Tuesday, November 30, 2021

2021 Thanksgiving Message

 What Happened to Thanksgiving?


The family gathered at Grandma's house.
It was the tradition year after year.
When Thanksgiving Day rolled around,
They all were expected to be here.

They sat down to a Thanksgiving meal,
And Uncle John gave thanks for the food.
Some wanted the meal to be over,
But they really didn't want to be rude.

They enjoyed the turkey and fixings
As they chattered about family news.
Then the ladies brought out desserts,
So many from which they could choose.

Then Cousin Jane arose to excuse herself.
"Grandma, your pies look really swell,
But Black Friday has already started,
And I am now late for a special sale."

Soon Cousin Tim slipped from his chair.
He said "Goodbye" to one and all.
"I am meeting my friends at the movies.
There's a new one showing at the mall."

Then Uncle Jim heard a honking horn.
"That must be my co-worker, Nate.
We're hunting for the rest of the day.
Grandma, the meal was just great!"

At the day's end, Grandma was alone,
And she got down on her knees to pray.
"I love You, Lord, and I give You thanks,
But what happened to Thanksgiving Day?”


By Margaret Cagle 


(https://www.christart.com/poetry/poem/7153)


What happened to Thanksgiving? Our society has long since moved away from giving thanks for all that we have. We jump from Halloween to Christmas, without barely a thought to Turkey Day. 

It is treated less like a day to give thanks, and more as a Black Friday Eve meal to get the calories necessary to storm box stores for the best deals. 

And the move away from Thanksgiving can be seen and felt in the fear and violence our country is facing today. When we don’t take the time to give thanks, we end up in sea of emptiness. Nothing satisfies. I never have a good enough job. I never have a good enough marriage. I never have a good enough car or house. “I never have” becomes our mantra and indeed we never have. 


Yet, those first pilgrims on that first Thanksgiving were in dire straights. 78% of the woman had died in the preceding winter. All that were left were 22 men, 4 women, and 25 children (https://www.history.com/topics/thanksgiving/first-thanksgiving-meal). And yet, it was thanks that they gave. Thanks to the Wampanoag (wamp-a-no-ag) Indians that taught them about this new land. But greater thanks was given to God, who brought them this far. Who blessed them with their harvest after such an excruciating year. 


Giving thanks in the midst of the perils of life. Looking beyond ourselves and the situations that we are in, to give thanks to God is how this nation began its life. In 1789, President Washington wrote this decree. 


By the President of the United States of America, a Proclamation.

Whereas it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor-- and whereas both Houses of Congress have by their joint Committee requested me to recommend to the People of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness.

Now therefore I do recommend and assign Thursday the 26th day of November next to be devoted by the People of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being, who is the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be-- That we may then all unite in rendering unto him our sincere and humble thanks--for his kind care and protection of the People of this Country previous to their becoming a Nation--for the signal and manifold mercies, and the favorable interpositions of his Providence which we experienced in the course and conclusion of the late war--for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty, which we have since enjoyed--for the peaceable and rational manner, in which we have been enabled to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national One now lately instituted--for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed; and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and in general for all the great and various favors which he hath been pleased to confer upon us.

and also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech him to pardon our national and other transgressions-- to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually--to render our national government a blessing to all the people, by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed--to protect and guide all Sovereigns and Nations (especially such as have shewn kindness unto us) and to bless them with good government, peace, and concord--To promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the encrease of science among them and us--and generally to grant unto all Mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as he alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand at the City of New York the third day of October in the year of our Lord 1789. (https://www.mountvernon.org/education/primary-sources-2/article/thanksgiving-proclamation-of-1789/)


Washington new that it was from the hand of God that our nation must turn and give thanks in order that our nation may endure. It is this very thing that we have lost. Thanksgiving has been lost, and so too, is our nation slipping away. 

So what shall we do? We must give thanks. As individuals we must raise a shout of Thanksgiving. As individuals we must stave off the selfishness that envelops our society. And the only way we can do this is by giving thanks back to God from whom all good gifts come. No matter the wars that are waged. No matter the diseases that plague us. No matter the unrest we see, or the bad news we hear, we must give thanks back to God in all situations.


So I want to challenge you, as you partake in Thanksgiving tomorrow, to give thanks for the things that you have. To stay away from going out to the box stores that feed the self-centeredness that is consuming our nation. Stay with friends and family and give thanks to God who’s give our nation so much, but no greater gift has he given than Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross to bring us out of the death and darkness of our sin and into a right relationship with him. It is from this greater gift of salvation that brings us into a greater understanding of the gifts God continues to give today.


Let us close with this:









With hearth and home and pleasant rest
As Father, you your children bless
There’s one thing left to do
Thank-you

For falling leaves from Autumn trees
And all the beauty my eye sees
There’s one thing left to do
Thank-you

For dearest friends and family
For laughing, singing, joyfully
There’s one thing left to do
Thank-you

For peace and rest within our lands
protection from oppressive hands
there’s one thing left to do
Thank-you

For generosity expressed
In fruitful harvest we are blessed
There’s one thing left to do
Thank-you

In work and bounty all around
Your providence is clearly found
There’s one thing left to do
Thank-you

For things created great and small
Your gracious hands provide them all
There’s one thing left to do
Thank-you

For joyous births and newborn cries
The final rest of old and wise
There’s one thing left to do
Thank-you

For those whose service grant us peace
The military and police
There’s one thing left to do
Thank-you 


(Thank-You” by John Janzen (https://www.christart.com/poetry/poem/5476)


Amen,

Wednesday, November 24, 2021

Prepared - 3 Questions Series: Morality Without God

  Growing up my parents gave me a solid foundation of right and wrong through both their examples and corrections. Yet, though my parents gave me a clear sense of what was right, I still developed my own approach. And that approach was to reject it. A lot of the things that my parents tried to instill in me, I pushed away for my own desire. And looking back, I can see how desire trumped doing right. 

Yet, when I came to know Jesus as my Savior, my desire was no longer an option. My life was his, my thoughts were his, my actions, and motives were his. These things that moved me to do as I pleased were now his to control. And so, over the course of many years, which is still happening today, Jesus has moved me away from what I used to believe was right and wrong and into what he says is right and wrong. Which, funny enough, was established for me through my parents. 


And it’s this idea of right and wrong that brings us to our final week in our 3 Questions that Every Christian should be able to answer series. In our first week we answered the question, “Is Jesus a historical person?” We answered this by answering three of the four arguments that those who believe Jesus was a myth put forward. We answered how Jesus is not a collection of ancient religious stories by comparing one of those stories and Jesus’ resurrection account. We then answered that Jesus was mentioned several times by influential Roman people, even though he was an out of the way Jewish person. And finally we answered how Jesus’ Jewishness fits the archeological timeframe he lived in, even though we do not have a stone that says, “Jesus was here.”

Then last week we covered the last of the four arguments, which we combined with the greater question of, “Is the Bible reliable.” Focusing on the New Testament, we saw how the overwhelming amount of manuscripts we have, in comparison with other ancient documents, gives us an assurance that the Bible has not only been persevered throughout the centuries, but that it is an accurate recorded account by the eyewitnesses of Jesus.


This brings us to our final week where we will be looking at, what I would say, is the most pivotal question of our day that a Christians needs to be able to answer. That question is, “Can we have morality without God?"


What I mean by this isn’t, can people do “good” things? We can see that no matter your background, you can be lawful and even caring to other people. Jesus, in Matthew 5 states, “46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that (46-47)?” So we’re not talking about the end actions of a person, rather, what we’re seeking to answer is, without God does humanity have a basis on which to derive a moral standing? In other words, where does our sense of right and wrong come from?


No matter what a person’s worldview or view on spiritual matters is, I am not suggesting that a person cannot do good towards others in a human sense of goodness. Rather, is there a basis, apart from the eternal standard of God that humanity can stand on for its reason for doing good.


See the Bible is very clear that the standard of goodness comes from God. In Genesis 1, it is through God’s Word that all things are created and when they are brought into existence, God repeatedly calls them good. Why? Because they come from the desire of God, a good being. 

In Exodus 34:6-7, as God himself passes by Moses, this prophet of God has to shout out,“The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, 7 maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.” Moses’ encounter with a glimpse of who God is, points to God’s purity in morality and how there is a standard by which all people are judged.  

In Psalm 25:8, the Psalmist proclaims the, “Good and upright is the Lord; therefore he instructs sinners in his ways.” This shows the difference between God’s eternal standard of goodness and a deficiency in humanity called sin, which are those things we do that outside of God’s moral standard. Here we also see that God doesn’t just expect us to meet that standard without notice. No, he gives it to us that we might know and obey.


This should not surprise the Christian. It should not surprise us that it is from God that humanity derives our morality. Because if you have accepted Jesus as your Savior, you, at some point in your life, have come to realize that you stood in opposition to God. That you were in need of a Savior because you sinned and were separated from God because of that sin. And that your sin entitled you to eternal separation from God first in hell, then in the lake of fire. Yet, Jesus took the punishment of that sin, that breaking of the moral standard of God. He took it upon himself on the cross, and now you live in the freedom of Jesus. Separated, not from God, but form your sin, and now your on your way to be with him and his people for eternity. I am right with you. I was a sinner who broke the standard of God, and I was saved by the grace of God for his good pleasure.


Yet, for those who are not believers, God isn’t seen as a moral God. For some, he is even the antecedent of morality. In a debate held in 2011 at the University of Notre Dame, a popular atheist name Sam Harris said this, “Given all this that your God does not accomplish, in the lives of others. Given the misery that is being imposed on some helpless child at this instant. This kind of faith is obscene. To think in this way is to fail to reason honestly, or to care sufficiently about the suffering of other human beings.”

Harris stated earlier that God, “visits suffering on innocent people on a scope and scale that would embarrass the most ambitious psychopath.”

And in his closing statement says, “The true horror of religion is it allows perfectly decent and sane people to believe by the billions what only lunatics can believe on their own (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqaHXKLRKzg).”


Harris points to tsunamis and the death tolls that result from them, for a grand scale of God’s lack of goodness. On the minor scale, Harris points to individual people who suffer for seemingly no reason. And his conclusion is “If there is a less moral framework than the one Dr. Craig is proposing, I haven’t heard of it.”


So, let’s look at this from two perspectives. First, how the world implements a moral standard, and then how then what is God’s moral standard in response. Now, I am not arguing that all Christian endeavors are without blemish and there will be, by God’s justice, a reckoning for all that the Church has done that opposes the standard of God. Yet, what is God’s standard even when his people fail to meet it?


First, let’s cover children. Harris brings them up a lot in his speech, so I think that’s a good place to start. 

In the Roman world that Christianity was birthed into, the Greek historian Polybius (approx. 200-118 B.C.) wrote, “In our times the whole of Greece has suffered a shortage of children and hence a general decrease of the population…This evil grew upon us rapidly and overtook us before we were aware of it, the simple reason being that men had fallen prey to inflated ambitions, love of money and indolence, with the result that they were unwilling to marry, or if they did marry, to bring up the children that were born to them; or else they would only rear one or two out of a large number (“The Rise of the Roman Empire”, Book 36, 17)…”

It was a common practice for the ancient world to abandon children when they were unwanted. This has a parallel in our society in both the foster care system and the abortion industry. 

So what is God’s standard? We find this out in places like James 1:27, “Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world…” In response to the society’s lack of care for all children, Christians began creating orphanages so that these unwanted children could be taken care of. God’s standard is that all children are important to him. Yet, apart from God, children are usually treated as second class citizens in most societies.


Let’s turn our attention to another issue in a different strain. Our personal view of self. In his debate with William Lane Craig, Sam Harris says that Christianity in particular is narcissistic, because Christians say that Jesus died for them. Now if you don’t know, narcissism is an inordinate fascination with oneself and excessive self-love (https://www.dictionary.com/browse/narcissism).

We can see how in the last thirty years or so, the emphasis on self importance has skyrocketed. This is why people say that millennials are so self absorbed. Our society says, “Everyone gets a participation trophy…you can bee anything you want to be.” Self-esteem books are everywhere and what does that lead to? In an article written in Psychology today back in 2014, Peter Gray wrote, “Over the years…questionnaires have been administered to many samples of college students, and analyses that bring all of the data together reveal that the average narcissism score has been steadily increasing and the average empathy score has been steadily decreasing ever since the questionnaires were developed. The changes are highly significant statistically and sufficiently large that approximately 70 percent of students today score higher on narcissism and lower on empathy than did the average student 30 years ago (https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/freedom-learn/201401/why-is-narcissism-increasing-among-young-americans).”

And with the advent of Social Media, this narcissism has only increased.

Yet, God’s standard in this case is found in places such as James 4:10, “Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will lift you up.” Christians are to seek humility not narcissism. We are to be those who don’t think of ourselves as anything greater than what God says we are. Why, because we are saved by grace, and not for anything that we have done (Ephesians 2:8-10). 

Yet as our society moves away from biblical teaching, we are seeing narcissism increasing. 


Finally, people say that Christianity has been used to destroy the lives of millions through the centuries. In fact, Harris says that the God of the Bible is psychopathic because of the hurt that groups like the Spanish Inquisition have enacted on people. Yet, what is God’s standard?

Just reading through Jesus’ words in in Matthew 5 anyone can see how high the standard of God is when in comes to being faithful and caring in our relationships. Starting in verse 21 Jesus says, “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ 22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment….27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart…You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you…43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you…”


Anyone can take the Bible and use it to hurt people, but that is not the standard that God has set. Yet, when we look at the alternative from the last century, we can see what happened when humanity, apart from God, is given free rein as applied to government. 

Josef Stalin stated, “Gratitude is a sickness suffered by dogs.”

Vladimir Lenin is said to have stated, “Russians are too kind, they lack the ability to apply determined methods of revolutionary terror (attributed, Lenin: Life and Legacy).”

William Provine wrote, “Let me summarize my views on what modern evolutionary biology tells us loud and clear … There are no gods, no purposes, no goal-directed forces of any kind. There is no life after death. When I die, I am absolutely certain that I am going to be dead. That’s the end for me. There is no ultimate foundation for ethics, no ultimate meaning to life, and no free will for humans, either (Origins Research. 1994, p. 9)…”

Provine writes elsewhere, “No inherent moral or ethical laws exist, nor are there any absolute guiding principles for human society. The universe cares nothing for us and we have no ultimate meaning in life (Scientists, Face it! Science and Religion are Incompatible, 1998)…”

So what happens when you have no moral standard by which to point to for all humanity? You get the bloodiest century of all human history.

61,911,000 Murdered in the Soviet Gulag State.

35,236,000 Murdered in the Communist Chinese Ant Hill. 

20,946,000 Murdered in the Nazi Genocide State.

10,214,000 Murdered by the Chinese Nationalist Regime.

1,670,000 Murdered in the Vietnamese War State.

About 1,663,000 Murdered in North Korea.

A total of 131,501,000 murdered in the name of Humanistic Morality. A morality that rejects God, and instead makes the human the source of mortality.


On taking in all of this type of information, John Steinrucken wrote a book called Secularisms Ongoing Debt to Christianity. In it he stated, “Those who doubt the effect of religion on morality should seriously ask the question: Just what are the immutable moral laws of secularism? Be prepared to answer, if you are honest, that such laws simply do not exist (2010)!”


When people do good outside of following God, when people say I can be moral without God, they are really stealing God’s moral standard and using it as their own. Because apart from God, we have no moral standard. When humanity is the basis for morality, there is no moral standard to be found. 

So the answer to the question is there morality without God is, no, there is no basis for morality without God.

Yet there is a moral standard that comes from the person of God and God is the only person who meets that standard. I have fallen short of God’s perfect standard, and so has everyone else in the world. And we know it. We know we have, because when confronted with God’s standard we see in ourselves the deficiently that’s there.

Yet, we should rejoice in God’s perfect standard as Paul does in Romans 7, “12 So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good.13 Did that which is good, then, become death to me? By no means! Nevertheless, in order that sin might be recognized as sin, it used what is good to bring about my death, so that through the commandment sin might become utterly sinful. 14 We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. 15 I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. 16 And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. 17 As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. 18 For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19 For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. 20 Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it. 21 So I find this law at work: Although I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22 For in my inner being I delight in God’s law; 23 but I see another law at work in me, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within me. 24 What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? 25 Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!”


When we are faced with God’s standard we are confronted with our deficiency in meeting it. Yet here lies the goodness of Jesus, he was not deficient in keeping the standard of God. And by keeping it, he made a way for us to be reconciled with God; having our sin of falling short of God’s standard dealt with at the cross. 

It is from God we derive our morals, because when God is taken out of the picture our morals become not based on anything. Yet, though the world might reject God’s standard, we still will be judged. And that judgement will come three-fold: By the standard of God, by our own standard, and by the choice of accepting Jesus or not. And if we haven’t accepted Jesus as our Savior, then the other two standards will condemn us. 


So my challenge for you this week is to understand that morality without God is a tornado of destruction. And when a person does good, it’s based on the God whom they may reject. So pray for the people around you. Ask God that you may have this conversation of where does a person’s good acts come from? We need to be praying for people, because at the end, it does’t matter if they accept God’s moral standard or not, they will be judged based on it. We need to pray that people will see their need for Jesus, because they fall short of the moral standard, just like we did. So pray this week for God’s revealing of himself to people who think that they are good enough.


Let us be a praying people, who know that any good in us or in our lives, is from God himself, because without him we are nothing. But praise God that he makes us right. Amen.

Wednesday, November 17, 2021

Prepared - 3 Questions Series: Trust the Bible

  My Dad once told me a story about a teacher in his junior high. The teacher taught history and the class received brand new text books. As the year went on the teacher became more and more upset with the new books. Finally one day, the teacher said to the class, “I have a degree that specializes in American history, and in all my years of study, I have never heard half the stuff that this text book wants us to learn.” My Dad told me later that the text books were found to contain a lot of errors, where certain historical events were attributed to made up figures instead of the actual person. These books were eventually thrown out of the public school system for all the problems they had. And you wonder how did the publisher think they could change history and no one would notice.

In the last few years I was doing a lot of study on early American history, specifically on how the Christian faith effected the founding of the U.S. In one of the lectures I was listening to, they were talking about a biography about George Washington. There was a text book that was used for somewhere around 60-80 years that had a forward in it by people who knew Washington personally. In that forward, people spoke about Washington’s faith and how it guided him in his life, setting the framework for the rest of the book. Yet in the early part of the 1900s, that book was reprinted without that forward. And by taking away that forward, the publisher took away a key aspect of understanding Washington’s life. And you wonder how the publisher could think they would get away with it.

And then there’s today, where there is so much misinformation out there, that if you watch anyone news organization you’ll come away with a very specific view on what’s going on in this world. In fact, just watching the Kyle Rittenhouse case these last two weeks, has been an eye opening experience. To watch people lie and then have that lie called out during witness examination, is just mind-blowing and you wonder, how could they think they will get away with it.

Well they don’t. People find out that they’re being lied to and manipulated, and they get mad. In fact, there’s a new phrase that has come out in the last few years, it’s called being black pilled. Meaning a person has become disillusioned with what they have been told and then begin to reject everything because they feel like they can’t trust anything. 

This brings us back to our fall apologetics series, where we’re going to talk about how we don’t have to be disillusioned with what the Bible tells us, because unlike any other document out there, the Bible has been put through the ringer and yet stands against all misinformation about it.


Last week we began our annual apologetics series by stating we were going to cover three big questions that every Christian should be prepared to answer. In that first week we covered the question is Jesus historical? We looked at how a group of people called mythicists, put forth the idea that Jesus wasn’t really a historical person, but rather an amalgamation of different ancient religions.

In response, we answered the first three main arguments of the mythicist. We answered the argument, that Jesus’ story takes from other ancient “resurrection” stories, by actually taking the time and comparing one of these stories to the biblical account, showing how it was not even close. 

Then we responded to the argument that Jesus’ wasn’t mentioned by Roman sources. To which we showed that indeed Jesus was mentioned by several Roman sources, which was amazing due to Jesus being a no one in Roman society.

Finally, we answered the argument that there’s no archeological evidence for Jesus. Agreeing that there is no stone that Jesus inscribed, here is Jesus, but rather everything about Jesus fits perfectly into the world of a 1st century Jewish man. From which the archeological account agrees.


Today we are going to cover the fourth argument of the mythicist, because it needs a little more time to respond to. This final argument encompasses more than a ten minute answer. It is the argument or, as we will refer to it today, the question of, is the Bible reliable?


This is probably the most asked question, or position I get. I’ve heard it from a teen girl when she was thirteen, I’ve heard from an adult man when he was around seventy, and I’ve heard it from people in between.


A comedian named David Cross, who I know from the live action Chimpmuck movie as the evil record produce, has said this, "Back when the Bible was written, then edited, then rewritten, then rewritten, then re-edited, then translated from dead languages, then re-translated, then edited, then rewritten, then given to kings for them to take their favorite parts, then rewritten, then re-rewritten, then translated again, then given to the pope for him to approve, then rewritten, then edited again, the re-re-re-re-rewritten again...all based on stories that were told orally 30 to 90 years AFTER they happened.. to people who didn't know how to write... so...(https://www.reddit.com/r/JoeRogan/comments/1le2is/back_when_the_bible_was_written/)."


And in the most popular podcast on the internet, Joe Rogan has said, “The New Testament was written by Constantine who was a F******* Roman Emperor who wasn’t even Christian. He didn’t even believe it. He became a Christian on his death bed. That’s when he became a Christian. The New Testament is utter horse s***. It’s created by a bishop and a f***** Emperor, that’s a fact. It’s established religious fact. Everyone knows where it came from. And not only that, it was written hundreds of years after the death of Jesus (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5nyyupLskI).”


For people in our society this is where they are getting their information from, and it’s bad information. The people who say such things have never actually taken the time and read the scholarly work on the Bible.


Now because people like David Cross and Joe Rogan focus on the New Testament, that is where we are going to camp for today. So the question is, is the New Testament reliable? And here we need to put the ancient world into perspective. See, here’s the first problem that is rooted in a greater problem of modern people. We have a tendency to think that the way things are today, is how they have always been. What I mean by that is the way information is transmitted, is the way it has always been. 

Last week when we talked about the Roman sources and the archeological evidence, there is a hint of modern error, because people do not understand that the history we do have is only a fraction of what was produced. And I want to give you some examples.

Do you know who Plato is? Well his work entitled, “Tetralogies” (tet-tra-lo-geezs) was written sometime in the late 400s or early 300s BC. Only 7 manuscripts of that work remain and the the earliest manuscript is dated to 900 AD. That’s about 1,400 years between when it was supposed to have been written and what we use to know what Plato said.

Or do you know Aristotle? His writing “Ode to Poetics” was written in the 300s BC. Scholars have 49 manuscripts with the earliest dating to 1,100 AD. There again you have about 1,400 years between when Aristotle wrote the original and what we have today to know that he did.

Or here’s one, a Greek historian named Thucydides who also lived in the 400s BC, and who the Encyclopedia Britannica calls “the greatest of ancient Greek historians (https://www.britannica.com/biography/Thucydides-Greek-historian), So you would think we would have a lot. But of his writing there are 8 surviving copies. The earliest of these 8 is again from the 900s AD. Again, 1400 years after the fact.

Do we need to continue? No, but we will. 

Livy, a Roman historian, who wrote in the 1st century BC, is said to have written 142 books on Roman history. Guess how many remain? 35 books have survived, and they’re contained within 20 manuscripts. The earliest of these manuscript is from the 300s AD. That’s about 300 to 400 year after the fact.

What about Julius Caesar, the first Caesar of Rome, and who a lot of people should know about, I mean he does have a Casino named after him after all. He was said to have written a work entitled the “Gallic Wars” in the 1st century BC. 10 manuscripts have survived, the earliest dates to around, you guessed it, the 900s AD. That’s about a 1,000 years after the fact. (https://books.google.com/books?id=LWVy0WKHsK0C&pg=PA193&lpg=PA193&dq=aristotle+ode+to+poetics+earliest+manuscript&source=bl&ots=WqX7ABTgcj&sig=ACfU3U0Xgf0LLjI8tui2ZkEi_ux_3av-4A&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiRn7T9x470AhXXIjQIHWpiAPwQ6AF6BAgnEAM#v=onepage&q=aristotle%20ode%20to%20poetics%20earliest%20manuscript&f=false)

Yet, these men and the things they recorded are taken has historical not only by scholars, but by the average person on the street. 


Now, let’s put this into perspective with the New Testament. 


As I quoted earlier, David Cross and Joe Rogan both have this idea that the New Testament has been been rewritten a lot of times, with Rogan going so far as to say that it was Emperor Constantine who compiled the writings into what we now have today. Him and Cross would be at odds, because Cross says it was done by popes and kings, so I guess Cross doesn’t know the historical fact that Rogan says is clearly there. Except both are completely wrong. 

You know how we know? Because of manuscripts.


First off, we need to put history into perspective. Jesus is said to be crucified in one of three years: AD 29, 30, or 33. I hold to a 33 AD because of internal and external evidence and so that’s the date we’ll use. Constantine held the council of Nicaea in May 325 AD. So if we have a New Testament before May 325 AD, the majority of the popular belief that the New Testament has been changed over time goes out the window. So, do we?

In the 1700s an Italian scholar by the name of Lodovico Antonio Muratori (lewd-o-v-co, an-tone-i-o, more-a-tore-i) discovers a fragment of a 2nd Century, corresponding to 100s AD, manuscript that contained a basic list of what was considered cannon in the west churches of the Roman world. This is now referred to as the  Muratorian Canon, named after the man who discovered it. 

Guess which books are there? All but 3, Hebrews, James, and maybe 2 Peter. Now why not these three? Well it might have contained 2 Peter, because it simple states the revelation of Peter and in other areas does not distinguish between separate letters an apostle might have written. Hebrews might also be included, because it was included in Paul’s writings that were circulating at that time. And there are two reasons why James might not be included: First, we don’t have the full text of the Muratorian Canon, and second, James is a very Jewish book, and might not have been circulated among the Gentile churches. 

Yet, here we have an almost complete list of the New Testament roughly 200 years before Constantine called the Council of Nicaea where he allegedly compiled the book. Joe Rogan doesn’t know the history of the New Testament and he is leading others to the same false conclusions.

But what about the rewritings that have occurred, like Cross has said? Well, remember how many of those other ancient documents we have? If we included all the manuscripts that we talked about, they would total 94 manuscripts. For five ancient historical figures, we have 94 manuscripts of their writings. Let’s compare that to the NewTestament.

In the first 1,000 years after Christ, the time frame that most of these other ancient manuscripts are written in, there are around 5,000 Greek manuscripts, to which the New Testament was originally written, and roughly another 20,000 manuscripts in other languages. Within a 1,000 years of the events there are roughly 25,000 New Testament manuscripts compared to the same span of time of other ancient documents with only 94. And there’s more discovered all the time. In fact a group called the Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts, headed by Daniel Wallace, seeks to take digital copies of all the manuscripts for the public, and has found several manuscripts that were unknown before (https://www.csntm.org).

And whereas the earliest we have of these other ancient documents is 1,000 years after the fact, with the New Testament we have manuscripts that date back to the 100s AD. Which means that within 60 years of the authors’ original work. 

But that’s not all. There are roughly 32,000 quotes from early church fathers and second generation believers, who heard directly from the apostles themselves, written down in places like 1st Clement. Meaning, that even if we didn’t have those 25,000 manuscripts, we would still have a New Testament.


Okay, but is the New Testament reliable? Well, scholars say that 94% of all the manuscripts are identical in structure and information. Of the 6% that is left, 3% deals with textual anomalies, such as “Jesus loved Mary,” as compared to “Mary was loved by Jesus.” The two are the same, but ordered differently, which is easy to do in the Greek. The final 3% does deal in areas that are contradictory. One such area is the use of the mark of the Beast. A lot of manuscripts contain the 666, but there are others that have that number as 616. Now does that change the theology? It does change the interpretation of who might be the beast, but it doesn’t change the theology of what the mark is, and that’s the key here. Even this 3% doesn’t change theology. In fact. Out of those 25,000 manuscripts Kenneth Boa writes, “The New Testament can be regarded as 99.5 percent pure, and the correct readings for the remaining 0.5 percent can often be ascertained with a fair degree of probability by the practice of textual criticism.”

In other words, because we have such an overwhelming amount of manuscripts, we can be assured that what was originally written by those apostles, are what we have in our hands today. In fact, there is more evidence for the reliability of the New Testament, than any other ancient document. Which shouldn’t surprise us as believers. 


Isaiah 40:6ff states about the word of God, “A voice says, “Cry out.” And I said, “What shall I cry?”All people are like grass, and all their faithfulness is like the flowers of the field. 7 The grass withers and the flowers fall, because the breath of the Lord blows on them. Surely the people are grass. 8 The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of our God endures forever.”

Paul states in 2 Timothy 3:16-17 that, “16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.”

And as Jesus himself said in Matthew 7:24ff, “24 Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25 The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. 26 But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. 27 The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.”


God’s Word endures through the centuries, showing that he is true to it and reliable in its execution. Christians can be assured that the New Testament is what the Apostles witnessed and recorded. So let us be confident in God’s enduring word, that even as those who would rail against its authenticity, fail to land a blow when history balks at their attacks. 


My challenge for you this week then, is to become familiar with the information I have shared with you today. With a reminder that all of my sermons and references are given online every week. But also to come before God in worship this week. Praising and thanking him for his word that we can dive ever deeper into, and yet always have new things challenge us to ponder. So with becoming familiar with the information, and worship God for his word, I want to challenge you to have a prayer of “Lord, help me be wise and build my life upon your word.” Because information without action isn’t very useful within the kingdom of God.


Let us be a people who are firm upon the foundation of God’s enduring word. That in the storms and assaults of this life, we can weather anything because God’s true to what he has said, and we can trust him in it. Amen.

Monday, November 8, 2021

Prepared - 3 Questions Series: Historical Jesus

  On Wednesday nights during the winter time, I teach a class on apologetics. We cover multiple subjects, but the majority of our congregation doesn’t attend that, so it has become part of our tradition to do an apologetics series in the fall of every year. I believe that engaging in apologetics deepens our faith by bringing us face-to-face with the questions that non-believers have concerning our relationship with God. Apologetics comes from the Greek word apologia, usually translated as defense, and 1 Peter 3:15 uses this words to call us to be prepared to give a defense for our faith when some one asks. In 1 Peter 3:15, this defense is linked to the on going sanctification that God is doing in our lives. So as we defend our faith, God uses it to conform us to the image of the Son (Romans 8:29).


In my experience and the experience of other Christians that I have come into contact with, when presenting the Gospel there are always questions that are asked. Now, I would say that there’s about ten common questions that I have been asked throughout my witnessing to people. Things like, did Jesus really rise from the dead? Who made God? Why would God not want me to be happy? But out of these, there are three that kind of encompass the others. 

In the next three weeks, we’re going to look at these three encompassing questions so that when we encounter them, or a variation of them, we will be better equipped to give a defense to why we believe in Jesus as Lord and Savior.


The first of these questions is, was Jesus’ a historical person? Jesus’ question to his disciples in Mark 8:29, “Who do you say I am,” is the most important question that a person can answer. Because the answer to this question determines the eternal state of that individual. If we were to answer that Jesus was a good teacher, but not God, then if he is God, that means our eternal state would be separation from him for eternity. Yet if we accept what Jesus says about himself, that he is the Creator God who sacrifices himself for our sin, so that we can be brought back into relationship with him, then our eternal state will be with him for eternity. 

And so, the first step for a lot of people is the simple question of, was Jesus’ even real? In our day of hyper skepticism, the very historical person of Jesus is called into question. The term for scholars that reject the historical person of Jesus is myth-icist. These scholars believe that Jesus was simply a myth that combined several beliefs from Jewish, Egyptian, Roman, and other eastern religions.

These mythicists build their case on about four points, first there are other gods that died and rose that the Christians borrowed from. Second, Jesus is never mentioned by Roman sources. Third, there is no archeological evidence for Jesus existing. And finally, the only account of Jesus’ life are the Gospels, which were written long after Jesus’ death.


Today, we’re going to address the first three of these points, and next week address the fourth because it ties into another larger question.


So let’s start with the claim that there are other ancient gods who died and rose from the dead. I want to give you one example that gets brought up a lot, but there are several others as well. The one we’ll talk about is the Egyptian story of Osiris and Seth. The story goes like this, Osiris was the god-king over Egypt. His bother Seth, murdered and dismembered him, spreading the pieces over the entire land. Osiris’ two sisters then searched the land, collecting the body, and put him back together, creating the first mummy. Isis, Osiris sister-wife, then resurrected him, has a child by him, and Osiris lives eternally as king in the underworld. Here is the parallel with Jesus that people bring up, Osiris’ “resurrection.” Expect the two resurrections are vastly different. 

First, Jesus’ resurrection was a full restoration from the dead, except for the four wounds from the cross. Second, Jesus didn’t simply live in the realm of the dead, but first returned to earth, where he was seen by hundreds of people, then was seated on the throne of heaven. Finally, there are no wives, or children, or murderous brothers that are a part of the story. So when examined this, and the other examples, fall short of their goal, which is to show that Jesus’ story borrowed from them.

These claims that Jesus is an amalgamation of different ancient religions was pushed in the late part of the 1800s, and has long been dismissed by modern scholarship, because the overwhelming evidence of Jesus’ being a true Jew overshadows any supposed parallel with any other religion.

The response here is that when the question is presented, we must press the issue. We must ask the person to tell us which ancient story they are referring to and then walk through both the story and the biblical account with them showing how Jesus is different. Scholarship, even atheistic and agnostic scholarship, overwhelmingly agree that these supposed parallels come from a biased need to dismiss Jesus and are not rooted in historical reality.


The second point that mythicists make is that Jesus is never mentioned by Roman sources. This comes from the idea that Romans were meticulous in keeping records, so where are the birth and death certificates for Jesus?

There’s a few problems with this, the first is, though the Romans took a lot of records, not every person in the Roman world was seen as important. Yes, Jesus was important to his disciples, and eventually has become the most influential person in history, but in the world around him, he was a no nothing Jew. A non-citizen in a backwater region, why would any of those documents be worth keeping, if they were even produced in the first place? 

We can put this into a modern perspective. My house here in Quartzsite was built in 1982. At that time, La Paz county was transitioning out of being a part of Yuma county to become its own entity. There are no records of my house being built with La Paz county, because it was never given to La Paz county by Yuma. At around that same time, the records department in Yuma had a massive fire that destroyed many land documents. Yet, my house is there, but I cannot prove that it was ever built. That was a mere thirty-nine years ago. 

What is amazing however is that we do have influential Romans who mention Jesus as a historical figure writing within a hundred years of his life. The Roman historian Tacitus references Jesus when commenting on a large fire that blazed through Rome in the 60s AD. Pliny the Younger, a governor in Asia Minor, mentioned Jesus to Emperor Trajan as the source for the Christian movement. And Mara bar Serpaion, a philosopher, describes the crucifixion of Jesus when he wrote around 73AD. These and several others speak volumes for Jesus being a real historical person and recognized by contemporary influential Romans. Therefore another of the mythicists’ arguments falls short.


The final point to the mythicists’ argument that we’ll cover today is that there is no archeological evidence of Jesus’ existence. This is both true and false. See when people talk about archeological evidence, they’re talking about physical things that are found in the area that’s of interest. So if there was anything that said “I Jesus” on it, that would be gold. Except archeology isn’t an exact science. In his book, Is This Man a Biblical Archaeologist?, Hershael Shanks writes, “Good scholars, honest scholars, will continue to differ about the interpretation of archaeological remains simply because archaeology is not a science. It is an art. And sometimes it is not even a very good art.”

People don’t realize that archaeology is interpreted just like any other form of history. Therefore we must ask, is there archaeological evidence, that has been uncovered, for Jesus? And the answer is yes. The person that the Gospels present to us as Jesus fits the archeological evidence that we have of a 1st Century Palestinian Jew. Jesus’ words, locations, dress, mannerisms, all fit a 1st Century Jew. The people that are referenced, the times that are mentioned, and the world events that surround Jesus, all fit as well. Though there is no single stone that says here is Jesus, everything about Jesus fits everything that would have been in his world. This is also another reason that the borrowing from other religions doesn’t fit, Jesus was too Jewish and his followers too Jewish.


There is more overwhelming evidence for Jesus being a real person, then the majority of ancient people that we take for granted. We’ll get more into that next week, but there are ancient people that are held as absolute historical figures, who do not have a tenth of the evidence for their lives that Jesus does. In fact Bart Erhman, a New Testament scholar who rejects the deity of Jesus and the Christian religion as a whole, states, “I can assure you, as a historian, that whatever else you might want to say about Jesus, he certainly existed (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SB6EZzJ7m1c&t=27s).” In fact, Ehrman wrote a book Did Jesus Exist? that tackles this very issue.

As believers’ we must realize that there are people out there that question if Jesus even existed. Popular podcasts, such as the Joe Rogen Show, and channels dedicated to search history, put forth that Jesus wasn’t a real person, but something made up. This shouldn’t surprise us as believers. John writes in the opening of his his second letter to the churches that, “I say this because many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist (v.7).”

A denial that Jesus was a real human is one way in which the world denies the totality of Jesus’ message. Because if Jesus was really historical person, then they would have to then wrestle with his words. And many people don’t want to do that. Because to wrestle with Jesus’ words, is to wrestle with God himself, and as the patriarch Jacob learned, no one walks away from God with our being effected (Genesis 32:22-32).

And as believers’ this attack on Jesus’ historical life, attacks all aspects of the Gospel. For most religions, the historicity of events really doesn’t matter. They are tale’s told to inspire, correct, and bring about an inner change. But for Christians, God’s message is link to history. Abraham was a real person, Moses was a real person, David a real king, the exodus and exile were real events. Jesus was a real person crucified, buried, resurrected, and coming again. The Bible puts forth these things are real historical events, and we must realize that the attack on the historicity of the Bible is an attack on the Gospel itself. Therefore we must be ready when the history of Jesus comes under question. 


The opening to the book of Hebrews states, “1 In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe. 3 The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. 4 So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs (1:1-4).”

The Bible is clear that it references historical events by which God spoke. Through Jesus, God speaks to us today, so let us be prepared to respond to the accusation that Jesus wasn’t historical, with the truth that God has provided through history.


This week I want to challenge you to learn these three responds to the argument that Jesus wasn’t historical, followed by a reading of Hebrews 1:1-4, and then a prayer asking God to speak to you through Jesus and to speak through you to others by the power of the Holy Spirit, so that others may know the glory of the Father. 


Let us walk confidently in the work of God through the history of humanity, waiting expectantly for the return of our Lord, that we may be with him forever. Amen.