Christianity Considered 4

Did Jesus really rise from the dead?

In our last blog we had come to the end of the initial appearances of the resurrected Christ in Jerusalem. But He had left them instructions to go to Galilee. This is where they saw Him next.

In Galilee

Seven of the disciples were fishermen. Peter led them back to their old occupation on the sea of Galilee. He was still distressed that he had denied his Lord when Jesus was in custody, so he had decided to leave the service of the Messiah and return to his business as a commercial fisherman. But although they fished all night yet they caught nothing! Did the Lord have a hand in ensuring their net was empty? Certainly in the morning a stranger on the shore asked them if they had caught anything. The answer was ‘nothing’. The stranger was, of course, Jesus, though still unrecognized. When instructed to fish again by casting the net on the other side of the boat, they immediately netted a shoal of mature fish. At this point they realised the stranger was none other than Jesus, their Lord and Master. When they finally reached shore He had a meal already prepared for them.

An appearance to a large company of His disciples.

The rendezvous in Galilee that Jesus had previously promised was not only for the eleven but for all the disciples. Although the number of His followers was no longer large, nevertheless some 500 gathered together at His invitation. Here, after assuring them that He had all authority, He gave them the famous instruction: “go and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” (Matt. 28:19-20)

The Appearance to James

There was yet one more individual that Jesus had to meet. That was His half-brother, James. James would become an important member of the Christian community and lead the Jerusalem Church. We do not know when the resurrected Jesus met with him, or what the Lord said to him, but we do have Paul’s assurance that it happened. (1 Cor.15.7)

The Ascension

There is one more recorded resurrection appearance, that to the apostles when He ascended from the mountain overlooking Jerusalem. He gave His closest followers some last instructions and then rose from the earth, passing out of sight in the clouds. (Acts 1.9)

There was no doubt He died!

The Bible records for us the details of the death of Jesus of Nazareth. How He was first beaten to within an inch of His life, then dragged a mile up a mountain to be crucified. He was executed there, and the Roman execution party ensured that He was dead before they allowed His body to be taken from the execution stake. He was buried and remained in the tomb for 3 days. There was no doubt He was dead!

There was no doubt He rose!

Then He was seen alive again!

By one on her own, by two together, by a group of 7, a group of 10, a group of 11, a group of 500.

He was seen in the morning, in the afternoon, in the evening.

He walked with them, He talked with them, He ate with them He taught them.

He showed the marks of the crucifixion to them.

He spent a little time with some, and a long time with others.

He was seen in poor light and He was seen in good light.

The universal testimony of the followers of the Messiah—He is alive—even though some of them had initially been very reluctant to believe. The record bears all the marks of eye-witness testimony. And the Bible alludes to many more appearances, saying, “After His suffering, He showed Himself to these men and gave many convincing proofs that He was alive. He appeared to them over a period of forty days and spoke about the kingdom of God”. (Acts 1:3) There was no doubt He was alive again!

Did Jesus really rise from the dead?

Dear Friends,


My apologies for not posting recently but I have been away from my computer. Let me make it up to you by beginning a study on the resurrection of Christ.





Did Jesus really rise from the dead?

Most people, when asked, “Is there life after death?” reply, “I don’t know, no-one has come back to tell us”. The Bible tells us that is not true. That there is one who returned from the dead, never to die again. That one is Jesus of Nazareth, the founder of Christianity. And if He did rise from the dead, then it is a fact that demands the attention of everyone. And if He didn’t rise, then Christians have been deceived, and the foundation of the Christian faith crumbles. Paul wrote: “If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men”. (1 Cor.15:19) The resurrection is at the heart of the Christian message. Everything hangs on it. Jesus was just another good man, unjustly killed, if death was the end of Him. But if he rose from the dead ... ....

The Resurrection: Fact or Fiction?

It has sometimes been said that the resurrection is the best attested fact in history. Sir Edward Clarke KC, in a letter to the Rev. E.L. Macassey, offered the following perspective: “As a lawyer I have made a prolonged study of the evidences for the resurrection of Jesus Christ. To me the evidence is conclusive...I accept unreservedly as the testimony of truthful people to facts they were able to substantiate.”

B. F. Westcott, one of the ablest of New Testament textual scholars, said: “Taking all the evidence together, it is not too much to say that there is no single historical incident better or more variously supported than the resurrection”. As mentioned in an earlier study, Frank Morison, originally planned to write a monograph on the trial of Jesus. Confronted by the fact of the resurrection, he was convinced by the evidence, became a Christian and wrote instead ‘Who Moved the Stone?’

Well, what are the facts?

The Bible states that Jesus rose from the dead and showed Himself alive over a period of nearly seven weeks. (Acts 1.3) There are ten recorded resurrection appearances.

(i) To Mary of Magdala. (John 20.14 ff)
(ii) To others of the women. (Matt.28.9,10)
(iii) To Peter on his own. (Lk. 24.34; 1 Cor.15.5)
(iv) To the two on the road to Emmaus. (Lk. 24.13 ff)
(v) To a group of disciples when Thomas was absent. (Lk. 24.36 ff)
(vi) To the disciples when Thomas was present. (John 20.26 ff)
(vii) To the seven disciples by the Lake. (John 21.1 ff)
(viii) To a company of more than 500, in Galilee. (1 Cor.15.6)
(ix) To James, the half-brother of the Lord. (1 Cor.15.7)
(x) To those who witnessed the ascension. (Lk.24.50,51; Acts 1.9)

When Jesus was buried, Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James and Joses had noted where the grave was. It was the women that were concerned that the proper dignities had not been performed for the body of Jesus, so they returned with others on Sunday morning to anoint the body and lay it to rest honourably. But something had already happened. Angels had descended and one of them had moved aside the stone door of the tomb. A small task for an angel! The soldiers placed there to guard the body had gone, having been scared out of their wits. The women were instructed by the angelic messengers, to return to the disciples to tell them that Jesus had risen. Mary of Magdala found Peter and John and the three returned together to the tomb, and found it just as she said. Peter and John left but Mary was distraught and unwilling to leave the vicinity of the grave. Consequently, she was the first to see, and then to touch and to talk to Jesus. Initially, she did not recognise Him and so asked the stranger, who she thought was the gardener, where the body of Jesus had been taken. Jesus spoke her name, and she immediately recognised and embraced Him. Now given fresh instructions by Jesus Himself, she returned to the company of the other disciples.

While this was proceeding, Jesus was seen a second time—this time by a group of the women. He instructed them also to return to the disciples and tell them to go to Galilee.

But what about the those that ordered His execution?

Meanwhile the soldiers had returned to the Jewish leaders and told them about the earthquake and the angels. So the Sanhedrin was again convened. Talk about resurrection was particularly distressing for the Sadducees (the High Priest and Chief Priests were Sadducees) because they said that there was no life after death. They decided to start a rumour about a conspiracy—the disciples stole the body while the guard slept. Not very credible — but it gained momentum and many believed it.

The appearances of Jesus on the morning of the resurrection continued thick and fast.

At some time that morning Jesus was seen by Peter, although we have no details of the encounter. But we do have a fuller description of the experience of Cleopas and another un-named disciple. They were on the road from Jerusalem to Emmaus when they were joined by someone who looked like a travelling Rabbi. It was, of course, the resurrected Jesus. At first they did not recognise Him, but they were strangely encouraged as He gave them an explanation from the Scriptures why the Messiah had to die. It was only when they returned to the familiar surroundings of their home and Jesus broke bread that they recognised Him. But in that moment He disappeared.

The two returned from Emmaus to find the others gathered together in a locked room. With their leader executed, the followers of Jesus were worried that their lives might be in danger. At this point they still did not believe in His resurrection, even though the women had said they had seen Him. (Under Jewish law at that time, a woman was not considered a reliable witness, and her testimony was excluded from all legal trials). The two from Emmaus confirmed the testimony of the women, but they were not believed either. At that point Jesus appeared in the room, although they didn’t know quite how, since the doors and windows were locked. Consequently, the disciples thought He was a spirit. Jesus immediately scotched that idea and showed them His hands and feet that still had the nail prints. He also ate some fish to show He was real! Then He gave them a Bible study. “He told them, ‘This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day’”. (Lk 24:46)

However, Thomas was absent. Later they told him about the visit but he would not believe that Jesus was alive. He wanted concrete evidence. This was supplied a week later when Jesus appeared again and asked Thomas to examine His hands, feet and side—and not to doubt but believe. Thomas fell at His feet and cried, “My Lord and my God”. Thomas’ disbelief has given us a wonderful beatitude. Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” (John. 20:29)

At this stage none of the disciples have gone to Galilee as instructed. In our next blog we will see what happened when they did!

Christianity Considered 3

Why the Cross? (Continued)

What was the significance of the death of Jesus?

The principles laid down in the Bible suggest three possible reasons.

(i) The first is that it could be a life taken unjustly, just like the murder of Abel whom Cain killed.
(ii) Then it could be payment for a capital crime.
(iii) Thirdly, it could be someone dying in the place of someone else, as a substitute.

The blood of Jesus was shed in compliance with all three principles.

(i) That it was a life taken unjustly is clear from the narrative. Jesus was the only innocent man that ever lived. Pilate, the highest Roman authority, said from the judgement seat, “I find no fault in this man”. (Luke 23.4; John 19.6) The death of Jesus was a political assassination, that is a life taken unjustly.
(ii) Secondly, it was payment for a capital crime, although not His own. This points to the third aspect.
(iii) He died as a substitute, in place of someone else.

If the Bible teaches that Jesus died as a substitute, who was He a substitute for? For sinners! Sinners who were under sentence of death by God. Paul wrote, “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”. (Rom. 3:23) A condition that had a consequence. “For the wages of sin is death”. (Rom. 6:23) Who are these sinners that Jesus died as a substitute for. Well, me for one, you for another, indeed everyone, for, “There is none righteous, no, not one; There is none who understands; There is none who seeks after God. They have all turned aside; They have together become unprofitable; There is none who does good, no, not one.” (Rom. 3:10-12) At some time or another, all who are honest with themselves will admit that they have failed to keep God’s moral law and fallen short of that high standard of perfection that God expects.

But Jesus “… Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree.” (1 Pet.2.24) “For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God.” (1 Pet.3.18) We need to understand, “He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities.” (Isa.53.5) for “the Lord ... laid on him the iniquity of us all”. (Isa. 53.6)

But how can the death of one man be enough for God to forgive the sins of all men? It can’t! One perfect man could only be the substitute for one other. But remember, Jesus wasn’t just a man, He was God also. Therefore the value of His substitutionary sacrifice is infinite. His death can compensate for the sins of all men.

But why crucifixion?

But that doesn’t explain why it had to be by crucifixion. Well the answer to this is a bit complicated, but here are some of the implications.

(i) First, the Romans executed those that rebelled against their rule (which was the charge that the Jewish leaders laid against Jesus) in a very painful and public manner. Their purpose was to demonstrate to everyone that Rome would not tolerate any that stood against their power and authority. Crucifixion meant pain and humiliation, as well as lasting for several hours, sometimes even days. Crucifixion also meant the victim was ‘lifted up’ in public view so that all could see their agony and pain. Jesus was executed near a very busy cross-road in Jerusalem. It overlooked the city and the Temple, and His death was witnessed by the large numbers of people who had come to Jerusalem for the Passover festival. What the Romans did not realise was that they were fulfilling God’s plan because the beginnings of Christianity had to be very public. Nothing done in secret.

(ii) Also, God needed people to see the pain and agony that sin causes. Those that die without taking Jesus Christ as their substitute will have to suffer the penalty of their own sins. They will know a similar agony as Jesus suffered when separated from God and bearing the penalty for sin. But they will suffer without reprieve. It will be continuous and eternal.

(iii) Another reason Jesus was ‘lifted up to die’ was to symbolically demonstrate that His death was a victory, not a defeat. This is the decease He said He had to accomplish. When His agony came to an end He said, “it is finished”. (John 19.30) This was a cry of triumph, shouted out at the top of His voice, not a sigh saying, ‘I am glad that is over’. He declared, in the clearest, most direct way, that He had accomplished that which He had been born to do. When He was born, Joseph and Mary were instructed to name Him ‘Jesus’, that is ‘Saviour’, “for he will save his people from their sins.” (Matt. 1:21) This He did, and now we can know eternal life, if we accept that He died for our sins. I, along with many, have sung the words to Philip Bliss’ wonderful hymn, “Hallelujah, what a Saviour”.

Bearing shame and scoffing rude,

In my place condemned He stood,

Sealed my pardon with His blood;

Hallelujah, what a Saviour!

Lifted up was He to die,

‘It is finished,’ was His cry;

Now in heaven exalted high,

Hallelujah, What a Saviour!

Christianity Considered 3

Christianity Considered 3

Why the Cross?

The mission of Jesus involved dying on a Roman gibbet. Jesus spoke of it on a number of occasions. We have to face the question, Why? Why did He have to die and why by crucifixion?

The cross is the most widely used symbol of Christianity. Crosses are worn on necklaces and lapel pins—they are seen on and outside churches. Yet the cross was an execution stake on which felons were put to death. Why wear such a gruesome token? It is, of course, the symbol of how the founder of Christianity, Jesus Christ, was executed. But, if Jesus was the Son of God, and had such power, why did He offer no resistance to those that arrested Him? And if He was innocent, why didn’t He put up some defence? Let us check the Biblical record to find some answers.

Did Jesus Himself say how He was to die?

Yes He did! In private conversations with His disciples, Jesus tried to prepare them for the time when He would no longer be with them. Indeed, He indicated that He would be unjustly executed. “From that time Jesus began to show to His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised the third day”. (Matt. 16:21) Some time later He said again, “The Son of Man is about to be betrayed into the hands of men, and they will kill Him, and the third day He will be raised up.” (Matt. 17:22,23) This second time He added the detail of how He would be taken—it would be by betrayal. And again at a later date He warned them once more. “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be betrayed to the chief priests and to the scribes; and they will condemn Him to death, and deliver Him to the Gentiles to mock and to scourge and to crucify. And the third day He will rise again.” (Matt. 20:18,19) This third time He added that it would not be the Jews that would kill Him, but the Gentiles (Romans) and that His execution would be by crucifixion. These are most remarkable details of an event over which normally you would say the individual has no control. The most startling detail is His prediction that He would rise from the dead.

Did Jesus say why He was to die?

Yes He did! He said, “And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, (this is a clear reference to the manner of His death—by crucifixion) that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3:14,15) Here then, is the purpose of His death, that those who believe in Him, that is, in His life, death and resurrection, might themselves have eternal life. This He repeated, in different ways, on several occasions. For example, speaking of those that follow Him, “I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish.” (John 10:28) And speaking of Himself in prayer to God the Father, He said, “You have given Him authority over all flesh, that He should give eternal life to as many as You have given Him.” (John 17:2)

Does the New Testament give any account of the death of Jesus?

Yes it does! In fact the description of the death of Jesus is recorded in all four biographies. Moreover, the explanation of why He died is given in all the later books. Peter explains what happened and Paul explains why it happened. But let us look at the gospels first.

All four gospels record the events leading up to the execution. Different details are given prominence by the different authors. However, there is a harmony between them all. The events of the last twenty four hours in the earthly life of Jesus unfolded in this fashion.

The night before He died He celebrated a Jewish feast, the Passover, with His disciples. At that meal He again warned them that He would soon die, adding that it would be to obtain forgiveness of sins for many. Using a cup of red wine as a symbol for His life blood, He said, “Drink from it, all of you. For this is My blood ... which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” (Matt. 26:28) This was a confirmation of something He had said some days earlier. “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.” (Matt. 20:28) A ransom is a price paid to buy back someone from some kind of imprisonment. However, Jesus said His death would be a ransom, not just for one, but for many. Leaving the room where they had shared a last meal together, they travelled across the Kidron valley to a quiet garden, called Gethsemane, where He prayed. It was here that Judas brought a large contingent of soldiers to arrest Jesus. He offered no resistance.

From the garden at the foot of the Mount of Olives, He was taken to be questioned by two of the Jewish leaders, Annas and Caiaphas. These, His implacable enemies, were ready to recommend the death sentence. The examinations before Annas and Caiaphas took place some time after midnight. While in their custody Jesus suffered abuse and humiliation.

Early the following morning, to give the trial of Jesus some semblance of legality, the Sanhedrin (the council that ruled the Jews) was convened. Jesus was found guilty of blasphemy (a religious charge) and condemned to die. However, the Jews at that time were a conquered race, and it was the Romans that had the power of life and death over its citizens. So Jesus was taken to Pilate, the personal representative of Caesar, who was the officer who had control of Jerusalem. The Jewish leaders, to obtain confirmation of the death sentence from the Romans, had to change the accusation against Jesus, from a religious one to a political one. They accused Him of plotting against Rome. Even though Pilate was convinced that Jesus of Nazareth was innocent of all charges, he finally submitted to pressure and blackmail, and gave Him to an execution squad to crucify.

By this time Jesus was in a quite appalling condition, having been beaten, abused and flogged over a period six hours. Nevertheless, He was compelled to carry His execution stake. But because He was so weak He collapsed under its weight, and another was conscripted to carry it.

Because it was a political execution, the Romans selected a site for the crucifixion that would be very public. It was near a busy cross-roads, in fact near the road on which Jesus had ridden into Jerusalem to fulfil the prophecy, “Tell the daughter of Zion, behold your King is coming to you”. (Matt.21.5) When the execution party reached the spot, the Romans nailed Him to a cross. At this time Jesus prayed, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do”. (Luke 23.34) This was at nine o’clock in the morning (the time of the morning sacrifice in the Temple). He hung on the cross for another six hours, the last three of which was under the cover of an unusual darkness. It was when the light of the sun was shut out that He cried, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?” (Matt. 27:46)

At the end of the six agonising hours, during which He had suffered the wrath of man, the wrath of Satan and the wrath of God, He declared, “It is finished” (John 19.30) and gave up His life. This was at 3 o’clock in the afternoon (the time of the evening sacrifice in the Temple).

When the request came to bring His body down from the cross, one of the execution party, to make sure He was dead, thrust a spear into His side. From this open wound came blood and water to mingle with the blood already on the ground beneath the cross.

Such were the main facts of the end of Jesus’ earthly life.
He was betrayed—just as He said.
He suffered at the hands of the Jewish leaders—just as He said.
They condemned Him to death—just as He said.
They handed Him over to the Romans— just as He said.
The Romans mocked Him and flogged Him—just as He said.
He was crucified—just as He said.

To be continued

Christianity Considered (Part 2)


Who was Jesus (Continued)

What did others think of him?
He was scrutinised by friends and enemies. None found any error, untrue word, or unkind action. Unsolicited testimonies include the following:
From the Father. “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” (Matt. 3:17)
From Judas. “I have sinned by betraying innocent blood.” (Matt. 27:4)
From Pilate. “I find no fault in him at all.” (John 18:38) and “I am innocent of the blood of this just Person. You see to it.” (Matt. 27:24)
From the felon co-crucified with him. “This Man has done nothing wrong.” (Luke 23:41)
From the Roman in charge of the crucifixion party. “Certainly this was a righteous Man!” (Luke 23:47)
From an unclean spirit. “I know who You are—the Holy One of God!” (Mark 1:24; Luke 4.34)
Indirectly from Herod. Pilate said, “ … having examined him in your presence, I have found no fault in this Man concerning those things of which you accuse him; no, neither did Herod.” (Luke 23:14,15)
From Peter, the apostle to the Jews. “You were not redeemed with corruptible things, …but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot.” (1 Pet. 1:18,19)
From the writer of the letter to the Hebrews speaking of Jesus, Son of God. “For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin”. (Heb 4:15)

His miracles supported His claims
The Jewish leadership, many of whom were students of the Scriptures knew what to look for in any individual making the kind of claims Jesus made. They expected attesting miracles. “For Jews request a sign”, wrote Paul. Jesus provided multiple miracles to answer this requirement. The gospel stories contain numerous examples of Jesus healing all kinds of illnesses and, in three instances, raising the dead. He also demonstrated His powers over nature. These miracles, as Archibald Alexander puts it: “...were performed, for the most part, in an open and public manner, in the presence of multitudes of witnesses, under the inspection of learned and malignant enemies, in a great variety of circumstances, and for several years in succession. His enemies never denied these signs.”
The healing of leprosy
In the culture of Jesus’ day, leprosy was considered a judgement of God upon sin. The leper was considered to be personally under the judgement of God. Therefore, the Jewish leadership expected any Messianic claimant to have an ability to heal this disease. Jesus satisfied that expectation. He helped the many lepers that were in Israel at that time, lifting the judgement of God and healing their ravaged bodies. Luke described the beginning of this ministry. “Behold, a man who was full of leprosy saw Jesus; and he fell on his face and implored him, saying, Lord, if You are willing, You can make me clean. Then he (Jesus) put out his hand and touched him, saying, I am willing; be cleansed. Immediately the leprosy left him.” (Lk.5.12,14) It is significant that this first recorded case of leprosy treated by Jesus was a person “full of leprosy”. The disease had such a hold that it had almost extinguished life. It had run its course and had the decaying man firmly in its grip. The touch of Jesus regenerated the dying body of the diseased man. On another occasion He healed ten lepers at one time. (Luke 17.12 ff.) This ability to heal lepers was also delegated to His disciples who had much success in this area. (Matt.10.7,8; 11.5) This ministry, along with other instances of healing, had added significance by its strong connection with the forgiveness of sins.

The Forgiveness of Sins
The clearest case where an authenticating miracle was used to support His claim that He could forgive sins is recorded in three places. (Matt. 9.1-8; Mark 2.1-12; and Luke 5.17-26) There a paralytic was healed only after Jesus declared his sins were forgiven. You can guess what His enemies made of that claim. They said, “Who is this who speaks blasphemies? Who can forgive sins but God alone?” (Luke 5:21) In another incident, He forgave the sins of a notorious woman. (Luke 7.48) These acts of forgiving sin are not the acts of a man, not even a good man, but the work of God.
C.S. Lewis, a University academic, said of this claim to forgive sin: “Now unless the speaker is God, this is really so preposterous as to be comic. We can all understand how a man forgives offences against himself. You tread on my toe and I forgive you, you steal my money and I forgive you. But what should we make of a man, himself unrobbed and untrodden on, who announced he forgave you for treading on other men’s toes and stealing other men’s money. This only makes sense if he is the God whose laws are broken and whose love is wounded in every sin.”
That Jesus claimed deity and was God walking the roads of Israel in human form, is further confirmed by the apostle Paul. He wrote: “Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God”, (Phil. 2:5,6), and again, “looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ”. (Titus 2:13), and again, “Christ ... who is over all, the eternally blessed God.” (Rom. 9:5)

To Summarise

If we read the gospels aright, we see that Jesus claimed to be Israel’s Messiah. But more than that He claimed a relationship with God as a co-equal. These claims were supported by actions of mercy and blessing, even to the point of forgiving the sins of individuals. There is no doubt that the writers of the gospels intended to indicate that Jesus of Nazareth was God walking the land of Israel in human form—a real man, and at the same time, really God. Consider this—God wanted to make Himself known to us, the crown of His creation. He did this by coming into the world in the person of Jesus of Nazareth.

Jesus was love personified.
Jesus was good personified
Jesus was wisdom personified
Jesus was God personified.

A last thought: CT Studd said, “If Jesus Christ be God and died for me, no sacrifice can be too great for me to make for Him”.

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.