Part Three: Additional Evidence- Answering the Misconceptions

Question #1- It is said that the New Testament was written long after the life of Jesus Christ. Doesn’t the elapsed time between Jesus’ life and the writing of the Gospels casts doubt on the accuracy of the Gospels?

Answer: Actually, evidence indicates that the New Testament was written not long after the events themselves.

The Case For Christ p.33 “…[the book of] Acts ends apparently unfinished-Paul is a central figure of the book, and he’s under house arrest in Rome. With that the book abruptly halts. What happens to Paul? We don’t find out from Acts, probably because the book was written before Paul was put to death…That means Acts cannot be dated any later than A.D. 62. Having established that, we can then move backward from there. Since Acts is the second of a two-part work, we know the first part-the gospel of Luke-must have been written earlier than that. And since Luke incorporates parts of the gospel of Mark, that means Mark is even earlier. If you allow maybe a year for each of those, you end up with Mark written no later than about A.D. 60, maybe even the late 50’s. If Jesus was put to death in A.D. 30 or 33, we’re talking about a maximum gap of thirty years or so.”

Question #2- Doesn’t the sheer number of New Testament manuscripts and the variations in these manuscripts casts doubt on what the Bible is truly saying?

Answer: No. Despite what some atheistic writers would like you to believe, the large number of manuscripts actually confirms what the Bible is saying, because we are able to compare them. The few variations that do exist do not cast doubt on any doctrine of the Church.

The Case For Christ (p. 59) points out that the New Testament has many more surviving copies than any other ancient work, copies that were created within a couple of generations of the originals. The multitude of surviving copies can be cross checked to determine what the original actually said.

The Case For Christ p. 65 “I don’t know of any doctrine that is in jeopardy [because of manuscript variants]….scholars work very carefully to try to resolve  [variations] by getting back to the original meaning. The more significant variations do not overthrow any doctrine of the church. Any good Bible will have notes that will alert the reader to variant reading of any consequence. But again, these are rare. So rare that scholars Norman Geisler and William Nix conclude “The New Testament, then, has not only survived in more manuscripts than any other book from antiquity, but it has survived in a purer form than any other great book- a form that is 99.5 percent pure.”

Question #3- In the Talmud, Jewish historians and religious leaders rejected Jesus’ claim that He was the Messiah. If the Jewish experts of the time rejected him, why shouldn’t we?

Answer: Interestingly, the Old Testament predicted that Jesus would be rejected (Psalm 118:22), but even those who rejected him implicitly acknowledged that He performed miracles.

The Case For Christ p. 51 “Many people had reasons for wanting to discredit this movement and would have done so if they could have simply told history better….Yet look at what his opponents did say. In later Jewish writing Jesus is called a sorcerer who led Israel astray- which acknowledges that he really did work marvelous wonders, although the writers dispute the source of his power. This would have been a perfect opportunity to say something like, ‘The Christians will tell you he worked miracles, but we’re here to tell you he didn’t.’ Yet that’s the one thing we never see his opponents saying. Instead they implicitly acknowledge that what the gospels wrote- that Jesus performed miracles- is true….Could this Christian movement have taken root right there in Jerusalem- in the very area where Jesus had done much of his ministry, had been crucified, buried, and resurrected- if people who knew him were aware that the disciples were exaggerating or distorting the things he did?....We have a picture of what was initially a very vulnerable and fragile movement that was being subjected to persecution. If critics could have attacked it on the basis that it was full of falsehoods or distortions, they would have….that’s exactly what we don’t see.”

The Case For Christ p. 184 “…the Jewish community would have jumped on any opportunity to discredit the gospels by pointing out falsehoods….But even though the Jewish Talmud refers to Jesus in derogatory ways, it never once makes the claim that the fulfillment of prophesies was falsified. Not one time.”

There is an interesting book titled “The Search for Messiah” by Mark Eastman and Chuck Smith. In this book, the authors cite numerous references from the Jewish Talmud and the Dead Sea Scrolls which refer to the Messiah. Interestingly, the descriptions of the Messiah they were looking for sound a lot like Jesus. Early Jewish writings agree with scripture on the timing of the Messiah, and His identity:

The Search For Messiah p. 116 “In the Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 96-99 (written roughly between 200-500 C.E.), the rabbis expressed their disappointment that the Messiah had not come during the expected time. They explain that the delay in the coming of the Messiah was due to the sin of Israel. Otherwise, he would have come around the year four thousand after creation, precisely the time Jesus of Nazareth came.”

In the Search For Messiah, the authors note the following rabbinic (Jewish) writings, referring to the Messiah as “Jehovah Our Righteousness” Talmud Babha Bathra 75b, Midrash on Psalm 21:1, Proverbs 19:21, and Lamentations 1:16. (p.44).

Eastman and Smith, in The Search for Messiah,  point out that “ancient rabbinical beliefs are in stark contrast to the contemporary beliefs of most rabbis and Jewish scholars….modern rabbis believe that the Messiah is only a man. They deny the supernatural origin of the Messiah and claim that he is simply a man of great character…but nothing more than a human being. However, this has not always been the position of the rabbis. There is abundant evidence in Jewish scholarship that the Messiah would, in fact, be an eternally existent supernatural being, with a supernatural birth, mission, and destiny.” (p.36). They list some of the rabbinic writings which support this, which include: the Targum on Isaiah 9:6, the Targum on Micah 5:2, the Midrash on Proverbs 8:9, the Septuagint versions of Psalm 72 verses 5 and 7 and Psalms 110:1-3, and the Babylonian Talmud Sotah 9b. In the Babylonian Talmud Sukkah 52a, there is even a reference to the Messiah being pierced and suffering martyrdom.

Conclusion

Today, some skeptics claim that Jesus was “merely a man”, but any mere man who claimed to be the Messiah would have to be an imposter. The Bible says that the Messiah was and is more than just a man. We can clearly see that Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament descriptions of His timing, His work, and even very specific details about his life. We have additional confirmation of His ability to work miracles in the writings of a hostile opposition, and we even have historical confirmation in the lives of his apostles, who were so convinced that He was authentic that most of them died as martyrs, preaching His kingdom. For more information and additional evidence about Jesus Christ, we recommend: “The Search For Messiah” by Mark Eastman and Chuck Smith, and “The Case For Christ” by Lee Strobel.

Eastman, Mark, & Smith, Chuck, “The Search For Messiah” (Joy Publishing, Fountain Valley, CA, 1996).

Esposito, Don (various sermons) Note: the website authors do not agree with some of Mr. Esposito’s theological positions.

Spangler & Tverberg “Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus” (Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI, 2009)

Stern, David,  “The Complete Jewish Bible”. (Jewish New Testament Publications, Inc., Clarksville, Maryland, 1998).

Strobel, Lee, “The Case For Christ”. (Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1998).