Uncategorized Archives | Page 33 of 35

“Resurrection” Myths vs. Resurrection of Jesus – Tammuz and Adonis

Posted on May 22, 2007April 17, 2020 by confidentchristianity@gmail.com

This is the first in a series of posts on resurrection myths by Mary Jo.

Was the story of Jesus’ resurrection unique in the first century or did other written accounts of resurrections like Jesus’ exist before or during the time period of the New Testament writings? This is an important question to answer since it is at the root of an objection to Christianity’s claims of uniqueness. Over the course of the next couple of posts, I will look at other resurrection claims and the evidence surrounding those claims versus the evidence surrounding the resurrection of Jesus. Although, throughout these short posts do I in no way intend to accomplish a full treatment of this subject matter. Instead, I will lay down very minimal facts and point to other sources.

The Mystery Cults

Skepticism about the uniqueness of Christianity’s resurrection claim can be read in writings such as The Golden Bough by Sir James Frazer (1906), Hellenistic Ways of Deliverance and the Making of the Christian Synthesis by John H. Randall (1970), and Those Incredible Christians by Hugh Schonfield (1968). However, upon a closer examination of the available source documents, it is shown that much of the written record of the mystery cults comes to us from the second to fourth century A.D. The appearances of “resurrections” in these myths do not emerge in their writings until after the resurrection accounts of the New Testament.

The Cult of Tammuz

Names:
Mesopotamian – Tammuz
Sumerian – Dumuzi
Phoenician – Adonis

The cult of Tammuz can be traced back to around 3000 B.C, and has a Babylonian-Sumerian origination.[1] Tammuz was allegedly resurrected by the goddess Inanna-Ishtar. Tammuz’s resurrection is “alleged” because the end of both the Sumerian and the Akkadian texts of the myth of “The Descent of Inanna (Ishtar)” had not been preserved. The story actually states that Dumuzi (Tammuz) did not return from death to an earthly life, but was placed in the underworld as a substitution for Inanna.[2] Apparently, there is only fragmentary evidence that Dumuzi had his sister take his place in the underworld for half of the year. Even so, the story of Tammuz is not like the resurrection story of Jesus. However, let’s take a brief look at Adonis.

The cult of Adonis has possibly been linked to the same parent deity of the cult of Tammuz. According to Jessie Weston in Ritual to Romance, “…the worship of the divinity we know as Adonis, may, under another name, reach back to an antiquity equal with that we can now ascribe to the cult of Tammuz.”[3] The earliest stories of Adonis report no death or resurrection and the “resurrection” of Adonis is not recorded until after A.D. 150.[4] Edwin M. Yamauchi, professor of history at Miami University, Ohio, in his article Easter: Myth, Hallucination, or History states, “P. Lambrechts has shown that there is no trace of a resurrection in the early texts or pictorial representations of Adonis; the four texts that speak of his resurrection are quite late, dating from the second to the fourth centuries A.D. (“La ‘resurrection’ d’Adonis,” in Melanges Isidore Levy, 1955, pp. 207-40).”[5]

The story of Adonis’ death is not similar to that of the sacrificial nature of Jesus’ death. Adonis was mortally wounded by a wild boar. As described in Frazer’s The Golden Bough, “At last the fair youth was killed in hunting by a wild boar, or by the jealous Ares, who turned himself into the likeness of a boar in order to compass the death of his rival.”[6] Adonis, according to the story, was eventually given to Persephone, goddess of death, for part of the year, and to Aphrodite, goddess of love for the other. This is not a picture of a god dying for the sins of the world and being resurrected to new life that all people may partake in.

When comparing the stories of Tammuz, Dumuzi, and Adonis with the resurrection stories of Jesus, these stories only demonstrate strained similarities (in that they speak of the death and life of a being). It is also not likely the New Testament writers were mimicking later writings of dying and rising gods due to the second century appearance of the “resurrection” in the myths.

Mary Jo

Note: Please check referenced documents for further documentation. Articles quoted have many more sources than provided here.

For Further Reading:

Metzger, Bruce. Historical and Literary Studies: Pagan, Jewish, and Christian. Available from: http://www.frontline-apologetics.com/mystery_religions_early_christianity.htm Accessed January 22, 2007.

Nash, Ronald. Was the New Testament Influenced by Pagan Religions? Available from: http://www.equip.org/free/DB109.htm Accessed January 22, 2007.

Frazer, Sir James George. The Golden Bough. Available from: http://www.bartleby.com/196/79.html Accessed May 22, 2007.

Footnotes:

1 Weston, Jessie. From Ritual to Romance. Chapter IV: Tammuz and Adonis. Available from: www.sacred-texts.com/neu/frr/frr07.htm#fn_39>http://www.sacred-texts.com/neu/frr/frr07.htm#fn_39. The Internet Sacred Text Archive. Accessed May 22, 2007.

[2] Yamauchi, Edwin M. Easter: Myth, Hallucination, or History. Available from: >http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/yama.html. Accessed January 22, 2007.

[3] Weston, Jessie. Ritual to Romance.

[4] Habermas, Gary. Mike Licona. The Case For the Resurrection of Jesus. Grand Rapids, Kregel Publications: 2004. pg. 90.

[5] Yamauchi, Edwin M. Easter: Myth, Hallucination, or History.

[6] Frazer, Sir James George. The Golden Bough. Available from: >http://www.bartleby.com/196/79.html. Accessed May 22, 2007.

False Philosophy

Posted on May 4, 2007April 17, 2020 by confidentchristianity@gmail.com

Once again Oprah has offered yet another philosophy for success as she featured her friend Russell Simmons, the author of Do You! In his just released book, he offers 12 laws of achieving success. He states that it is through yoga and listening to your inner voice that you can achieve a deep spiritual connection. However, the interesting twist to his philosophy is that you can achieve this power through Muhammad, Buddha, God or your choice of a higher power. Christians must beware not to fall into the trap of following this post-modern philosophy because it is in direct opposition to the Scriptures.

Sadly, many have fallen prey to speakers that mention the word prayer or god associating those words with being a Christian. Russell Simmons used these same words in his interview with Oprah, but he does not represent Christianity. He claims to listen to the inner voice inside, yet this is not what the Bible teaches. Jesus says to “teach all that I have commanded”[1], as well as “sanctify them with my word”[2]. In other words, Christians do not rely on spiritual feelings of an inner voice, but instead the reading of His word. It is through the reading of the Word that God has given every principle for life and godliness.

Simmons also suggests that through yoga there is a process that clears the mind in order to centralize on your higher power. However, this is also in disagreement with the Word of God. Instead the Bible says to meditate on God’s law. Joshua was commanded “not to let the book of the law depart from his mouth; meditate on it day and night”[3]. The Psalms calls the believer to meditate on God’s Word all day long and Romans urges the believer to stop conforming to the world and be transformed by having the mind of Christ. The believer is not called to empty the mind, but to fill it with the Word of God.

Unfortunately, Simmons also suggests an egalitarian view regarding Buddha, Muhammad and God. However, Buddha and Muhammad never rose from the dead nor did they have a ministry in comparison with Christ. Jesus came to save His people, rose from the dead and stated “I am the way, the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through me”.[4]

The recent book by Simmons calls people to empty their minds and connect with their inner higher power, but God is calling His own to have the mind of Christ and live according to all He has commanded. Turn off the T.V., quit searching through the latest philosophy turn to God’s Word and you will find the hope and peace that passes all understanding.

“See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.” (Colossians 1:8)

Deanna

[1] Matthew 28:18
[2] John 17:17
[3] Joshua 1:8
[4] John 14:6

The Effects of Sin

Posted on April 23, 2007April 17, 2020 by confidentchristianity@gmail.com

In our post modern society more often than not, people account their misfortunes or their hurt felt lives to their environmental surroundings, sickness and anything else that will remove the blame from their own sinful nature. The husband, who is dissatisfied, blames the critical wife, the student with bad grades blames their terrible teachers, the depressed woman blames her childhood and people continue to blame everyone except the sin that entangles our thoughts and ways when we walk away from obedience to God. The fact is, sin gives birth to enslavement, self-centeredness and leaves people with an inability to love among many other things.

Sin often times becomes an enslavement of bondage. “Sin becomes a habit or even an addiction.”[1] When we walk in sin, such as lying, harming our bodies and walk in direct opposition to God’s desires, we bring on anxiety, pain and broken relationship with God. All sin leads to bondage, pre-marital sex produces fear and anxiety in a relationship because it is outside of God’s desire, uncontrolled anger produces violence when God desires self-control, and drinking robs us of a sober mind, just to name a few. While in my college days many encouragers gave me some good advice and it is that, “Sin takes you farther than you are willing to go, keeps you longer than you are willing to stay and has a price higher than you are willing to pay” (author unknown).

Sin will always have a self-centered view of life. For example, in the story of Cain and Abel in the account of Genesis, it is pointed out that Cain’s face was downcast. Normally when someone has a downcast face something in their life is not going well, in our society we would call the person depressed. However, God gave Cain a choice that if he would do what is right, then his countenance would be lifted. However, Cain wanted to serve his sinful desires and he killed Abel due to his own jealousy. “For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there is disorder and every evil thing” (James 3:16).

Sin also leaves people with an inability to love according to God’s desire. Most people have a skewed view of love, however God gives us a clear picture in the book of 1 Corinthians 13. Love is patient, kind, not jealous, not bragging, not arrogant, not self seeking, does not rejoice in wrong, is not provoked, but rejoices with the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things and endures all things. Sin will not produce these things in the life of a person, instead it will produce just the opposite. “The teaching of the wise is a fountain of life, to turn aside from the snares of death. Good understanding produces favor, but the way of the sinner is hard” (Proverbs 13:14-15).

In the end, sin will always lead to bondage, self centeredness and an inability to love. “The problem with this answer is not that people find it unclear but that they find it unpalatable.”[2] The healing in life will come through calling out to God in repentance and learning to walk in his ways. Marriages will be healed when wanting my way turns into wanting it God’s way, depression will be healed when the Word of God is actually applied and lived out, and lives will experience peace when we realize who we are and who God is.

“Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light” (Matthew 11:28-30).

Deanna

[1] Erikson, Millard J., Christian Theology, Baker Academics, Grand Rapids, MI, 1998, pg. 632.

[2] Colson, Charles, How Now Shall We Live, Wheaton, Illinois, Tyndale House, 1999, p.148.

Minimal Facts Approach – Testing Hypotheses

Posted on April 13, 2007April 17, 2020 by confidentchristianity@gmail.com

This post is a continuation of a series of posts by Mary Jo on the Minimal Facts Approach.

Various Hypotheses Concerning the Resurrection

After establishing the four minimal facts surrounding the event of resurrection, I will now put to the test a few of the numerous hypotheses given as an explanation for these facts. The answer at the end of each fact demonstrates whether or not the theory in question can account for that particular fact.*

Swoon Theory – Jesus did not die on the cross; he fainted or swooned, and was eventually revived

Fact 1: Jesus died by Roman Crucifixion – NO
Fact 2: Jesus appeared to the disciples – NO
Fact 3: Jesus appeared to foes – NO
Fact 4: Jesus’ tomb was empty – NO

X This hypothesis does not account for all of the facts.

Hallucination Theory – The disciples had grief-induced or other type hallucinations, which explain the appearances of Jesus.

Fact 1: Jesus died by Roman Crucifixion – YES
Fact 2: Jesus appeared to the disciples – NO
Fact 3: Jesus appeared to foes – NO
Fact 4: Jesus’ tomb was empty – YES/STRAIN

X This hypothesis does not account for all of the facts.

Legend Theory – Jesus was most likely a man who led a small religious cult in first century Palestine, but legend about him developed over the years after his death in an effort to convert people to Christianity.

Fact 1: Jesus died by Roman Crucifixion – NO/STRAIN
Fact 2: Jesus appeared to the disciples – NO
Fact 3: Jesus appeared to foes – NO
Fact 4: Jesus’ tomb was empty – NO

X This hypothesis does not account for all of the facts.

Myth Theory – The story of Jesus Christ is a myth that developed much like the myths of other ancient near east religions.

Fact 1: Jesus died by Roman Crucifixion – NO
Fact 2: Jesus appeared to the disciples – NO
Fact 3: Jesus appeared to foes – NO
Fact 4: Jesus’ tomb was empty – NO

X This hypothesis does not account for all of the facts.

Jesus was resurrected – Jesus died by Roman crucifixion, was buried, and subsequently appeared to his disciples and others in bodily form.

Fact 1: Jesus died by Roman Crucifixion – YES
Fact 2: Jesus appeared to the disciples – YES
Fact 3: Jesus appeared to foes – YES
Fact 4: Jesus’ tomb was empty – YES

This hypothesis accounts for all of the facts.

The inference suggested by historically exploring the evidence around the events of Jesus’ life is that a resurrected Jesus is the best explanation for the historical facts. What are the implications of a resurrected Jesus?

Mary Jo

Main Sources:

Habermas, Gary. Mike Licona. The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus. Grand Rapids, Kregel: 2004.

*Licona, Mike. Resurrection of Jesus. Lecture. McLean Bible Church Apologetics Conference, “Loving God With All Your Mind.” November, 2006. Format for checking hypotheses from Licona’s lecture.

For further reading:Explaining Away Jesus’ Resurrection: The Recent Revival of Hallucination Theories – Gary HabermasThe Late Twentieth-Century Resurgence of Naturalistic Responses to Jesus’ Resurrection – Gary HabermasContemporary Scholarship and the Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ – William Lane CraigDid Jesus Really Exist? – Paul L. Maier
© Mary Jo Sharp 2007

What is Sin?

Posted on April 3, 2007June 24, 2020 by confidentchristianity@gmail.com

This is an article written by a friend back when we began the Confident Christianity blog together in 2006. I have updated this article with my response as of 2020.

On any given day, you can open up the newspaper to find conflict, shootings, theft, adultery and moral decline. But, what is at the heart of moral decline? What is it that causes others to kill, cheat on their taxes and deceive people? It is sin, oops! If anyone speaks of sin or calls someone a “sinner it is almost like screaming out a profanity or obscenity at a very formal, dignified, genteel meeting, or even in church.”[1] Yet, we are all sinners resulting from the fall of Adam and Eve. So, what is sin according to the Bible and what causes someone to sin?

The nature of sin is “any evil action or evil motive that is in opposition to God”.[2] Sin is displacing God from His rightful place. Scripture gives several descriptions of sin:

¨ Missing the mark – Pro. 19:2
¨ Rebellion – Deut. 31:27
¨ Transgression – Nub. 14:41-42
¨ Iniquity – Lev. 26:40
¨ Treachery – Pro. 13:15
¨ Abomination – Deut. 22:5

“The essential nature of sin is giving the allegiance that we owe God, to someone or something else.”[3]

Knowing that sin is against God, what is it that causes a person to sin? James wrote, “Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone. But each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust. Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and when sin is accomplished, it brings forth death” (James 1:13-15).

God has given us natural desires such as hunger in order that we would not starve, but when our own desires go beyond His desires then we are in gluttony and missing the mark He had intended for us. He has given us natural desires, such as:

¨ The desire to obtain things, but when our desires are at the cost of exploitation or hurting others, then the pursuit is coveting.
¨ God has given us the desire to do things, but when we boast in our own pride instead of thanking Him for the gift, then the pursuit is putting ourselves above God.
¨ God has give us the desire to enjoy marriage, but physical relations outside of marriage is pursuing adultery.

It is when we miss the mark, rebel and transgress God’s laws that we sin. Because of our sin we deserve death. However, “God demonstrated His love that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:8), making restitution for our sin to all who believe. It is only when our society turns away from sin and turns to repentance to God that people will begin to walk in integrity, live with morals and love one another.

“Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked or stand in the way of sinners or sit in the seat of mockers.
But his delight is in the law of the LORD, and on his law he meditates day and night. He is like a tree planted by streams of water, which yields its fruit in season and whose leaf does not wither. Whatever he does prospers. Not so the wicked! They are like chaff that the wind blows away.
Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the assembly of the righteous. For the LORD watches over the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked will perish.” Psalm 1

Deanna

My response
I think our culture today has a near immediate and negatively visceral reaction to the ideas of both “sin” and “rebelling against God.” Let me treat the later one first. Our general cultural understanding of “rebellion” seems to be that of an attitude that is desirable for the purpose of achieving an unique individual identity. Rebellion seems to equal refusal to be something other than authentic. However, I would argue that this idea is a reversal of truth.

Rebellion, as understood in the biblical sense towards God, leads towards inauthenticity and a false knowledge of the self. God, being the omniscient Creator of all things, is the one who knows individuals as they truly are. He’s the only one who can be said to hold this knowledge perfectly. He has created each person with a unique identity. Becoming authentically oneself would actually relate to having a genuine relationship with the being who knows us and guides us perfectly towards becoming who He made us to be. This guidance towards authenticity cannot fully come from imperfect beings who often serve selfish purposes and desires in guiding others. There is always a catch with humans, but God has nothing to gain from us. His love is completely and uniquely unconditional. Therefore, rebellion against God is to do harm to oneself. Deanna focused more on the right of God, as Creator, to be recognized and worshiped for who He is. While I don’t disagree, one can become a bit pharisaical if not cautious with view (such as in failing to combine this right of God with an understanding of his perfect mercy and grace). A more robust understanding of our relationship to the Creator can help us understand how much damage we do to ourselves when we rebel against the One who knows us and loves us as we truly are.

Sin, as Deanna noted, has seemingly become a vulgar utterance to many people. Conversely, I have understood “sin” to mean that which goes against the perfectly omniscient and benevolent God’s design for the universe. There’s a moral quality to how God intended for us to interact with the creation and with Him: we were meant for good and to do good. When we choose to do what is not good, what is morally reverse of what God intended, there’s a biblical word to describe those attitudes, thoughts, and actions. That word is “sin.” I have sometimes equated sin with the word “evil,” because people don’t seem to have that immediate visceral reaction to the term “evil.” Perhaps, part of the problem lies in how people in the church have presented their teachings on “sin,” mixed with their own twisted and selfish pursuits causing pain and suffering in others. Rather, a teaching on sin should show (and model) how the liberation of Christ’s salvation frees us from being slaves to doing that which is morally evil; and can help us individually flourish as human beings.

[1] Erikson, Millard J., Christian Theology, Baker Academics, Grand Rapids, MI, 1998, pg. 582.
[2] Ibid
[3] Lewing, Jason, Systematic Theology, The Doctrine of Sin.

Minimal Facts Approach – Fact #4

Posted on March 27, 2007April 18, 2022 by confidentchristianity@gmail.com

This post is a continuation of a series of posts by Mary Jo on the Minimal Facts Approach.

Fact #4 – Jesus’ tomb was empty

1) The Jerusalem Factor
2) Enemy attestation
3) The testimony of women

The Jerusalem Factor

Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem. His empty tomb and his resurrection were proclaimed there first. If Jesus’ body had still been in the tomb, why did no one go get the body and drag it through the streets of the city to shut down the Christian movement that so angered the Jewish officials? This would not be an easy task but it would be worth getting rid of a blasphemous group of rebels. Furthermore, an occupied tomb would at least have dissuaded enough of the believers to merit some apologetic attention on this matter. However, no apologetic work can be found on an occupied tomb by any of the apostles or even second or third century Christian writers: Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Polycarp, Ignatius, and Origen (to name a few). There is a strong possibility they would have reasoned a defense for an empty tomb, as demonstrated in their reasoning of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection, if they had needed to do so. In addition, no work on the tomb from early Christian opposition can be found, such as Celsus, the second century Christian critic.[i]

Enemy Attestation

If testimony about an event or person is given by a source who does not sympathize with the person, message or cause that benefits from the affirmation, then there is reason to believe the testimony’s authenticity. The empty tomb can be found either implicitly or explicitly stated in the works of Josephus, Justin Martyr’s “Dialogue with Trypho,” Tertullian’s “On Spectacles,” and in the Jewish Toledoth (a derogatory version of Jesus’ life in Jewish tradition).

In the Jewish Toledoth:
“On the first day of the week his bold followers came to Queen Helene with the report that he who was slain was truly the Messiah and that he was not in his grave; he had ascended to heaven as he prophesied. Diligent search was made and he was not found in the grave where he had been buried. A gardener had taken him from the grave and had brought him into his garden and buried him in the sand over which the waters flowed into the garden.[ii]

In Justin Martyr’s Dialogue with Trypho:

“You have sent chosen and ordained men throughout all the world to proclaim that a godless and lawless heresy had sprung from one Jesus, a Galilaean deceiver, whom we crucified, but his disciples stole him by night from the tomb, where he was laid when unfastened from the cross, and now deceive men by asserting that he has risen from the dead and ascended to heaven.” [iii]

Even to imply that Jesus was raised or that his tomb was empty is certainly damaging to the case against the resurrection if reasoning from the offensive.

Testimony of Women

If I had an intention of creating a story to make myself (or my story) look good, I would most likely not include information that would be damaging or embarrassing to the credibility of my story. By that standard, it would be an odd invention to have the women as the first witnesses of the empty tomb. In the accounts of the empty tomb, the women are exactly that, the first witnesses, in all four gospel accounts. This report would most likely be damaging to the case for the empty tomb when taken in context of the first century socio-cultural norms. The testimony of a woman was not regarded as highly as the testimony of a man. Habermas and Licona quote a few Jewish writings on this matter:

Sooner let the words of the Law be burnt than delivered to women. (Talmud, Sotah 19a)
But let not the testimony of women be admitted, on account of the levity and boldness of their sex…..; since it is probable that they may not speak truth, either out of hope of gain, or fear of punishment. (Joshephus, Antiquities 4.8.15)

Any evidence which a woman [gives] is not valid (to offer), also they are not valid to offer. This is equivalent to saying that one who is Rabbinically accounted a robber is qualified to give the same evidence as a woman. (Talmud, Rosh Hashannah 1.8)[iv]
Why would the gospel writers include women as the number one witnesses to the empty tomb when it would behoove their cause to use men instead? The reason would be because they were reporting the truth; embarrassing as that may be.

These three factors contribute to the case for an empty tomb. Though the empty tomb is conceded by 75%[v] of scholars who write on the Resurrection (versus 95% or better on the other 3 facts), this is still an impressive number for the empty tomb case. Again, the empty tomb is a historically probable event that needs to be explained when discussing the evidences surrounding the Resurrection.

[i] Habermas, Gary. Mike Licona. The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus. Grand Rapids, Kregel Publications: 2004. pg. 71.

[ii] http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/humm/Topics/JewishJesus/toledoth.html. Accessed December 1, 2006.

[iii] The Second Apology of Justin for the Christians: Addressed to the Roman Senate. The Medieval Sourcebook, Fordham University. http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/justin-apology2.html. Accessed December 2, 2006.

[iv] Habermas. Licona. pg. 72. All three quotes were taken from The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus.

[v] Ibid. pg. 70.

The Deity of Jesus

Posted on March 21, 2007April 17, 2020 by confidentchristianity@gmail.com

A short time ago, a flyer was left on the front door of many houses. The flyer was an invitation for those who wanted to celebrate Jesus, the man who died. Of course, most churches celebrate Jesus resurrection around this time of year, however this flyer mentioned nothing of the resurrection, nor did it bring up anything pertaining to Christ the Risen Lord. Therefore, it was evident this group of people were not believers of the one true God. But who is the one true God? By far, the most excellent way to discern the lies of false religions is to know what the Bible communicates. So, what does the Scripture exclaim regarding Jesus and His deity?

Jesus as man and God has been a long disputed debate because it plays a central role in Christianity. For this reason, it is important to look at what Jesus proclaimed regarding His deity.

Although, Jesus did not make explicit claims to be God in the words “I am God”, “He did make claims that would be inappropriate if made by someone who is less than God.”[1] In Luke 12:8-9; 15:10, He spoke as if the angels and the kingdom were his. He also spoke as being the forgiver of sin, “Son, your sins are forgiven” (Mark 2:5). Jesus declared authority over the Sabbath, which was God’s establishment and sacred day. Consider these verses, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath” (Mark 2:27-28). “Jesus was clearly claiming the right to redefine the status of the Sabbath, a right that belongs only to someone virtually equal to God.”[2]

Of course, Jesus also put his word on equal ground to the Old Testament Scriptures. For example, “You have heard that the ancients were told, ‘You shall not commit murder’ and ‘Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court’. But I say to you… (Matt. 5:21-22). These are the Scriptures that were believed to be from God through His people. Therefore, “Jesus understood himself as equal with the Father and as possessing the right to do things that only God has the right to do”.[3]

Too, the gospel of John is noted for its references to the deity of Jesus. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). Here John is stating the divinity of Jesus and His eternal existence.

Lastly, examine the reason that the Jews wanted to kill Jesus. “Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say too you, before Abraham was born, I am.” Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Him”(John 8:58-59). “If the Jews attempted to stone him merely because they were angered by his unfavorable references to them, they would, in the eyes of the law, have been guilty of attempted murder.”[4] Thus, the opponents of Jesus interpreted Him as claiming to be God and this was considered blasphemy.

Therefore, many Jews sought Jesus and pursued Him, till finally He was hung on a cross to die. But His death led to the affirmation of His deity, which was the RESURRECTION. The message of Christ “was validated and actualized through His resurrection”.[5]

Finally, any view that would make Jesus simply a great man or great teacher gives an inadequate view. Instead, Jesus was fully human and fully God being one person with two natures.

So, the next time you see a flyer requesting you to celebrate a great man, then be aware that they may be calling you to celebrate false religions. The best discernment you will rest on will come through the Scriptures. Be a student of the Word and know what you believe, in order to share the truth with others.

Deanna

[1] Erickson, Millard J., Christian Theology, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids, Michigan 1998, p. 701.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Norris, Richard A. Jr., The Christological Controversy, Fortress Press, Philadelphia, 1980.

Minimal Facts Approach – Fact #3

Posted on March 17, 2007April 17, 2020 by confidentchristianity@gmail.com

This post is a continuation of a series of posts by Mary Jo on the Minimal Facts Approach.

Fact #3 – Jesus appeared to foes

Evidences:
1) Paul – Saul of Tarsus, a Pharisee
2) James – Jesus’ brother

– Both were unbelievers before the resurrection of Jesus
– Both became believers after an experience of the risen Jesus, following Jesus’ crucifixion
– Neither had motive to convert
– James: principle of embarrassment
– Paul: earliest N.T. writings, very reliable material

Paul was an unlikely convert to Christianity. He had been a known persecutor of Christianity and yet his conversion was based on what he perceived to be an experience of the risen Jesus. His conversion was based on primary evidence (what he experienced for himself), not secondary evidence (such as believing what others told him about Jesus). This testimony carries no little weight. Paul’s writings in 1 Corinthians 15 are considered some of the earliest writings from the New Testament and are therefore closest to the events themselves. Due to the early nature of these writings, scholars grant much of what Paul reports to be historically probable events. What can be shown from this material is 1) an ardent enemy of Christianity converted to Christianity based on an experience he believed to be the risen Jesus 2) the convert’s name was Paul and he recorded these experiences himself (a primary source) and 3) He testified to the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. Paul also wrote about another foe Jesus appeared[i] to, which was James, Jesus’ brother.

“Then he appeared[ii] to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared[iii] to me also, as to one abnormally born.”
1 Corinthians 15:7-8The information regarding James’ status as an “enemy” of Christ comes from the reports in the Gospels (Mark and John). This material would not be seen as favorable to the cause of Christ by including it in these books. In fact, Jesus’ own brother’s disbelief in him is rather embarrassing testimony to the faith. Later on, however, James was identified as the leader of the church in Jerusalem after the alleged resurrection of Jesus. He eventually was martyred for his commitment to the Christianity as reported by Josephus, Hegesippus, and Clement of Alexandria.[iv] Paul gives an account (above) of the appearance of Jesus to James as part of an early creedal statement in making a defense of the resurrection.

These two men, with nothing to gain materially or politically, with seemingly no logical reason to understand Jesus as a part of their monotheistic God, began to follow Jesus due to experiences they had of Him after His death and subsequent resurrection. This fact needs to be explained and accounted for, not with mere speculation, but with hypotheses supported by first century evidence.

“Skeptics must provide more than alternative theories to the Resurrection; they must provide first-century evidence for those theories.”[v]
– Dr. Gary Habermas
Mary Jo

[i] optanomai – “to look at, behold” from the KJV New Testament Greek Lexicon available from http://www.biblestudytools.net/Lexicons/Greek/grk.cgi?search=3700&version=kjv&type=str&submit=Find

[ii] Ibid.

[iii] Ibid.

[iv] The material of Hegesippus and Clement of Alexandria is preserved in the writings of Eusebius, which is where this material is found.

[v] Geisler, Norman. Frank Turek. I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist. Quote by Gary Habermas. Wheaton, Crossway Books: 2004. pg. 299.

Main Source:
Habermas, Gary. Mike Licona. The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus. Grand Rapids, Kregel Publications: 2004.

Oil and Water Do Not Mix

Posted on March 15, 2007April 14, 2020 by confidentchristianity@gmail.com

Like oil and water, so are Christianity and The Secret. Recently, Rhonda Byrne created what is now being called The Secret. “If you follow its philosophy, which is based on the “law of attraction,” you can create the life you want-whether that means getting out of debt, finding a more fulfilling job or even falling in love.”[1] The philosophy suggests that “everything that happens to you -good or bad- you attract to yourself.”[2] Ultimately, it is saying that all of us can control our own destinies from our power within. “The Secret is a New Age version of the prosperity gospel.”[3]

Sadly, many advocates are placing The Secret, within the Christian faith, however there is a vast difference between the two. Christianity, is not man centered it is God centered, it is not about wealth on earth, but treasures in heaven and it is not about happiness it is about holiness.

The Secret, implies that your desires are going to make your life happy and peaceful and this can be obtained through positive thinking. The truth is that mans problem in life is sin, not his inability to think positively. Christianity states “Cursed is the man who trusts in mankind and makes flesh his strength and whose heart turns away from the Lord” and “the heart is more deceitful than all else and is desperately sick’ who can understand it: I, the Lord search the heart (Jeremiah. 17:9).” It is only through Christ who has sent the Holy Spirit to guide his people that believers can enjoy wisdom, peace and love, but it does not come without trials and tribulation and it does not promise wealth.

Christianity can define success as knowing God through Jesus Christ. “What aim should we set ourselves in life: To know God”[4] not get rich or fulfill every pleasure of self. Jesus said “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in or steal; for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.” This does not mean that you will not have blessings in your life, however it does mean that the riches of this life are fleeting and far from the goal that God desires for His people.

God desires His people to be holy in order that we may glorify Him. Many of His disciples have been poor or martyred in life and yet they did not pray for wealth or a girlfriend. Were they unable to think positive enough to attract good things? No, Jesus said, “These things I have spoken to you, so that in Me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation, but take courage; I have overcome the world” (John 16:33). James tells us to count it all joy when we face trials because it is testing our faith and developing maturity.

Self fulfillment, wealth and happiness are just the surface areas of great importance regarding the differences in The Secret and Christianity. We have not even touched on the fact that The Secret rests on the foundation of the Gnostic gospels mixed in with Christianity, as well as the issues of taking Scripture entirely out of context. At any rate, this philosophy is a lie and must be exposed by the truth of the Bible.

“I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned (through the Bible). Keep away from them. For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people. Everyone has heard about your obedience, so I am full of joy over you; but I want you to be wise about what is good, and innocent about what is evil” (Romans 16:17-19).

Deanna

[1]http://www.oprah.com/tows/pastshows/200702/tows_past_20070208.jhtml
[2] Ibid
[3] Swan, James, www.aomin.org
[4] J. I. Packer, Knowing God, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1993.

“The Tomb of Jesus” and the Resurrection

Posted on March 10, 2007April 14, 2020 by confidentchristianity@gmail.com

From the Discovery Channel “Tomb of Jesus” webpage:

“Ascension: It is also a matter of Christian faith that after his resurrection, Jesus ascended to heaven. Some Christians believe that this was a spiritual ascension, i.e., his mortal remains were left behind. Other Christians believe that he ascended with his body to heaven. If Jesus’ mortal remains have been found, this would contradict the idea of a physical ascension but not the idea of a spiritual ascension. The latter is consistent with Christian theology.”

The whole article is no longer available although this summary from wikipedia is helpful.

I will focus on the statement, “the latter is consistent with Christian theology.” This statement is not consistent with the writings of Paul in 1 Corinthians 15 and therefore not acceptable within orthodox Christianity. In selections from 1 Corinthians 15: 35-50 we read:

“But someone will ask, ‘How are the dead raised? With what kind of body (Greek word “soma”) do they come?’ You foolish man! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. And what you sow is not the body (soma) which is to be, but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or some grain. But God gives it a body as he has chosen, and to each kind of seed its own body (soma).”

Picking back up in verse 42: “So it is with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable, what is raised is imperishable. . . . It is sown a physical body (soma), it is raised a spiritual (Greek word “pneumatikos”) body (soma). . . . I tell you this, brethren, flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.”

The word “body” in the Greek is “soma,” which refers to a physical object (the body of both men or animals and that which casts a shadow as distinguished from the shadow itself). The word “spiritual” in the Greek is “pneumatikos” which refers to the human spirit or rational soul.

Spiritual Body – In verse 44, the scripture says “it [the body] is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.” But what does this mean? The type of body is “relating to the human spirit, or rational soul, as part of a man which is akin to God” that is also “the body of both men and animals or that which casts a shadow.” Soma pneumatikos.

The doctrine of bodily resurrection is vital to the Christian faith. If God did not raise Jesus from the dead, giving His stamp of approval on Jesus’ message, then Christianity is false. Also, according to Christian theology, the physical resurrection of Christ was a victory over death and hope for a new life to come. Without a bodily resurrection, Christ has no victory over death. Christians are “found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead,” (1 Corinthians 15:15) and if Christ has not been raised, our beliefs are futile and we are still dead in our sins. (15:17)

You may access the Greek word definitions at www.biblestudytools.net/Lexicons/Greek/grk.cgi?search=4983&version=nas&type=str&submit=Find using a Greek Lexicon. “Body” is Strong’s number 4983 and “spiritual” is Strong’s number 4152.

Some other good sources:
http://www.serioustimes.com/ James Emery White’s website

“The Jesus Dynasty: How to explain away the New Testament” by Darrell Bock
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2006/mayweb-only/120-32.0.html