If you started with Section 1 on near-death experiences, you have seen that there is considerable evidence that life continues after our physical death. Given that evidence, I would hope your mind would be more open to consider the evidence presented in Section 2 that the universe was created by a non-physical, timeless, personal Creator (God) who created time and space and the conditions for the universe and life to form.                                                                                                                                                                                       

So the next subject to tackle is the question that Christianity is based on: is Jesus of Nazareth the Son of God or just a mortal historical figure? Let’s examine the evidence.                                                                                                                                                                                  

I’ll start with the assumption that you already know the basics of the biblical story of Jesus accepted by most Christian denominations:

• He is part of the Holy Trinity – one God but three consubstantial (of the same essence) persons – Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

• He was begotten (or came from) God and entered the world as both man and God.

• His purpose was to reconcile mankind (who had strayed from God’s desired path) to God and provide a path for salvation for those who believe in Him and his message of redemption.

• He was born to a virgin (Mary) who conceived through the Holy Spirit (the third person of the Holy Trinity).

• He preached a message of the coming of a new age for humanity that included repentance and forgiveness of sins and the promise of eternal life for those who believe in Him.

• He performed numerous miracles and gained a large following during his ministry.

• He was crucified by the Roman authorities at the request of the Jewish elders (even though Jesus was himself Jewish).

• He rose from the dead and appeared to his disciples and followers before ascending into Heaven.

• He charged his key followers with spreading the gospel (good news) to all nations of the world.

• He promised to come again to the world at the end of time as judge of all humanity.

 

So  Is Jesus Who He Said He Is?

 

Let's start to answer this question by examining the evidence. I found three sources especially helpful in examining the evidence for the veracity (truthfulness) of Jesus's story:

• Lee Strobel is the former legal editor for the Chicago Tribune and a former atheist. When his wife unexpectedly (to him anyway) became a Christian, Lee set out on a two year journey to deeply investigate the case for Christianity to understand what was causing the fundamental (but positive) changes in her character.

  • He read extensively and traveled the U.S. meeting with experts in different​ areas of his inquiry to understand what evidence there is in support of Christianity.

  • Beginning his research, he was expecting to confirm his preconception that the story of Jesus was due to legendary development by well-intended but misguided people.

  • He concluded however, that the evidence was so substantial that it would require more an act of faith to maintain his atheism than to believe the evidence that Jesus is indeed who He said He is.

  • He became a Christian and wrote a book chronicling his research. I highly recommend reading it to get the whole story: The Case for Christ: A Journalist's Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus.[36]

• J. Warner Wallace is a cold-case homicide detective whose friends knew him as an "angry" atheist who thoughtfully dissected the Christian world view. He attended a church service at a friend's request and became interested in using his considerable investigative skills to examine the evidence behind Christianity.

  • He carefully researched the multiple lines of evidence and examined the points raised by skeptics using the skills of an experienced detective.

  • After completing his investigation, he too concluded that the evidence was too strong to ignore and became a Christian. He wrote an excellent book that I highly recommend reading that addresses the evidence and concerns of skeptics: Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels.[37]

• A third source that I found very valuable is one previously referenced: William Lane Craig's On Guard: Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision.[21]​​​  As noted, Bill Craig has two Ph.D.s in Philosophy and Theology and has researched and written extensively on the basis for Christianity.

​

Historical Jesus

Let's start with the question of whether Jesus was a historical or a legendary figure by examining the sources outside the Bible:                 

• While there is debate over the teachings of Jesus and the events portrayed in the New Testament of the Bible, there is broad consensus among scholars that Jesus is a historical figure. As described in the Wikipedia article on the historicity of Jesus: "Virtually all scholars who have investigated the history of the Christian movement find that the historicity of Jesus is effectively certain, and standard historical criteria have aided in reconstructing his life."[38]

• Flavius Josephus was a Jewish historian who was born in 37 AD; became a Pharisee (member of a Jewish religious sect) and is a prominent source of historical information during this period in Jewish and Roman history. He was captured by the Romans after the fall of Jerusalem and later became a Roman citizen after predicting that Vespasian would become emperor. It is important to note that as a Pharisee, Josephus would have been hostile to the development of Christianity. In his most ambitious work, The Antiquities, Josephus made two references to Jesus:

  • He described how the high priest Ananias (also mentioned in the New Testament) took advantage of the death of the Roman governor, Festus, to have James (the brother of Jesus*) killed: "He convened a meeting of the Sanhedrin and brought before them a man named James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ, and certain others. He accused them of having transgressed the law and delivered them up to be stoned."[39] The consensus of scholars is that this passage is authentic.                                                                                                                                                                                                                   *The term brother used here (adelphos in the original Greek) does not refer to brothers born of the same parents. It refers to brothers not born of the same parents (e.g. half-brothers, cousins, nephews, uncles, etc.) [40]                                                                                                                                                                                    

  • His second reference, called the Testimonium Flavianum (testimony of Flavius Josephus) contains important but controversial references to Jesus. The consensus of scholars is that in its present form, it contains original elements from Josephus but that it also contains interpolations (insertions) by Christian scribes later working on copying the original. Here is the current form:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           “About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Christ. And when, upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.”[39]                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            ​​

    • The highlighted words are thought to be interpolations because they weren't consistent with Josephus's style of writing or the likely beliefs of a Jewish Pharisee historian while the remaining parts of the passage are consistent.

    • So the importance of this passage isn't the affirmation of Jesus's resurrection or divinity (likely inserted by copyists), but the confirmation that:

 

1.  A "wise" man named Jesus lived at this time.

2. He performed "surprising deeds".

3. He was a teacher who won over many Jews and Greeks.

4. He was accused by the "principal men among us" (likely a reference to the Sanhedrin or Jewish ruling council).

5. He was condemned by Pontius Pilate to death on a cross.

6. A "tribe of Christians" named after him continued to that day.

​

• Publius Cornelius Tacitus, (born in 56 AD and died in 120 AD) was a Roman orator and public official who is considered by modern scholars to be one of the greatest Roman historians. Here is a passage from his work The Annals as he wrote about the Great Fire of Rome in 64 AD:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   "But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order. Consequently, to get rid of the report, 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 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, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind."[41]                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         

  • The significance of this passage is that:

1. It is considered authentic by modern scholars.

2. It confirms details about not only the death of Jesus but also refers to "a most mischievous superstition" from a group

    called Christians (presumably a reference to Jesus's resurrection and divinity).

3. An "immense multitude" held so strongly to their beliefs that they were willing to die instead of recanting.[39]

4. Plus this account came from a prominent Roman who was clearly not sympathetic to Christianity.​​

 

• Pliny the Younger (61 AD - 113 AD) was the Roman governor of Bithyna (northwestern Turkey) who was a friend of the Roman emperor Trajan. In his  letter to Trajan, he referred to Christians he had arrested and was asking Trajan for advice:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      "Sir, 

It is my constant method to apply myself to you for the resolution of all my doubts; for who can better govern my dilatory way of proceeding or instruct my ignorance? I have never been present at the examination of the Christians [by others], on which account I am unacquainted with what uses to be inquired into, and what, and how far they used to be punished; nor are my doubts small, whether there be not a distinction to be made between ages [of the accused]? and whether tender youth ought to have the same punishment with strong men? Whether there be not room for pardon upon repentance?" or whether it may not be an advantage to one that had been a Christian, that he has forsaken Christianity? Whether the bare name, without any crimes besides, or the crimes adhering to that name, be to be punished? In the meantime, I have taken this course about those who have been brought before me as Christians. I asked them whether they were Christians or not? If they confessed that they were Christians, I asked them again, and a third time, intermixing threatenings with the questions. If they persevered in their confession, I ordered them to be executed; for I did not doubt but, let their confession be of any sort whatsoever, this positiveness and inflexible obstinacy deserved to be punished. There have been some of this mad sect whom I took notice of in particular as Roman citizens, that they might be sent to that city. After some time, as is usual in such examinations, the crime spread itself and many more cases came before me. A libel was sent to me, though without an author, containing many names [of persons accused]. These denied that they were Christians now, or ever had been. They called upon the gods, and supplicated to your image, which I caused to be brought to me for that purpose, with frankincense and wine; they also cursed Christ; none of which things, it is said, can any of those that are ready Christians be compelled to do; so I thought fit to let them go. Others of them that were named in the libel, said they were Christians, but presently denied it again; that indeed they had been Christians, but had ceased to be so, some three years, some many more; and one there was that said he had not been so these twenty years. All these worshipped your image, and the images of our gods; these also cursed Christ. However, they assured me that the main of their fault, or of their mistake was this: That they were wont, on a stated day, to meet together before it was light, and to sing a hymn to Christ, as to a god, alternately; and to oblige themselves by a sacrament [or oath], not to do anything that was ill: but that they would commit no theft, or pilfering, or adultery; that they would not break their promises, or deny what was deposited with them, when it was required back again; after which it was their custom to depart, and to meet again at a common but innocent meal, which they had left off upon that edict which I published at your command, and wherein I had forbidden any such conventicles. These examinations made me think it necessary to inquire by torments what the truth was; which I did of two servant maids, who were called Deaconesses; but still I discovered no more than that they were addicted to a bad and to an extravagant superstition. Hereupon I have put off any further examinations, and have recourse to you, for the affair seems to be well worth consultation, especially on account of the number of those that are in danger; for there are many of every age, of every rank, and of both sexes, who are now and hereafter likely to be called to account, and to be in danger; for this superstition is spread like a contagion, not only into cities and towns, but into country villages also, which yet there is reason to hope may be stopped and corrected. To be sure, the temples, which were almost forsaken, begin already to be frequented; and the holy solemnities, which were long intermitted, begin to be revived. The sacrifices begin to sell well everywhere, of which very few purchasers had of late appeared; whereby it is easy to suppose how great a multitude of men may be amended, if place for repentance be admitted."[42]                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          

• The significance of this letter (written in approximately 112 AD) is the following:

1.  It attests to the rapid spread of Christianity.

2.  It refers to Christians worshiping Jesus as God.

3.  It's clear that Christians were willing to die instead of recanting their faith.

 

• Another non-biblical historical reference that is significant refers to the account in the Gospels of darkness falling between noon and three o'clock (during the crucifixion) and an earthquake occurring. In The Case for Christ, Lee Strobel cites his interview with Edwin Yamauchi, (Ph.D. in Mediterranean studies) and references author Gary Habermas (Ph.D. in Philosophy and History and Philosophy of Religion) in describing this historical reference:[44]                                                                                                                                                                       

  • Dr. Habermas wrote about an historian, Thallus, who wrote a history of the eastern Mediterranean. The original work ​​​was lost but a later historian, Julius Africanus (born in 160 AD), quoted from Thallus's work as follows: "Thallus, in the third book of his histories, explains away the darkness as an eclipse of the sun -- unreasonably, as it seems to me." (Note: Thallus apparently made this comment due to the time of the year the crucifixion occurred being inconsistent with the timing of an eclipse).

  • Yamauchi then quotes about the darkness from Paul Maier's book, Pontius Pilate (note: Paul Maier has a Ph.D. in ancient history): "This phenomenon, evidently, was visible from 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 137 AD, reported that in the fourth year of the 202nd Olympiad (i.e. 33 AD) there was 'the greatest eclipse of the sun' and that 'it became night in the sixth hour of the day (i.e. noon) so that stars even appeared in the heavens. There was a great earthquake in Bithynia, and many things were overturned in Nicaea.'"

 

Is the New Testament Reliable?

​

Here’s a link to a video from Dr.Craig’s Reasonable Faith website: https://youtu.be/lCeOjLQ61vo?t=3

​

Gospel Authors

 

While you may not have thought about it, the four gospels that tell the story of Jesus in the Bible (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) are either direct eyewitness accounts or directly based on eyewitness accounts.                                                                                                  

• The four gospel accounts are believed to have been written by two of the original twelve disciples of Jesus, (Matthew and John); a companion and interpreter for Peter (Mark); and a physician and disciple of Paul (Luke). Although their authorship isn't absolutely certain, early Christian tradition supports their authorship and there are no attributions to other possible authors which is significant since there is evidence of early Christians identifying and condemning forgers who tried to credit false gospels to the apostolic eyewitnesses (e.g. The Traditions of Matthias).[44]

• Further evidence to support their authorship is the fact that Mark and Luke were not direct eyewitnesses to Jesus's ministry and didn't represent themselves as such. It is unlikely that a forger would have chosen names of two men who were not immediate witnesses as some later authors did in their writings from the second to fifth centuries that used names of Jesus's disciples to present accounts of Jesus that were rejected by Christians as forgeries. It's also likely that a forger would have chosen the name of a different disciple than Matthew who was a tax collector (a much hated and disrespected occupation in Roman times).

• There is also a record of the gospels being attributed to the identified authors by early church officials:

  • Papias (60 AD - 130 AD) who was Bishop of Hierapolis, wrote about Mark's Gospel: "When Mark became Peter's interpreter, he wrote down accurately, although not in order, all that he remembered of what the Lord had said or done." He also attributed authorship of Matthew's Gospel to the original disciple.[45]

  • Polycarp (69 AD - 155 AD) who was Bishop of Smyrna, was known to have attributed the Gospel of John to the original disciple John.[44]

  • Irenaeus (130 AD - 202 AD) who was Bishop of Lugdunum,​​ attributed authorship of all the gospels to two original disciples (Matthew and John) in addition to Luke and Mark.[45]

​​

Gospels Timeline

• The timeline of when the gospels were written is important in assessing their reliability. The closer to the ministry and death of Jesus, the more likely the accounts are to be accurate and not tainted by legendary development.

• It's important to keep in mind that at the time of Jesus's death (generally understood to be between 30 - 33 AD), writings (on scrolls of papyrus) were rare so most history was communicated orally as it was passed on from generation to generation.

• It's also relevant to consider that early Christians expected that Jesus's promised second coming would be during their lifetimes so they may have not felt the urgency to codify his teachings in writing immediately.

• Having said that, what is known about the timing of the gospels?

  • Using knowledge of some well understood dates like the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem (70 AD after a three year siege)[46]; the death of James, Peter and Paul (61 AD - 65 AD)[47]; and when​ Paul wrote his letters (50 AD - 62 AD)[48], it's possible to combine that knowledge with the timelines from references in Paul's letters and the known sequence of the gospels to establish likely dates of composition. Here is how Lee Strobel recaps the timeline in his interview with Craig Bloomberg, (Ph.D. in New Testament from Aberdeen University and senior research fellow at Cambridge University)[49]:

    • Luke wrote the Acts of the Apostles after his Gospel.

    • He ends Acts of the Apostles with Paul imprisoned in Rome but still alive.

    • Paul died in 62 AD (consensus date) so Acts cannot be dated later than 62 which means the Gospel According to Luke would be dated earlier.

    • Luke incorporated parts of Mark's gospel in his so Mark's gospel would be dated even earlier.

  • There is scholarly debate about dating the gospels with some contending that Mark's gospel was written before the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem (70 AD), Matthew's and Luke's in the 80's and John's in the 90's. It seems to me the earlier dating makes more sense since the destruction of the Temple was such a cataclysmic event that it's highly unlikely that it would not have been even mentioned in the gospels or Acts of the Apostles.

  • Additional evidence to support the earlier dating is that Jesus predicted the destruction of the Temple so that if it had already occurred before the gospels and Acts of the Apostles were written, it's highly likely the authors would have referred to it as a prophesy come true -- especially since they referred to other prophesies as having been fulfilled, not the least of which was Jesus's prediction of his death and resurrection.

  • Another argument to support the earlier dating is that while the martyrdom​​ of one of the original apostles (James, the Son of Zebedee) and Stephen (one of the seven original deacons of the new church) is covered in Acts of the Apostles, no mention is made of the death of any other of the church leaders. Since the deaths of James (brother of Jesus), Peter and Paul are believed to have occurred between 61 - 65 AD, it seems very likely that they would have been mentioned by Matthew, Luke and John had they been writing in the 80's and 90's.

 

So while scholars haven't been able to definitively date the gospels, the best evidence is that they were written during the lifetimes of original eyewitnesses or companions to those witnesses. It's also important to consider that they were written during the lifetimes of many who had witnessed the events of Jesus's ministry and death so the gospel writers would have been subjected to criticism and correction if they reported inaccurate accounts.

 

​

​

​

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other Evidence of the Accuracy of Gospel Accounts

 

Actions Speak Louder Than Words

• Among the original twelve disciples who were eyewitnesses to Jesus's ministry, death and resurrection, only the deaths of James (Son of Zebedee) and Judas are documented by written historical or biblical accounts (although Judas did not witness Jesus's resurrection since he killed himself after his betrayal).​

• Paul should also be considered an eyewitness since the resurrected Jesus appeared to him resulting in his conversion (more on that later). There is also written historical evidence of Paul's death at the hands of Emperor Nero.[50]

• Of the remaining original apostles, there are written references to the martyrdom of Peter[51] and traditions passed on verbally in the early church that each died a violent death as they preached the Christian gospel around the world with the exception of John who reportedly died of natural causes.[52]

• Many of these deaths were reportedly gruesome including death by crucifixion, stoning, stabbing, and beheading. Peter reportedly requested that he be placed upside down for his crucifixion since he didn't deserve to die in the same fashion as Jesus.

• The question we should all ask is why these men were willing to die for their faith when renouncing it would have saved their lives? One could argue that others chose to die for their faith as well including many of the early Christians but the difference with these men is for them, it wasn't a matter of faith. They were there. They were eyewitnesses. They knew whether Jesus was resurrected or not. Who would choose to die a gruesome death if they knew Jesus's resurrection was a lie?

​

Paul

An examination of the life of Saul of Tarsus (Paul in Greek) provides additional evidence that Jesus is who He said He is:

• Paul was a devout Jew who was a member of the Pharisees, who were strict adherents to the Jewish law.

• According to his own writings and Luke's, Paul was an aggressive persecutor of Christians, leading efforts to identify believers in Jesus and leading them to prison and stoning for what he considered their blasphemy.

• He requested permission from the Sanhedrin (Jewish ruling body) for letters authorizing him to bring followers of Jesus back to Jerusalem "in chains", a request the Sanhedrin granted.

• According to Paul's testimony, the resurrected Jesus appeared to him on the road to Damascus and asked Paul why he was persecuting Him. He told Paul to get up and go into the city where he would be told what he should do. Paul said he was blinded for three days before a messenger was sent by Jesus to baptize him.

• Afterward, instead of zealously persecuting Christians, Paul does exactly the opposite and devotes the remainder of his life to preaching the gospel (good news) of Christianity to the Gentiles (non-Jewish people).

• A more modern day analogy would be a Nazi SS officer in World War II who was aggressively rounding up Jews to send to the gas chambers suddenly doing everything he could to preach Judaism, save Jews and being willing to sacrifice his life for them.

• Paul suffered many hardships during his missionary journeys and was arrested and killed by the Roman authorities after two years of house arrest in approximately 62 AD.

• What would cause a man like Paul who deeply believed his persecution of Christians was right to suddenly turn 180 degrees and devote his life to teaching that Jesus is the divine Son of God? Even more, what would cause Paul to sacrifice his life and submit to execution for that belief? I think the only logical answer is that like the other eyewitness disciples, he didn't just believe -- he knew what Christians believed about Jesus was true.

​

The key point is that for Christians who came after the original eyewitnesses, their belief in his resurrection is a matter of faith. For the eyewitnesses themselves, their belief in Jesus's resurrection was a matter of knowledge.

​

Archeological Evidence

Archeological finds have confirmed numerous historical references in the New Testament, providing evidence of the accuracy of the accounts. Here are some examples from Jim Wallace's Cold Case Christianity[54]:                                                                                         

• In Luke's gospel, he wrote about Joseph and Mary returning to Bethlehem because a Syrian governor named Quirinius was conducting a census. Historian Josephus confirmed the existence of Quirinius but said his governorship was from 5-6 AD which would have been too late to confirm the story of Joseph and Mary's return to Bethlehem for Jesus's birth. Archeologists discovered coins and the base of a statue that confirmed that a man named Quirinius was proconsul of Syria from 11 BC to 4 AD which covered the time of Jesus's birth.

• In Acts, Luke described the city of Iconium of Phrygia. Some other ancient writings (e.g. from Cicero) said that Iconium was in Lycaonia, not Phrygia. However a monument was discovered by archeologists that confirmed that Iconium was a city in Phrygia, confirming Luke's account.

• Luke also mentioned in his gospel that a man name Lysanias ruled Abilene during John the Baptist's ministry. Josephus referred to a Lysanias who ruled the area from 40-36 BC which was long before John the Baptist's time. Archeologists discovered an inscription dated from 14-37 AD that confirms a man named Lysanias was the ruler in the region during that time which confirms Luke's account and suggests there may have been two men with that name who ruled during different time periods.

• Paul mentioned a man named Erastus in his letter to the Romans. A piece of pavement was discovered that confirmed his existence.

• In his gospel, John wrote about the existence of a pool of Bethesda that was located near the Sheep Gate in Jerusalem and surrounded by five porticos. Archeologists discovered the remains of the pool which had five porticos.

• John also wrote about the pool of Siloam which was confirmed by archeologists in 2004.

• Skeptics expressed doubt about Luke's use of the term "politarch" to describe "rulers of the city" since no other ancient writers used that term. Archeologists discovered nineteen inscriptions that used that term with five of them referencing Thessalonica which is where Luke claimed to have heard it.

• Luke identified Sergius Paulus as a proconsul of Paphos. Skeptical scholars claimed that any leader of this area would have been a "proprietor" not a "proconsul". An inscription was discovered that identified Paulus as a proconsul, supporting Luke's use of the term.

• Archeological finds have also confirmed the existence of Pontius Pilate through an inscription of a building dedication in Caesaria which was a provincial capital under his authority during his term (26-36 AD).

​​

Motivations of the Gospel Authors

Did the gospel writers have any reasons to lie or exaggerate when they wrote about Jesus?                                                                         

• They certainly didn't have any financial gain as a motive. They lived lives of modesty without material wealth and even shared their resources with each other to make sure all had food and shelter. Some even gave up their families to travel and preach the gospel.

• They certainly weren't motivated by power since they were at the mercy of the power of the Roman and Jewish authorities.

• They didn't do it for acceptance. Preaching the Christian faith totally changed and disrupted their lives and alienated them from the Judaism that had been the center of their lives. It made them outcasts and pariahs.

• And they certainly weren't motivated by the desire for safety. All the original disciples except John were killed for their faith.

 

Embarrassing Content

Including elements that are embarrassing or inconsistent with Jewish beliefs is another indication that the writers’ accounts were faithfully reported. One example of this is the gospel accounts of women discovering the empty tomb (more on this later).

 

In his interview with Dr. Bloomberg, Lee Strobel recounts Dr. Bloomberg citing examples of gospel writers including material that could be interpreted as embarrassing or inconsistent and yet they did not omit it as they might have done if they were not trying to report accurately. Here are a just a couple of examples[53]:

• In Mark 6:5, it says that Jesus could do few miracles in Nazareth because the people there had little faith which seems to indicate limitations on his power. Paul later explained this as Christ voluntarily and consciously limiting the independent exercise of his powers but it would have been more convenient for Mark to just have left that part of his account out if he were trying to “slant the coverage”.

• Another example is when Mark and Matthew described in their gospels Jesus crying out on the cross: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” While some scholars think Jesus was referring to Psalm 22 which starts with those words, it may raise questions for some about why Jesus would say that just before his death which would have been easy to leave out if they weren’t interested in reporting accurately.

 

The Empty Tomb and Resurrection Appearances

​

Jesus could not have been resurrected if his body remained in its tomb so what corroboration is there to support the gospel accounts that his tomb was found empty two mornings after his crucifixion? Dr. Craig lists the key lines of evidence (read chapter 9 of his On Guard: Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision for a detailed account)[58]:

​

Jesus's Burial 

If stories of Jesus's burial are accurate, then both Jews and early Christians would have known where his tomb was and Jesus's disciples wouldn't have believed in his resurrection if his body remained in his tomb. Also, Jewish authorities could have easily discredited resurrection claims if Jesus's body remained in his tomb. So what is the evidence in support of the gospel accounts of the empty tomb?

• In 1 Corinthians 15:3-5, Paul refers to the tradition he had received that "Christ died for our sins, in accordance with the scriptures, ​and that he was buried; and that on the third day, he was raised to life, in accordance with the scriptures; and that he appeared to Cephas; and later to the Twelve". Since Paul likely received this from the disciples no later than 36 AD during his visit to Rome, it is a very early reference to Jesus's burial and indicates the existence of "scriptures" outlining Christian beliefs. This would be far too soon after Jesus's death for legends to develop which would have been challenged by people with direct knowledge of Jesus's burial.

• Mark's gospel which was the first one written, independently includes details of Jesus's burial by Joseph of Arimathea and is another early source.

• The fact that all gospel accounts describe Joseph of Arimathea requesting the body of Jesus from Pontius Pilate which he buries in a tomb is itself evidence of the accounts' accuracy. If early Christians were to invent a story about Jesus's burial, it would be extremely unlikely they would have chosen Joseph as the one to give Jesus an honorable burial since he was a member of the Sanhedrin who had requested that Pilate put Jesus to death.

​

Independent Reports the Tomb Was Empty

• The gospels of Matthew and Luke appear to have had additional sources other than just Mark's gospel, and John's gospel had an additional independent resource -- all included accounts of the burial of Jesus by Joseph of Arimathea.

• In Paul's citation of the early scriptures, he not only refers to Jesus's burial but also that he was "raised" which clearly meant an empty tomb and corresponds with first century Jewish understanding of resurrection as physically bringing a body back to life.

​

Simplicity of Mark's Account

The simplicity of Mark's account is itself evidence of its accuracy since it doesn't include embellishment with theological themes as would be expected of a fictional account and as later fictional accounts did like the Gospel of Peter (which was rejected as being unauthentic).

​

Discovery by Women

Women in first century Jewish society had a low status in society and were very much second-class citizens. They were not even able to serve as legal witnesses. It would therefore be highly unlikely that gospel authors would have chosen women to be the first witnesses of the empty tomb as the gospels describe. Fictional accounts would almost certainly have described men making the discovery.

​

Response of Jewish Leaders

As described in Matthew's gospel, the reaction of Jewish leaders upon hearing of Jesus's resurrection isn't to deny that the tomb was empty for that would have been easy to disprove if it wasn't true. Their reaction was to claim that the body had been stolen while the guards were asleep.

​

Here is a link to Dr. Craig summarizing some of the evidence for the empty tomb: 

https://youtu.be/lT0nweGbt8k?si=lOLlMUso3aH3HJdf (9 min.)

​

Appearances of Jesus After His Resurrection

• There are numerous independent sources that report appearances of the resurrected Jesus after his crucifixion.

• In addition to the gospel accounts of multiple appearances of the resurrected Jesus to his disciples, Paul separately describes the  appearances of Jesus to Peter; the disciples; "five hundred brethren" (many of whom were still alive and could therefore have verified his claim); Jesus's brother James; a larger group of apostles; and finally to Paul himself. 

• And importantly, these appearances were bodily appearances where Jesus ate and drank and was touched.

​

Here’s a link to a video from Reasonable Faith that summarizes the key facts: https://youtu.be/4qhQRMhUK1o?si=DN8BJ0xdQdDb-FLD

 

And here’s a link to a companion video from Reasonable Faith that addresses the various hypotheses that skeptics have proposed to explain the resurrection appearances: https://youtu.be/6SbJ4p6WiZE?si=fiINBAWzsXDoPSXb

​

Understanding Inconsistencies

While core elements of the four gospel accounts are largely consistent, not all details are and some events are mentioned in one gospel account but not in another. Note that Matthew, Mark and Luke are called the Synoptic gospels because of their similarity in content and structure. It is believed that Matthew and Luke used Mark's gospel as a source in addition to an unidentified source labeled "Q", while John's gospel content is more distinct. Skeptics of Christianity point out the differences in the account in the gospels as evidence they are unreliable so let's examine that point:                                                                                                                                                         

• In Cold-Case Christianity, Jim Wallace uses his considerable experience as a homicide detective to point out that eyewitness accounts to a crime often differ as a natural result of their different experience, perspective and worldview.

• In fact, if accounts from multiple eyewitnesses are all in harmony, that suggests that they colluded to "get their story straight" as the saying does.

• So the fact that the gospel accounts agree on the big story but differ in some details should actually be seen as evidence that they were true recollections of the individuals.

• He also points out how one gospel unintentionally answers questions raised by another or fills in the gaps to provide a more complete picture. These provide evidence of the point he makes about witnesses providing their accounts from their own perspectives resulting in differences in those accounts plus how the details provided by one witness can provide a more complete picture when combined with details from other witnesses. Here are some examples[59]:                                                                          

  • In Matthew's gospel, he describes Jesus's trial in front of the Sanhedrin where they slapped Jesus and said "Prophesy for us, Messiah: who is it that struck you?" (Matthew 26:68 NAB). This seems odd if he is standing in front of them and could see who did it. But Luke's account answers the question when he noted that Jesus had been blindfolded: "They blindfolded him and questioned him, saying 'Prophesy! Who is it that struck you?'" (Luke 23:64 NAB).

  • In all four gospels, there is an account of the miracle of feeding five thousand people in a remote place with only five loaves of bread and two fish. This raises the question of why five thousand people would have been in such a remote place that there were no food sources available. John's gospel account of the miracle includes details that answer the question when he said that the people had been searching for Jesus after hearing he had been performing miraculous healings. John also reported that it was nearly Passover when thousands would have been traveling to Jerusalem.

  • When Matthew describes Jesus calling on Peter, Andrew, John and James to follow him, he says they immediately dropped their fishing nets and followed Him. It's hard to imagine four men abandoning their homes and families so easily as a result of a simple invitation. Luke's account provides more details of the encounter when he describes how Jesus instructed the four fishermen to go back out again after not catching any fish and catching so many that their nets burst. After witnessing this miracle, the four decided to follow Jesus.

​​