Christianity Considered (part 2)

Who was Jesus (Continued)

Jesus, the great I AM

Jesus used the phrase ‘I AM’ as a title. The name ‘I AM’ was the personal name God used to identify Himself to Moses and the elders of Israel at the time of the Exodus. Jesus took this great name of God to Himself, and used it on many occasions in various situations. His liberal use of this phrase was designed to indicate that He was the incarnation of the God of Israel. The strongest example is in John, chapter 8, when He said: “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.” In this statement, He not only stated He was Israel’s God, the ‘I AM’, but also supported it with the declaration that He existed before Abraham. (Abraham was the father of the Jewish nation and lived some two millennia before the birth of Jesus of Nazareth). The “most assuredly” at the beginning of the declaration emphasised its importance. Here are some statements of Jesus when the name I AM was incorporated into descriptions of His person and work.

“I am the bread of life”. (6.35); (6.48); (6.51) This statement is set in the context of the INCARNATION “For I have come down from heaven”. (see 6.33,38,41,42,51)

“I am the light of the world.” (8.12); (9.5); 12.46) He put this in the context of the His then current MINISTRY. “As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.” (John 9.5)

“I am the door of the sheep” (10.7) (10.9) and “I am the good shepherd:”(10.11); (10.14) These are set in the context of the DEATH of Christ. “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep.” (John 10.11,14,15)

“I am the resurrection and the life” (11.25) is set in the context of RESURRECTION. “Jesus said to her, ‘Your brother will rise again.’” (John 11.23 )

“I am the way, the truth, and the life” (14.6) is set in the context of the ASCENSION of Christ. “Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father’s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you”. (John 14.1,2)

“I am the vine” (15.1); (15.5) is set in the context of a promised PENTECOST. “But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me”. (John 15.26)

This set of statements from the incarnate God encompassed elements from the whole cycle of His earthly life (from heaven to earth to heaven) - the incarnation, ministry, death, resurrection, ascension, return to the Father and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. Individually each 'I am' is impressive, but as a group of interlocking truths they are compelling. Each of these statements begins with the name of God that encapsulates His eternal nature.

He claimed authority over the lives of people

Jesus invited a love and a loyalty that took precedence over love and loyalty for parents, children, possessions, and even life itself. Without giving him this kind of devotion people could not be His disciples (Matthew 8:21,22; 10:37; 19:29; Luke 14:26-33).

He expected people to suffer insults, persecution and slander for His sake (Matthew 5:11, Luke 6:22) and to lose their lives for His sake (Matthew 10:39; 16:25).

He expected people to acknowledge him before others and said they would be rewarded for doing so (Matthew 10:32). His Father would honour those who served him (John 12:26).

He claimed to be His disciples' only Master, Teacher and Lord (Mt.23:8-10; John 13:14).

To know Him

To know him was to know God (John 8:19; 14:7); to see him was to see God (John 12:45; 14:9); to believe in him was to believe in God (John 12:44); to receive him was to receive God (Mark 9:37); to hate him was to hate God (John 15:23); and to honour him was to honour God (John 5:23).

To be continued

Christianity Considered 2

Christianity Considered Course Part 2.

In several of the previous blogs we considered the Bible - and asked the question, 'was the record of the life of Jesus of Nazareth authentic?' If you agree that the biographies of Jesus do have 'the ring of truth' and are a reliable record of what he did, what he said, and how he died, then perhaps we should now consider what we should understand in respect of the person and work of this son of a carpenter who has had such an influence on our thinking and way of life. So let's ask the question,

Who was Jesus?

That there was such a person as Jesus of Nazareth is accepted by all. His influence has been substantial. Our calendar has His birth as the main reference point, with history being annotated B.C. (Before Christ) and A.D. (In the year of our Lord). But who was He? Let us explore the question.

Before we were inundated with mobile phones, interactive TV and the internet, it was considered that there were three main ways to send a message to someone. First you could send someone to represent you and speak for you. Or you could write down your message, in a letter or something similar. The weakness of these ways of communicating is obvious. In the first, if there are any queries, the messenger may not know the answers. With regards to the written communication, it may be that the recipient may not understand everything you wished to say. The third way was considered best. Go in person, take the message yourself. If there are any queries, you could answer them immediately. The message would be presented with much more accuracy and flexibility.

God, in communicating with humankind took no chances. First He sent men to represent Him and take His message. They were called ‘prophets’. Then, He ensured that the message was written down, the Bible. But best of all He came Himself. Christians believe Jesus was God walking this earth, making clear His mind and will for humankind. If this is so, then what message did He bring? What did He say about Himself, and His mission?

What Jesus said about Himself

The first claim He made for Himself was that He was the expected Jewish Messiah who would do mighty things. In His home synagogue, He identified Himself as such by reading a Messianic passage from Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, Because He has anointed Me To preach the gospel to the poor; He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to the captives And recovery of sight to the blind, To set at liberty those who are oppressed; To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord”. (Lk 4:18,19) and then saying, “today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.” This was perceived as an outrageous claim by those from Nazareth who had known him as boy and man, and seen him grow up. They were not willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. They drove him out of town. Not a very promising start to His career as a deliverer you might think!

He claimed a unique relationship with God the Father

Then, in a continuing defence of His Messianic claim over a long period, He spoke repeatedly of “the Father who sent me”. John 5.22-30 records His declaration that He had been sent as God’s co-equal to be the Messiah. Therefore, He should be honoured with the same honour that is afforded to God. Furthermore, He has the same power to impart life, as does the Father. Those that honour Jesus with the same honour as they give to the Father will be recipients of the life of God.

Jesus, supremely conscious that God was His Father, often spoke of it (about 120 times in John’s gospel alone). Sometimes He called him "my father" (Matthew 15:13; 18:10; Luke 2:49, etc). There is even an instance when He addressed God by the familiar term "abba" (Mark 14:36). The Jews of Jesus' day considered it irregular and blasphemous for a person to use such intimate titles for God.

Did Jesus of Nazareth claim to be God incarnate?

Certainly! Because this was such a mighty revelation, to begin with He claimed it by implication rather than by direct statement. This is the force of His claim, when He said, “I and My Father are one”. Those who heard him make this statement understood it as such. They accused him of blasphemy. The language Jesus used is the language of the incarnate God, revealed on earth as Son of the Father. When Jesus said: “My Father has been working until now, and I have been working”, the Bible describes the reaction of the people: “Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God.” (John 5.18)


In the ‘Good Shepherd’ discourse, He added some detail to the assertion that He was equal to the Father. Jesus said He could give His sheep eternal life and guarantee their eternal safety, because He had the same power that God the Father possessed. “And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand.” (John 10.28,29) The reaction of the people again confirmed their understanding that Jesus was claiming deity, for the Jews took up stones again to stone him. They perceived that in speaking this way, Jesus was again making Himself equal with God. For such impertinence He should die — and they aimed to kill him. (John 5:16-18) Jesus challenged this demonstration of anger and hatred. “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?” His opponents answered him, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.” In more amenable surroundings Jesus also confirmed to His disciples that, “He who has seen Me has seen the Father”. (John 14.9)

Jesus took this claim further. He declared Himself to be the only one who knew the Father, and therefore the only one who could reveal Him to others (Matthew 11:27; John 6:46). He was one with the Father (John 10:30,38) and everything that belonged to the Father belonged to him (John 16:15; 17:10). To have our prayers answered we are to ask the Father in the name of Jesus. (John 14:13; 15:16; 16:23,24)

Jesus under oath!

When Jesus stood before members of the Sanhedrin, Caiaphas the High Priest, put him under oath and demanded a direct answer to a direct question. “I put You under oath by the living God: Tell us if You are the Messiah, the Son of God!” This precise question brought into focus the two main elements in the dilemma that they faced: what was the nature of the person and work of Jesus of Nazareth? In respect of the mission of Jesus, he asked, “Are you the Messiah?” In respect of Christ’s personal essence, he asked “Are you the Son of God?” Jesus gave a clear, affirmative answer to both halves of the question, “It is as you said”. Furthermore, He increased their consternation by quoting a prophecy from Daniel that related to both halves of the High Priest’s challenge. Their interpretation of Daniel 7.13,14 was that the Son of Man named there was both Messiah and divine. Jesus therefore said, “…hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

Jesus claimed that, at a future time, He would return, and according to Daniel 7.14, the Ancient of Days would give him an everlasting dominion, with glory, and an eternal kingdom. Furthermore, all nations would serve and worship him. Caiaphas understood the implication of Jesus’ words. The High Priest tore his clothes, and declared: “He has spoken blasphemy! What further need do we have of witnesses? Look, now you have heard His blasphemy!” The High Priest, addressing the Sanhedrin asked, “What do you think?” They answered and said, “He is deserving of death”.

There can be no doubt that Jesus understood Himself to be Son of God in its fullest sense. When the opponents of Jesus had difficulty in supplying evidence to Pilate to support the political charges laid against him they fell back on, “We have a law, and according to our law He ought to die, because He made Himself the Son of God.” The law to which they referred was the law of blasphemy.

To be continued!

Christianity Considered Course Part 1

What about the Bible (Part 5)

Let's take our enquiry a little further in this blog. We need to ask, after 2000 years of transmission, is the New Testament record a true reflection of what the gospel writers penned? This question concerns what has happened to the records since they were written down. Suppose the original writers of the New Testament did give us a reasonably accurate account of the character and ministry of Jesus. That was two thousand years ago. The writings have been copied and translated many times since then, so how do we know that they weren’t changed in the process, either accidentally or deliberately?

This question can be answered by considering the testimony of the many manuscripts that have survived from antiquity. For example, in respect of the New Testament, we possess about 5,300 partial or complete Greek manuscripts, as well as an additional 8,000 or so manuscripts of New Testament translations in such languages as Syriac, Armenian, Ethiopic, Coptic, Gothic, Slavic, Sahidic and Georgian. Then we have numerous quotes from early Christian writers from the end of the first century onwards. More than 89,000 allusions to passages in the New Testament have been listed. These quotes help to establish the accuracy of the original text.

This weight of evidence is normally sufficient to assert that the text of the New Testament as we have it, is authentic. Sir Frederick Kenyon, a former Director of the British Museum and one of the greatest authorities on the subject, said in his book ‘Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts’: “The number of manuscripts of the New Testament, or early translations from it in the oldest writers of the Church, is so large that it is practically certain that the true reading of every doubtful passage is preserved in some one or other of these ancient authorities. This can be said of no other ancient book in the world.”

Other experts in the field of ancient literature have this to say about the authenticity of the New Testament. Clark Pinnock, Professor of Systematic Theology at McMaster Divinity School in Ontario: “There exists no document from the ancient world, witnessed by so excellent a set of textual and historical testimonies and offering so superb an array of historical data, on which an intelligent decision may be made. An honest person cannot dismiss a source of this kind. Scepticism regarding the historical credentials of Christianity is based on an irrational basis.”

The cumulative effect of this weight of evidence was summed up by F. J. A. Hort of Cambridge University, one of the greatest textual critics of the New Testament, in his book ‘Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek’. He said that, leaving aside the comparatively trivial variations between the manuscripts: “the amount of what can in any sense be called substantial variation is but a small fraction of the whole...and can hardly form more than a thousandth part of the entire text.” To quote Sir Frederick Kenyon again, from ‘The Bible and Theology’: “The interval between the dates of the original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be in fact negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established.” He also said, “It is reassuring at the end to find that the general result of all these discoveries and all this study is to strengthen the proof of the authenticity of the Scripture, and our conviction that we have in our hands, in substantial integrity, the veritable Word of God.”

Is the Bible really the Word of God?

After all, if Jesus is the most complete revelation of the person and character of God that we have been given, and if He did die on the cross to pay the penalty for our rebellion against Him, and if He is offering to us the incredible gift of his forgiveness and love for all eternity, then it would have been foolish of Him not to have taken steps to see that we had a reasonably accurate account of these things. And if this is so, would it not be foolish of us to reject his love because we imagined wrongly that the record was distorted?

In his book, the Ring of Truth, J.B. Philips reports a radio interview he had with the distinguished classical scholar, Dr. E.V. Rieu, who translated Homer into very modern English for the “Penguin Classics”. Rieu was sixty years of age and a lifelong agnostic when Penguin invited him to translate the Gospels. A year later, Dr. Rieu was a believer, having been convinced by the text. When Philips asked him, “Did you not get the feeling that the whole material was extraordinarily alive?” Rieu replied, “I got the deepest feeling. My work changed me. I came to the conclusion that these words bear the seal of the Son of Man and God. And they’re the Magna Carta of the human spirit.” Reflecting on the experience Philips said, “I found it particularly thrilling to hear a man who is a scholar of the first rank, as well as a man of wisdom and experience, openly admitting that these words written long ago, were alive with power. They bore to him as to me, the ring of truth.”

Christianity Considered 1

Christianity Considered 1 (Part 4)

What about the Bible?

In the last blog we suggested the biographies of the life of Jesus of Nazareth were reliable because they were written either by eye-witnesses or by those who received their information first hand from eye-witnesses. But that still leaves us with another question. Were the followers of Jesus themselves deceived ?

Were the disciples of Jesus subject to a deception?

This question has to be faced. If the biographies were, in fact, eye-witness accounts, were the writers themselves, subject to a deception? Were they gullible? Had they been deluded into believing Jesus was someone special? After all, it was 2,000 years ago, and isn’t commonly believed that people of that era were illiterate and uneducated? History presents a somewhat different picture.

Some 300 years before the birth of Christ, an order was given for the building of a great library in Alexandria. This world renowned library became a driving force for learning. Other libraries followed and education was highly valued. In the wake of this fresh impetus for learning, philosophical schools were set up by Plato and Aristotle, and their philosophies spread throughout the empire. It is no surprise that education was highly prized in Jesus’ day, especially among the Jews. Paul who wrote a substantial part of the New Testament was highly educated in three cultures, Roman, Greek and Jewish. The scholar F. F. Bruce, wrote of Paul: “I have learnt to regard Paul as the greatest man who ever wrote in Greek. If anyone should call him the greatest writer of all time, I would not dispute that claim.”

Luke, whom we have already met, was an educated Greek. Professor E. M. Blaiklock, who was a lecturer in the classics of Greece and Rome, and who had studied in that field for forty years, said: “Luke is a consummate historian, to be ranked in his own right with the great writers of the Greeks.” Matthew, writer of the first gospel, was a civil servant, an employee in the custom and excise department of the government of Rome. He kept records, calculated taxes and collected money. Even a cursory reading of the New Testament will demonstrate that the people who testified to the facts of the life of Jesus were neither fools nor gullible. This leads us to ask a further question.

Were the followers of Jesus deceivers ?

If the followers of Jesus were not deceived, could it be that they themselves were deceivers? Did they engage in a conspiracy to raise Jesus to a figure of legend? The answer must be an emphatic ‘No!’ Everything we know about them marks them out as honest men. And besides, all were persecuted for their faith, and most were martyred. It is highly unlikely that they would die for a lie. And considering the numbers involved, at least one would have broken ranks and recanted. But none did!

The absence of fictitious material

In support of the belief that the writers of the life of Christ were neither deceivers nor deceived, it could be asserted that there is a distinct lack of fanciful material in the New Testament record. What is commonly called "myth", i.e. fable or legend, is conspicuous by its absence. Many who work in the field of ancient literature have commented on this. Archibald Rutledge wrote: “For more than 30 years it was my chief business in life to study and try to teach literature. To anyone earnestly so engaged there naturally comes a certain ability to distinguish the genuine from the spurious, the authentic from the invented. Every time I read the Gospels I am pressed more deeply with the conviction that the narratives concerning Christ do not belong to the realms of fancy, tradition or folklore…The incidents are such that they could never have been invented; and their effect on the world for 2,000 years has been such as no inventions could have produced. These stories possess that patent transparent validity that belongs only to truth.”

C. S. Lewis, who was professor of Medieval and Renaissance Literature at the University of Cambridge, wrote of his conversion to Christianity in his autobiography, ‘Surprised by Joy’: “I was by now too experienced in literary criticism to regard the Gospels as myths. They had not the mythical taste...nothing else in all literature was just like this … And no person was like the Person it depicted; as real, as recognisable, through all the depths of time, as Plato's Socrates or Boswell's Johnson, yet also numinous, lit by a light from beyond the world, a god. But if a god—we are no longer polytheists—then not a god, but God. Here and here only in all time the myth must have become fact; the Word, flesh; God, Man.”

Christianity Considered 1. (Part 3)

What about the Bible?

In the last blog we raised the question, 'are the biographies of Jesus reliable' and considered John's gospel, which contained the record of an eye-witness. This time we will examine Luke's biography, who obtained his material from those personally involved with Jesus.

The biography written by Luke

It is widely accepted that Luke was an educated Greek, and a doctor by profession. He wrote two books; the first giving a history of the life of Jesus of Nazareth from His birth to His death and resurrection; the second describes many of the events experienced by the early church during the first thirty years of its existence. The two books together, his gospel and the Acts of the Apostles, account for some forty percent of the New Testament. The value of his contribution to the canon of Scripture cannot be over-estimated.

Luke, begins his gospel, by claiming that because of the information and knowledge that he had at his fingertips, (as a result of contacts and relationships), he was well suited to write a biography of the Messiah. He said, “Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus, that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed.” (Luke 1:1-4)

Luke's record as an historian

Since Luke’s contribution to the New Testament is substantially that of an historian, we can narrow our question a little further. In this specialist field what is his reputation? The answer is, that his ability as an historian has been amply documented. There are numerous instances where he refers to rulers and historical events in his two books. These can be, and have been, tested from other sources. Invariably they have been found to be accurate. Examples include:

(i) a reference to Philippian rulers as ‘praetors’,
(ii) his choice of the word ‘proconsul’ as the title for Gallio in Corinth (Acts 18.12),
(iii) his describing of Publius as ‘the leading man of the island’ in Malta (Acts 28.7), and
(iv) his use of ‘politarchs’ to denote the civil authorities of Thessalonica. (Acts 17.8)

He gets no less than fifteen Roman governor titles right. His accuracy extends in other directions also. For example, the description of his sea voyage with Paul to Rome, and their shipwreck on Malta, in Acts 27, has been called "one of the most instructive documents for the knowledge of ancient seamanship" that we possess (Holtzmann).

Sir William Ramsay, Professor of Classical Art and Architecture at Oxford University, an eminent archaeologist and holder of numerous doctorates said, the account of the voyage as a whole is commonly accepted by critics as the most trustworthy part of Acts”.

The distinguished Roman historian A. N. Sherwin-White said of Acts: “Any attempt to reject its basic historicity, even in matters of detail, must now appear absurd.” The historical accuracy demonstrated in the Acts of the Apostles has been widely accepted, but the question remains, can we be as confident about his record of the life of Jesus? F. F. Bruce, a highly respected Classical and New Testament scholar, can answer this query for us. “A man whose accuracy can be demonstrated in matters where we are able to test it is likely to be accurate even where the means for testing him are not available. Accuracy is a habit of mind...Luke's record entitles him to be regarded as a writer of habitual accuracy.” In other words, Luke’s biography of Jesus can be trusted.

Chirstianity Considered 1 (Part 2)

What about the Bible (Continued)

In the last blog we asked if the Biblical record of the life of Jesus was reliable. This is the question we should now consider.

The biographical material of His life is contained in the first four books of the New Testament. It is right to ask, what kind of evidence is it? Is it written by eye-witnesses, or at least, does it contain eye-witness testimony? Furthermore, if it is eye-witness testimony, are the witnesses themselves honest and reliable, and neither deceived nor deceivers. And we need to be sure that the original records have not been tampered with between when they were written and now.

Q.1. Are the biographies of Jesus eye-witness accounts?

What we are asking here is, do we have in the New Testament, material that is written by people directly involved in the events they record? Where this is not the case, did they get it from those immediately involved? The answer is ‘yes’ and ‘yes’, that is, we have a substantial amount of eye-witness testimony, as well as reported records of eye-witnesses.

Of the four books of the New Testament that record the life of Jesus, the first and fourth are by eye-witnesses. The authors of these books are Matthew and John respectively. They were two of the group of twelve that accompanied Jesus during His three years of public ministry. The two other biographies were written by Mark and Luke. Mark, was well placed to write a biography because he was closely connected with the life of Jesus. From the very beginning he was involved because his mother was one of the wealthy women that supported the Messiah. Their home was often used by Jesus and was the venue that Jesus used to celebrate the last supper. This home of the family of Mark became a centre for the new Jesus movement. The apostle Barnabas was his uncle. Luke was also well supplied with eye-witness material, having been associated with the apostles for decades. Much of his material was supplied by Peter, the apostle to the Jews. Mary, the mother of Jesus, also acted as a source for Luke. This accounts for the personal details about the birth of Jesus that he was able to include. Let us look a little closer at two of the gospel writers.

The biography written by John

John's gospel specifically claims to be a direct eye-witness account. We have his plain statement at the end of his gospel declaring: “This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and wrote these things; and we know that his testimony is true”. (John 21:24). And when there are instances where the facts might be questioned, he gives additional assurances. For example, when the side of Jesus was ruptured with a spear, and blood and water flowed from the wound (John 15.34), John added a triple affirmation. First, that he saw it; secondly, that he wrote it accurately; and thirdly, that his own conscience confirmed the accuracy of his narrative. He wrote, (i)“he who has seen has testified”, and (ii) “his testimony is true”; and (iii) “he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you may believe”. (John 19:35)

This eye-witness flavour to John’s gospel has been accepted by some experts who are experienced in assessing ancient literature and sorting the genuine from the imitation. A.T. Olmstead, who was Professor of Ancient and Oriental History at the University of Chicago, said, the story of the raising of Lazarus in chapter 11 had "all the circumstantial detail of the convinced eyewitness", and the record of the race to the empty tomb in chapter 20 is "told by an undoubted witness - full of life, and lacking any detail to which the sceptic might take justifiable objection." Archbishop William Temple is another who came to a similar conclusion and commented: “It is most manifestly the record of a personal memory. Nothing else can account for the little details, so vivid, so little like the kind of thing that comes from invention or imagination.”

Writer Frank Morison was drawn to the biographies of Jesus, and planned to write an essay on the trials of Jesus before Annas, Caiaphas, the Sanhedrin and Pilate. He intended to call it, ‘Jesus the Last Phase’. He considered Jesus an individual of integrity with high moral standards, but who had been elevated by His followers to a figure of legend. However, studying the gospel records changed his mind. Confronted by undoubted eye-witness accounts he acknowledged that the records were historically correct and that Jesus really did rise from the dead. Convinced by the evidence, he wrote ‘Who Moved the Stone?

John, the eye-witness

To support his claim that he was an eye-witness of the ministry of Jesus of Nazareth, John includes in his biography those passages where he speaks of his presence in the company of Jesus. Using a third person description of himself, (‘the disciple whom Jesus loved’), he tells us:

(i) He was at the table on Passover night when Jesus celebrated a last Passover meal with the disciples, (chapter 13). During that meal, after Jesus had said He would be betrayed, he and Peter exchanged looks and words. Moreover, he witnessed the identification of Judas as the traitor, and heard Jesus despatch him with the words, “What you do, do quickly.” (13:27)
(ii) The following morning he accompanied Mary, the mother of Jesus, to the crucifixion site and received a word from Jesus to care for her. (19:26,27)
(iii) As previously intimated, he was early to the empty tomb on resurrection morning, (20:1-9) and
(iv) also present when the risen Messiah appeared to the disciples by the Sea of Galilee (chapter 21).

So let us frame the question plainly; do the records read as if they are true? In the opinion of this writer, they do. There are no internal contradictions, nor is there any variance with the other biographers of the life of Jesus. Each of the authors give the same facts from a different perspective, yet remain in perfect agreement. Furthermore, these biographies were in circulation during a period when many of the contemporaries of Jesus were still alive. Even His enemies, the Sanhedrists, never disputed that Jesus performed miracles, and did the things reported. They put a different spin on His life, of course, calling Him a sorcerer, but the facts recorded by the gospel writers were never disputed.

In the next blog we will consider the biography written by Luke.

Christianity Considered 1

Lets Consider the Bible

Christians are a people of one book, and that book is the Bible. They consider it unique - different. It is a book alone, a book apart, a book above all other books. There is none like it and none with it. For the Christian, the Bible (like its author) is all-sufficient. It is an original book.

It is the one book, the only book, that begins in the beginning, and therefore is self-introductory. “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”. (Gen. 1:1)

It is designed to be self-explanatory. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.” (John 1:1-3) If you come to any part or passage in the Bible you do not understand, the explanation is somewhere else in the Bible, not somewhere else outside it. The book explains itself. And the book must conclude itself. You cannot write a follow up – you cannot add another chapter – it is complete! It begins, it ends!

The Bible as the Word of God

While they often use the term ‘Bible’, Christians usually use the term, ‘the Word of God’. The book derives its authority from its author. This is not a book about God – this is a book from God. God is not the subject of Scripture – He is its author – this is His Word. It is because He is the author that the book has authority. “Wonderful, wonderful, Word of the Lord”. Christians speak like that, and they speak well – it is God’s Word.
A person’s words should reflect his character. A man who is true should speak the truth. God is the God of truth and the God of truth cannot lie. The Bible is true because it is His Word. It is the Word of Truth. Moreover, it is the Word of Power, and the Word of Holiness (Holy Bible), because it reflects the character of the author.

And you learn theology by studying the Bible. Reading its pages will bring to your heart and mind concepts and thoughts of God that are true to Him. God is love, God is light, God is life. Reading the Bible will give you an accurate and true understanding of the one and only true God. And you will think of Him as He is – in His greatness, in His goodness, in His glory.

The Oracles of God

Another title of the Bible is ‘the oracles of God’ (Rom.3.2). This means that the Bible was first brought to the minds and hearts of people from the mouth of God. There are 416 instances of the phrase, “Thus says the Lord”, which is another way of saying, ‘the Word of the Lord’. Oracle means the spoken word. Such was the honour given to the Old Testament prophets.

The Scriptures

A much more familiar term is ‘Scripture’. Scripture is the written word of God. It is the Word of God in a more permanent and convenient form. The written word can be studied, examined, quoted. God’s Word has been written down – it is firm, it is sure. It has been written on many materials—papyri, clay, cloth, stone, paper. The Old Testament tells of a time when it was written on a rock. The New Testament tells us it can be written on the heart.

What is the Bible about?

Jesus of Nazareth is the main subject of Scripture. ‘In the volume of the book it is written of me’. (Heb.10.7 KJV) Indirectly it is about us, but primarily about Him. There is no part of the Bible that is not concerned with Christ. He is there on the first page, in the beginning, and He is there at the end, on the last page. As all the roads link up, the motorways, the A roads, the B roads, and so on, so does every part of Scripture. He is the beating heart of the Bible, supplying energy and life to every individual page.

Are the Biographies of Jesus accurate?

If the person of Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ of God, is the primary subject of Scripture, the key question must be—do we have an authentic, accurate record of His life and work in the pages of the Bible? If the claim is, that God entered human history in the person of Jesus, to offer himself as a Messiah and Deliverer, and die a sacrificial death to pay for our sins, then we must be sure that we have the facts straight. If His contemporaries say He conquered death and rose from the grave, can we be sure that their testimony has been accurately preserved?

We will consider these questions in the next blog.

Happy Bible Study everyone.

Teaching Newsletter

We send out to those who have an interest in Bible Study, and have registered as a 'friend' of Mountjoy Bible School, a bi-monthly teaching newsletter. Should any readers of this blog wish to receive the newsletter, please email me your name and postal address and I will add you to our database and you will receive one each time they are published. Your details should be sent to bryan@bryansbiblestudy.co.uk.
Please be advised that currently they are only available to friends in the U.K. to whom they are sent free of charge.

May I take this opportunity to wish you all abundant blessings in the New Year.

'Christianity Considered' now on YouTube

CHristianity Considered Part 1 is now on YouTube: it is split into two parts. The links are as follows:

CC1 1/2 http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Jus8Xi4HbNk
CC1 2/2 http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=XTspFOJIZnA





Christianity Considered Part 2 is also on YouTube in two parts. The links are as follows:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=c8YorpLHvAk
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=bMVJPmBzlSk

The Cross in the Psalms

The Shadow of the Cross in the Psalms

The Psalms of David in particular are a fruitful source of illumination when tracing the image of the cross prior to the incarnation. He was the anointed of the Lord as recorded by Samuel, “the Spirit of the Lord came upon David from that time forward” (1 Sam.16.13) and therefore a Messiah himself. He honed his gift of music and prophecy at the Naioth School of Prophets, under the tutelage of Samuel, and accordingly became a perfect channel to write as the Spirit of God moved him.
Psalm 22, the most famous of all psalms in this connection reads as if it were composed at the foot of the cross. It describes in detail so much of what a Roman crucifixion entailed before even such a capital punishment was in existence. Jesus, the Son of God, the Messiah of Israel, and the Saviour of the world, was nailed to a Roman execution stake at 9 a.m. on the 14th Nissan, in the very year that was predicted in Daniel’s prophecy.

Bulls and Dogs

The suffering and abuse which Jesus suffered through the night of the 14th Nissan is illuminated in Psalm 22 by several images. “Many bulls have compassed me: strong bulls of Bashan have beset me round” (v.12). The bulls alluded to here are from trans-Jordan and are remarkable for size, strength and fierceness. A suitable image when we consider the Messiah was arrested by a combination of Temple guards, Roman soldiers and supporters of the unmerciful Jewish leaders (over 600 men altogether), to be abused through the night with both beatings and humiliations.
The verbal abuse of the crowd as they bayed for His blood like a pack of dogs shouting, ‘crucify … crucify’ is captured by the verse, “For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me”. (v.16)
The unmerciful treatment of Jesus by Jews and Romans; including a scourging which would have killed a weaker man, left Jesus totally exhausted, unable even to carry the crossbeam of the execution gibbet; “I am poured out like water … my strength is dried up like a potsherd”. (vv.14,15) Add to that the excruciating pain of the crucifixion itself, “they pierced my hands and my feet” (v.16); “and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels … and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death” (vv.14,15). This inhuman treatment demonstrated the sinfulness of the human heart and the insatiable evil appetite of the Devil. Jesus suffered distilled essence of the wrath of man and the wrath of Satan.

I am a Worm

The added humiliation of Golgotha is captured by the words, “I am a worm and no man” (v.6). The word translated ‘worm’ refers to the worm ‘coccus ilicis’. When the female of this species was ready to give birth to her young, she would attach her body to the trunk of a tree, fixing herself so firmly and permanently that she would never leave again. The eggs deposited beneath her body were thus protected until they were ready to enter their own life cycle. As the mother died, crimson fluid stained her body and the surrounding wood. From the dead bodies of such worms were the scarlet dyes of antiquity extracted. For example, these were the dyes that were used to colour the scarlet curtains and cloths in the Tabernacle. When David said, ‘I am a worm’ he pre-figured the death of Jesus when the Messiah, like the coccus ilicis worm, shed His life blood to bring many sons to glory.

I am a Reproach

The prophet continued, I am “a reproach of men, and despised of the people. All they that see me laugh me to scorn they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying, He trusted on the LORD that he would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him.” (vv.6-8) The fulfilment of this is referenced by Matthew, and Mark, “…they that passed by railed on him wagging their heads”. (Matt.27.39; Mark 15.29)
Then again, “They divide My garments among them, And for My clothing they cast lots”, (v.18) was fulfilled to the letter. “Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took His garments and made four parts, to each soldier a part, and also the tunic. Now the tunic was without seam, woven from the top in one piece. They said therefore among themselves, ‘Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall be,’ that the Scripture might be fulfilled which says: ‘They divided My garments among them, And for My clothing they cast lots.’” (John 19.23,24) Other Psalms add more detail, such as, “They gave me also gall for my meat; and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink”. (Ps.69.21)

My God, My God, Why hast thou forsaken me?

But it is the first line of Psalm 22 that hits us like a hammer blow between the eyes. “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” The pre-incarnate Christ says it through David; David says it; and Christ says it on the cross. The expression is not one of impatience and despair, but of alienation and yearning. The sufferer feels himself rejected of God; the feeling of divine wrath has completely enshrouded him. This is the cry of the Suffering Servant of Jehovah.
In His life the Messiah had delivered those who were oppressed of Satan. “God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him”. (Acts 10.38) But on Calvary He was on the receiving end. He felt Himself deserted by God, and easy prey for the oppression of the Devil. The Psalmist knew something of the attacks of Satan. He suffered from depression caused by the enemy of souls. “I will say unto God my rock, Why hast thou forgotten me? why go I mourning?” He answered his own question – “because of the oppression of the enemy?” (Ps.42.9) The instrument that Satan used in his oppression of the Psalmist was persecution. As with the Psalmist, so with Jesus - but in the person of the Messiah it is not simply the horrendous distress caused by unrestrained persecution but rather because He realised that it was the climax of a war of hatred that was as old as mankind; the unceasing conflict that dates from the Garden of Eden.

It was the pivotal battle that the pre-incarnate Christ had prophesied; and the incarnate Christ undertook to win. “I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel”. (Gen.3.15) The Bible speaks of Satan as a murderer from the beginning – a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour. Psalm 22 describes the distilled essence of that insatiable evil. Jesus, suffering the attack of the most powerful created being, without divine help, and without recourse to His own qualities of deity, cried, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani” “My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Matt.27.46)
The appearances of Christ in the T’nach as the Angel of the Lord had precluded any successful attack by His ancient enemy. But the Philippian stoop, that is, ‘He emptied Himself’, apparently gave Satan His opportunity. Jesus described it so, “this is your hour, and the power of darkness”. (Luke 22.53) Satan had been waiting centuries for this opportunity.

Sin separates fromm God

Then there was the wrath of God. It was experienced at the time when Christ was made an offering for sin. Peter put it succinctly, “Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree”. (1 Pet.2.24) Sin separates from God. Sin will make you hide from the Lord, but it will end with the Lord hiding from you. It did in the Garden of Eden. Adam and Eve hid themselves from the presence of the Lord. Then, He drove them out! Similarly, with Cain, God said, “... now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother’s blood from thy hand …”, and Cain responded, “Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid ….” And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD. And so it was with the Messiah; “My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me”.
As previously indicated Psalm 69 is also Messianic and it gives us another image of what the Saviour experienced in bearing our sins in His own body on the tree. The Psalmist’s prayer, “Save me, O God; for the waters are come in unto my soul. I sink in deep mire, where there is no standing: I am come into deep waters, where the floods overflow me”. (Ps.69.1,2) The restless sea has long been considered an image of sinful humanity. On such a sea there is no place to stand - it will engulf you. Jesus was different. The sinless, spotless Son of God walked on water. But on Golgotha He carried the sins of the world. There the weight of sin sank the unsinkable.

Deliverance

But there was deliverance for the Messiah. The second unit of the twenty second Psalm ends with a prayer. “Deliver my soul from the sword, My only life from the power of the dog. save me from the lion’s mouth”. (v.20) This is a prayer that was answered, but as a deliverance out of death, not a deliverance from death. “Save me from the lion’s mouth”, initially points us to Satan, the ‘roaring lion’, but it also reminds us of Daniel. The best man in the kingdom, Daniel, was unjustly accused and sentenced. The law was immutable and Daniel was thrown to the lions. But in the morning, when the stone was rolled away Daniel emerged from the cave. The death sentence had been served. Similarly, in the morning, after the stone had been rolled away, the Messiah emerged from the tomb after the death sentence had been served. Jesus was delivered from the tomb, not the cross.

Conclusion

It is evident that the provision of salvation for humankind through a substitutionary sacrifice was not an exercise in fire-fighting, undertaken by God because He had been taken unawares by the activity of Adam and his posterity. He knows the end from the beginning. (Isa.46.10) Not only did know that the sacrifice would take place, but He knew when, where, and how. So much so, that He included the date in the prophetic calendar He gave to the Jewish nation, and He included details of the execution in the T’nach. When the Ethiopian statesman read from the 53rd chapter of Isaiah, “He was led as a sheep to the slaughter ... For His life is taken from the earth.” (Acts 8:32,33) he asked the question, “... of whom does the prophet say this, of himself or of some other man?” (Acts 8:34) The only answer that could be given is—Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah of Israel, the Son of God and the Saviour of the World.