finds that overturn a century-old scholarly consensus. That consensus held that the Gospels are almost entirely proclamation, and contain little, if any, real history.
The remains belonged to a man who had been executed in the first century A.D., that is, from the time of Jesus. As Jeffrey Sheler writes in his book IS THE BIBLE TRUE? the skeleton confirms what the evangelists wrote about Jesus' death and burial in several important ways.
First, location -- scholars had long doubted the biblical account of Jesus' burial. They believed that crucified criminals were tossed in a mass grave and then devoured by wild animals. But this man, a near contemporary of Jesus, was buried in the same way the Bible says Jesus was buried.
Then there's the physical evidence from the skeleton. The man's shinbones appeared to have been broken. This confirms what John wrote about the practice of Roman executioners. They would break the legs of the crucified to hasten death, something from which Jesus, already dead, was spared.
This point is particularly noteworthy, since scholars have long dismissed the details of John's Passion narrative as theologically motivated embellishments.
Another part of John's Gospel that archeology has recently corroborated is the story of Jesus healing the lame man in John 5. John describes a five-sided pool just inside the Sheep Gate in Jerusalem where the sick came to be healed. Since no other document of antiquity -- including the rest of the Bible -- mentions such a place, skeptics have long argued that John simply invented the place.
But as Sheler points out, when archeologists decided to dig where John said that the pool had been located, they found a five-sided pool. What's more, the pool contained shrines to the Greek gods of healing. Apparently John didn't make up the pool, after all.
The dismissal of biblical texts without bothering to dig points to a dirty little secret about a lot of scholarly opinion: Much of the traditional suspicion of the biblical text can only be called a prejudice. That is, it's a conclusion arrived at before one has the facts.
Scholars long assumed that the Bible, like other documents of antiquity, was essentially propaganda, what theologian Rudolf Bultmann called "kerygma" or proclamation.
But this prejudice does an injustice to biblical faith. Central to that faith are history and memory. Christians believe that God has acted, and continues to act, in history. For us, remembering what God has done is an act of worship -- something that brings us closer to God.
Thus, while these discoveries in the desert may come as a surprise to some skeptics, they're no surprise to Christians.
While archeology alone cannot bring a person to faith, these finds are an eloquent argument for not dismissing the truth of Scripture before at least examining the evidence -- because, as we are learning every day, Jesus meant it when he said that "the very stones will cry out."
Cordially,
Hands down...I agree! <><
"...William F. Albright, considered the foremost archaeologist of the 20th century, began his excavations of the Middle East skeptical of the Bible's historicity. But his discoveries turned him into a believer. He concluded: "The excessive skepticism shown toward the Bible by important historical schools of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries...has been progressively discredited. Discovery after discovery has established the accuracy of innumerable details, and has brought increased recognition to the value of the Bible as a source of history."
"...William Ramsey, the foremost archeologist of Asia Minor, was schooled to believe that the New Testament was merely a second century fabrication. However, when he went to the field to examine the evidence for himself he found that the places, topography, antiquities, titles and technical terms accurately matched those of the New Testament. With regard to the book of Acts he concluded: "Luke's history is unsurpassed in respect of it trustworthiness.""
Cordially
Cordially,
This at the end of the commentary may also help:
For further reading:
Jeffrey Sheler, IS THE BIBLE TRUE? (HarperCollins, 1999).
http://www.pfmonline.net/products.taf?_function=detail&Site=BPT&Item_Co de=BKIBT
Visit the Biblical Archaeology Society website. http://www.bib-arch.org
Randall Price, THE STONES CRY OUT: HOW ARCHEOLOGY CONFIRMS THE TRUTH OF THE BIBLE (Harvest House, 1997).
http://www.parable.com/breakpoint/item.asp?sku=1565076400
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.