|
Apologetics
26. Questions about Contents of the New
Testament
(Why
you can be happy with it)
A
series that helps consider the foundations for faith
Contents:
Introductory
Comments
•
All
about integrity
1.
Why are the Gospels Different?
•
A look at
each book in order
2.
How are the first 3 Similar yet Different?
•
similarities
and differences
3.
Why is John so Different?
•
Why John
is like it is
4.
Why can we trust these accounts?
•
questions
to be asked
5.
How can we believe the impossible happening?
•
facing the
accounts
6.
How do Accounts about Jesus Suggest Integrity in the Writing?
•
how I would
have written about Jesus
To
Conclude
•
Putting it
all together
On
this page we step into the New Testament and ask questions
about it.
We'll
start with the Gospels - why are they like they are?
Then
we'll consider the crucial questions you need to face up to
if you deny these writings.
Next we'll look at how down to earth they are.
Finally
we'll consider the integrity of what we find about Jesus.
|
Return
to top of page
| 1.
Why are the Gospels Different? |
If
you read Page 27 about Contradictions you will see we speak
about seeing the same thing but from different viewpoints.
If
you read Page 25 about the Origins of the N.T. you may remember
we indicated that they were written about the following times:
Mark
|
About
AD 55-65 |
Luke
|
About
AD 60 |
Matthew
|
About
AD 60-65 |
John
|
About
AD 85-90 |
So
the first three were roughly about the same time, drawing on
roughly the same information, while John was many years later.
Moreover
the character and, in John's case, age came into it as suggested
below:
Mark
|
About
AD 55-65 |
Primarily
for Roman readers Jesus is the Servant, |
Luke
|
A
gentile writer |
Primarily
for Greek readers Jesus is the prophetic Son of Man |
Matthew
|
A
Jewish tax collector |
Primarily
for Jewish readers - Jesus is the Messiah King, the Son
of David. |
John
|
An
aged writer |
Aimed
at the whole world Jesus is the Son of God |
|
Return
to top of page
2.
How are the first 3 Similar yet Different?
|
|
Although
the subject is very much more complex than shown below, the
structure of the Synoptic Gospels can be compared roughly as
follows:
Mark
|
606
verses same as Matthew |
+55
not in Matthew |
|
350
verses in Luke |
24
in Luke |
31
unique |
(Mark's
total = 661 verses)
| Matthew
|
606
verses from Mark compressed into 500 verses |
250
common with Luke |
300+
unique |
(Matthew's
total = 1068 verses)
| Luke
|
350
verses same as Mark |
250
common with Matthew |
579
unique |
(Luke's
total = 1149 verses)
The
fact that Matthew and Luke use a very large amount of Mark,
suggests Mark was first and they both used him as a major source.
The
fact that about 250 verses are common to Matthew and Luke suggests
another common source, which scholars call Q' (from the German
Quelle meaning source).
- Matthew's
unique verses have a distinctly Jewish feel to them
- Luke's
unique verses have a distinctly Gentile feel to them.
Where
verses are used in common, but have been slightly changed, the
probable cause is that the individual writers had their unique
readers' group in mind and adjusted them accordingly. This should
in no way be seen as changing the truth. We come again to the
same thing being seen through different eyes. In this God takes
and uses the different backgrounds and personalities of the
writers.
|
Return to top of page
|
3.
Why is John so Different?
|
|
Answer:
The
most important things to remember are who John is and what has
happened to him and the long period of time that has passed.
John
is a primary leader of the early church. He has been an elder
for many years and would obviously have matured greatly with
all those years experience.
Contrary
to casual thought the passing of years would actually have been
beneficial to the writing of this Gospel. Many people as they
grow older find a change in their memory. Things that are recent
are easily forgotten but as the years pass, the earlier years
of life grow into sharper focus. Hence the tendency of the old
to reminisce.
Imagine
John in his old age, having learnt so much about the Christian
faith in his years of leadership under the prompting and teaching
of the Holy Spirit. He sits there reflecting back on those three
most incredible years of his life with The Master. He relives
it, and sees' it so clearly. He hears again the things Jesus
said and suddenly he thinks, Why didn't the others pick up
on that?
Suddenly
he sees the significance of some of Jesus words that the earlier
writers had not picked up, I
am the living bread that came down from heaven. Suddenly so
many things all pointed to this one truth: this is the Son of
God who came from heaven. He came to point us to God. All his
miracles were really signs pointing to him and pointing to God.
Suddenly
he sees how Jesus set up those last days before the last week.
He remembered how he had waited until Lazarus had died, Lazarus
who had now passed on again, finally. He saw how the raising
of Lazarus so close to Jerusalem
, so close to Passover
had inspired the people to rise up. He remembered how Jesus
had gone into Jerusalem
at the beginning of that
last week and upset the temple authorities, and then had come
back day by day, teaching the crowds under their very noses.
Their sinful anger had grown and grown and grown until it exploded
on that awful night when the took him, tried him and had him
crucified. But before that had all happened he heard again the
Master's calm voice at that last supper as he shared his heart
with them all.
Oh
so vividly, as he looked back to those younger years of life,
he remembered the confusion of those few days, and the wonder
of his return from the dead. He remembered that encounter with
the Master up in Galilee
when he had recommissioned
Peter. So many things the others had not wished to include in
their writings while they were still there
. but now they were
gone
. only John was left to share his insights of the wonders
of those three years.
THIS
is why John's Gospel is so different!
|
Return
to top of page
|
4.
Why can we Trust these Accounts?
|
|
Answer:
Skeptics
say they made up these things. Think about how likely this
was.
We
have looked at the similarities and the differences. Why did
the first THREE write? Why three? Was it because God wanted
to appeal to the three main people groups of that day the
Jews, the Romans and the Greek world
a) Think about Questions of Reality
Why
would anybody bother to write these long documents in a day
when writing was not easy?
Why
would Matthew the tax collector and Luke the doctor bother
to copy and amalgamate so much of Mark's Gospel when he has
already written so clearly?
Why
would they bother to use the resource we call Q' if it wasn't
true? Why bother to try and convince people if it wasn't true?
Why bother to write things that would surely cause opposition
from Rome and from the Jewish authorities, opposition that would
only cause deep trouble
When we consider
the person of Jesus we will consider some of these questions
more fully, but why write about him if there even the smallest
sense that he was a fraud?
Why take Mark's
writings and the Q' collection and seamlessly add your own
knowledge if there wasn't some incredible motivating force behind
it all?
How
could they possibly write so uniformly if they hadn't been
there, and hadn't seen it all.
b) Watch the Detail!
Listen to their personal testimonies:
1
Jn 1:1-3 That which was from
the beginning, which we have heard , which we
have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at
and our hands have touched - this we proclaim
concerning the Word of life. The life appeared; we have
seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the
eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared
to us. We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard.
Jn
20:30 ,31 Jesus did many other
miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which
are not recorded in this book. But these are written that
you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God,
and that by believing you may have life in his name
Jn
21:24 This is the disciple who
testifies to these things and who wrote them down.
Jn
21:25 Jesus did many other things
as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose
that even the whole world would not have room for the books
that would be written.
Lk
1:1-4 Many have undertaken to
draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled
among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who
from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word.
Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything
from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an
orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that
you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.
Lk
3:1,2 In the fifteenth year of
the reign of Tiberius Caesar--when Pontius Pilate was governor
of Judea, Herod tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip
tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis, and Lysanias tetrarch
of Abilene-- during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas,
the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the desert.
Note
the incredible wealth of geographical and historical data
in those last two verses.
Catch
the sense of integrity in these writers.
It
is only the person who has never read these Gospels with an
open mind who dares say, Oh they just made them up! or Oh,
they probably aren't accurate!
On
a later page we will note some of the spurious writings that
were around in the early centuries ad we'll be able to see
how the New Testament canon is so different from those myths
that are so full of mistakes and contradictions.
The
Gospel writers never intended to write comprehensive accounts
of the life of Jesus, just sufficient to help us believe.
May you be able to do that as you read - but don't criticize
until you have read!
|
Return
to top of page
5.
How can we believe the impossible happening?
|
|
Answer:
Sense
the reality of the accounts
People
rarely write off the New Testament because of it's lack of historical
integrity, more because of their presuppositions that say, "That
couldn't have happened!"
But
that is prejudging the issue!
Consider
the following incredible account from chapter 12 of the Acts
of the Apostles in the New Testament:
Acts
12:1-5 "It was about
this time that King Herod arrested some who belonged to the
church, intending to persecute them. He had James, the brother
of John, put to death with the sword. When he saw that this
pleased the Jews, he proceeded to seize Peter also. This happened
during the Feast of Unleavened Bread. After arresting him,
he put him in prison, handing him over to be guarded by four
squads of four soldiers each. Herod intended to bring him
out for public trial after the Passover. So Peter
was kept in prison, but the church was earnestly praying to
God for him."
Now
that is a plain narrative account about specific people and
a specific historical moment. So far no problem!
Peter
is in prison and the church is praying for him.
Acts
12:6 "The night before
Herod was to bring him to trial, Peter was sleeping between
two soldiers, bound with two chains, and sentries stood guard
at the entrance."
Again,
straight historical narrative, so no problem.
Acts
12:7 "Suddenly
an angel of the Lord appeared and a light shone in the cell.
He struck Peter on the side and woke him up. "Quick,
get up!" he said, and the chains fell off Peter's wrists."
Ah! Now we have a problem if we are an atheist. Angels don't
exist so this can't have happened!
But
hold on! It isn't being spoken about in any mystical way, there
is no sense of Eastern mysticism here; this is still straight
historical narrative. The figure speaks to Peter ion language
that communicates. "Quick, get up!" is easy to understand.
it is the language of every day.
Acts
12:8 "Then the angel
said to him, "Put on your clothes and sandals."
And Peter did so. "Wrap your cloak around you and follow
me," the angel told him."
Now
this gets embarrassingly ordinary. The Bible does this. That's
what distinguishes it from any other world religion writing.
It blends the divinely supernatural with the incredibly ordinary.
There
is no weird, mystical stuff here. It is simply the instructions
you might give to a child: "Put your clothes on, we're
going out."
Acts
12:9 "Peter followed
him out of the prison, but he had no idea that what the angel
was doing was really happening; he thought he was seeing a
vision."
Now
isn't that amazing. The blend of the ordinary with the supernatural
(humanly impossible) makes Peter think he must be dreaming!
We struggle with the blessing of the divinely supernatural and
the ordinary. Mystics through the centuries have objected to
this, but this is God's world. He made the material world so
He can act into it.
Acts
12:10,11 "They passed
the first and second guards and came to the iron gate leading
to the city. It opened for them by itself, and they went through
it. When they had walked the length of one street, suddenly
the angel left him. Then Peter came to himself and said, "Now
I know without a doubt that the Lord sent his angel and rescued
me from Herod's clutches."
If
you forgot what went before, this would appear a totally normal
piece of historical narrative. It is incredible because it involves
and angel and it involves the angel making things happen that
would not happen otherwise.
The
ONLY reason you cannot accept this entirely reasonable and rational
account is if you start off with the presupposition that there
is no God and no angels - but that is an entirely prejudicial
and irrational starting place, founded on previous prejudices
and not the evidence.
WHY
should someone called Luke BOTHER to write this as an historical
account. Why not present it as a fictional story - unless it
was true.
Seriously,
stop and think about your thinking processes. Anywhere else
in history if you heard about something unusual, you might be
skeptical, but at least you would give it some thought and not
just write it off.
When
it comes to things to do with God, people write them off, not
because they are incredible, but because of the consequences
that follow: if I accept there is a God who is all-powerful,
all-wise and all-knowing then it follows that I would need to
submit to His call on my life.
That's
what this is really all about!
|
Return
to top of page
6.
How do the Accounts about Jesus Suggest Integrity in the Writing?
|
|
Answer:
Some
unthinking people say the Gospel writers made up the accounts.
Really?
Think about what we have in the Gospels. If I were writing
then to convince you to follow the Jesus I knew, the following
are some of the things I would seek to do:
1.
I would present him as a wise leader
Wise
leaders chose their teams well. However, the people Jesus chooses
are a dubious bunch
-
there are some ignorant mouthy fishermen
-
there are some dubious tax collectors
-
there is an extremist radical
-
there is one of them who will deny him three times
-
there is one of them who will betray him to the authorities
NOT
a good choice at first sight!
2.
I would present him as accepted by the important people
Successes
in society are normally approved by the top people in society,
but we find something quite different!
Jesus
was rejected by
-
the Roman leaders
-
the Hebrew politicians
-
the Hebrew religious leaders.
Not
an acceptable character.
3.
I would present him as morally unquestionable
Great
religious leaders should be 'squeaky clean'. Not so Jesus!
- Jesus
met, ate and drank with tax collectors, prostitutes and 'sinners'
generally.
- He
seemed dubiously questionable to the moral authorities!
4.
I would present him as a great success
On
a human scale Jesus completely blew it!
-
top people rejected him (see above)
-
some of his own followers gave up on him and left him
-
at the moment of crisis all of his followers left him
-
one of them denied him and another betrayed him
-
the crowds who had followed him abandoned him
-
he rashly allowed himself to be captured and crucified
before he had hardly had time to establish himself.
5.
I would present him as a great teacher
In fact Jesus used
a teaching style that:
-
was often hard to understand
-
used picture language that needed a lot of thinking
about
-
made unpleasant demands on people with talk about giving
up life
-
often upset and conflicted with the religious authorities
6. I
would present him as a survivor
In
fact:
- Jesus
allowed himself to be taken and crucified
- it
seems like his work was brought to a premature end, humanly
at least
- he
left his future inheritance in the hands of the dubious remaining
followers!
7.
I would present him as a balanced family man
In
fact, he is portrayed as:
-
a single man
-
travelling
with this band of dubious men and even more dubious women.
NB.
Silly talk in the media about him having a wife, has absolutely
no grounds for belief. If he had been then there would have
been no way that that could be kept quiet from his followers,
the early church, and those who wrote the Gospels.
No,
what we find in the Gospels is NOT a great success story on
human terms.
It
is NOT how we would have written if we wanted to win over the
masses.
But
it IS how it is written and these things, almost more than anything
else, are the things that convey a ring of truth about what
happened.
|
Return
to top of page
|
On
this page we have observed
The
differences of the four Gospels and how that adds to their integrity.
Questions
that must be asked if you deny the writings.
The general integrity of the writings conveyed in the nature
of them.
Overall we would suggest, that if you read the New Testament
it is harder to deny it with integrity than to accept it.
Have
you read it all yet?
|
Return
to top of page
|
Sunday Services
Back to Apologetics Contents Page