How can we know if we have a soul? How do we know souls exist? First it takes accepting that logic can be used to deduce truth. If you don’t believe truth exists or don’t believe it is possible to come to know truth; that is for a different argument. This article will present 4 arguments for the existence of a soul that which is separate from the physical body.
Continue reading
This is a question for some people that is a genuine concern. For others it is an attempt to belittle or patronize a religion. The question it self is a valid question for any and all documents that claim to be the source of unchanged universal objective divine truth.
Has the teachings and documents evolved and morphed into what we have today?
The Bible describes historic events. These events have also been recorded by outside sources as well. Then, archeology has been found from these events. When comparing extrabiblical sources and discovered archeological evidences, we see that the Old and New Testaments are historically accurate and true. The next question is:
Was this information added later?
The Bible is a collection of hand written documents. These documents that we currently have range in age, Applying this question to the Old Testament we see that we have documents from 200 BC to 1500 AD. By comparing the earliest copy of Isaiah (200 BC), with the latest copy of Isaiah (1,500 AD) we can see if information was later added. It has not changed!
Dead Sea Scroll of Isaiah 200 BC
The Septuagint copy of Isaiah 100 BC
This is where those with a close minded bias will distort the truth against The Bible. There are differences, not changes. Language and spelling. That is different. Aramaic and Hebrew to Greek to Latin to English. Does that mean the information has changed? Not at all. When Isaiah is read in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, English, French, Spanish… what ever language, the only thing that has changed is the spelling, punctuation, and language. The message and information is the same. This is proven by comparing The Biblical documents.
What about the New Testament?
Exactly same concept. We have fragments and manuscripts ranging in age from 1st century all the way to the 16th century. We can compare the old manuscripts with later manuscripts and see what is the same and what is later added in word usage and sentence structure.
This is were those who are close minded and bias against The Bible will again distort truth in the same way. Because the spelling of Honor was changed from Honour, or the word “The” is added for improved English sentence structure does not mean the information has changed. For example
It is written in 7 different languages. At the core of each language there is a message that is the same for all languages. The message is that the close minded person does not have honor. A change in spelling (honor and honour) and symbol representation of an idea (honneur and чести) does not change the idea. With that said, we can successfully compare Greek manuscripts with Latin manuscripts. And when this is done, we see that the ideas presented have not changed.
P52. Fragment of The Gospel of John 100 AD
The Right side is John 18:31-33, The left side is John 18:37-38
P90. Fragment of The Gospel of John. 150 AD. It records John 18:36 – 19:7.
P66. Manuscript of The Gospel of John. 200 AD.
Compare and put together all the fragments of The Gospel of John and we can see that it was not changed. Eye witnesses of the event could have still been alive at the time P52 was written. Children and grand children would be alive of the eye witnesses who would have been reading these documents and remembering what they parents and grandparents (the apostles, disciples of the apostles, and eye witnesses) would tell them. There have been thousands of fragments and manuscripts discovered. To believe that the bible has changed and is not the same message as the original writings is willing ignorance. To say that the bible has changed and is not the same message as the original writings is maliciously lie to people. Also read Have You Been Deceived by The World? Because The Bible is proven reliable and has been reliably passed on to us; knowing that the message contained in it, is the same message, what are you going to do about it?
It is true that we may not currently have the original writings of the Prophets and Apostles BUT when researching the accounts from the early church teachers we can say that there exists a real possibility that we actual may have, if not the originals, first or second generation copies of the originals. That’s a big deal. But how can we know that this possibility exists?
Clement of Rome, writing between 70 AD to 90AD:
let us come to the most recent spiritual heroes. Let us take the noble examples furnished in our own generation…Let us set before our eyes the illustrious apostles. Peter…Paul also.(Chapter V)
“The apostles have preached the Gospel to us fromthe Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ [has done so] from God. Christ therefore was sent forth by God, and the apostles by Christ. Both these appointments, then, were made in an orderly way, according to the will of God. Having therefore received their orders, and being fully assured by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, and established in the word of God, with full assurance of the Holy Ghost”
“Take up the epistle of the blessed Apostle Paul. What did he write to you at the time when the Gospel first began to be preached? Truly, under the inspiration of the Spirit, he wrote to you concerning himself, and Cephas, and Apollos” (Chapter XLVII)
According to Clement of Rome, the church of Corinth still had Paul’s letters. Here we can establish that up to 90AD Paul’s original letters still existed. Clement, in his letter, also quotes from the synoptic gospels and a majority of Paul’s letters. There is no reason not to conclude that the originals did not exist at this point.
Ignatius lived from 35AD to around 108AD. In his writing, he gives a factual gospel presentation which agrees with the known writings of the Apostles (IGNATIUS, the gospel, Chapter IX.)
Irenaeus lived from 130AD to around 202AD. In his well preserved writings he records some key information about the writings of the Apostles.
“who may wish to see the truth, to contemplate clearly the tradition of the apostles manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in a position to reckon up those who were by the apostles instituted bishops in the Churches, and [to demonstrate] the succession of these men to our own times…by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops…that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere…The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone [in this], for there were many still remaining who had received instructions from the apostles…From this document, whosoever chooses to do so, may learn that He, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, was preached by the Churches, and may also understand the apostolical tradition of the Church, since this Epistle is of older date than these men who are now propagating falsehood…the ecclesiastical tradition from the apostles, and the preaching of the truth, have come down to us. And this is most abundant proof that there is one and the same vivifying faith, which has been preserved in the Church from the apostles until now, and handed down in truth… Polycarp also was not only instructed by apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna, whom I also saw in my early youth, for he tarried [on earth] a very long time, and, when a very old man, gloriously and most nobly suffering martyrdom…There are also those who heard from him that John, the disciple of the Lord…Then, again, the Church in Ephesus, founded by Paul, and having John remaining among them permanently until the times of Trajan, is a true witness of the tradition of the apostles. (Chapter III)
“Since, therefore, the tradition from the apostles does thus exist in the Church, and is permanent among us, let us revert to the Scriptural proof furnished by those apostles who did also write the Gospel, in which they recorded the doctrine regarding God, pointing out that our Lord Jesus Christ is the truth” (IRENÆUS, Against Heresies: Book III, Chapter V.)
The Trinity and The Gospel: “…has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: [She believes] in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensationsof God” (Chapter X)
“the prophets and the apostles confessing the Father and the Son; but naming no other as God, and confessing no other as Lord: and the Lord Himself handing down to His disciples, that He, the Father, is the only God and Lord, who alone is God and ruler of all; —it is incumbent on us to follow, if we are their disciples indeed, their testimonies to this effect. For Matthew the apostle…Matthew again says, and Luke likewise…John, the disciple of the Lord, preaches this faith, and seeks, by the proclamation of the Gospel…Luke also, the follower and disciple of the apostles, referring…Wherefore also Mark, the interpreter and follower of Peter, does thus commence his Gospel narrative…Also, towards the conclusion of his Gospel, Mark says…(Chapter X, Chapter XI)
“…he says, in the Epistle to the Colossians: “Luke, the beloved physician, greets you.” But surely if Luke, who always preached in company with Paul, and is called by him “the beloved,” and with him performed the work of an evangelist, and was entrusted to hand down to us a Gospel, learned nothing different from him (Paul), as has been pointed out from his words”(Chapter XIV)
“For the apostles, since they are of more ancient date than all these [heretics], agree with this aforesaid translation; and the translation harmonizes with the tradition of the apostles. For Peter, and John, and Matthew, and Paul, and the rest successively, as well as their followers, did set forth all prophetical [announcements], just as the interpretation of the elders contains them.” (The Apostles quoting from the XXL) (Chapter XXI)
“About Marcion: he mutilates the Gospel which is according to Luke, removing all that is written respecting the generation of the Lord, and setting aside a great deal of the teaching of the Lord, in which the Lord is recorded as most dearly confessing that the Maker of this universe is His Father. He likewise persuaded his disciples that he himself was more worthy of credit than are those apostles who have handed down the Gospel to us, furnishing them not with the Gospel, but merely a fragment of it” (Chapter XXVII)
Present miracles and witnesses: “He is the only Son of God. Wherefore, also, those who are in truth His disciples, receiving grace from Him, do in His name perform [miracles], so as to promote the welfare of other men, according to the gift which each one has received from Him. For some do certainly and truly drive out devils, so that those who have thus been cleansed from evil spirits frequently both believe [in Christ], and join themselves to the Church. Others have foreknowledge of things to come: they see visions, and utter prophetic expressions. Others still, heal the sick by laying their hands upon them, and they are made whole. Yea, moreover, as I have said, the dead even have been raised up, and remained among us for many years.” (Chapter XXXII)
Now, that the preaching of the apostles, the authoritative teaching of the Lord, the announcements of the prophets, the dictated utterances of the apostles (Chapter XXXV)
There is a number of important statements by Irenaeus here. Not only does he establish a continuance of the Apostles teachings down to him but also a continuance of witnesses. He points out that writings from the Apostles did exist which Marcion copies and mutilates. And that the Apostles writings have been passed down and entrusted to them. Again, no indication that their original writings were lost at this point in history.
Tertullian, 160AD to 220AD
“Come now, you who would indulge a better curiosity, if you would apply it to the business of your salvation, run over [to] the apostolic churches, in which the very thrones of the apostles are still pre-eminent in their places, in which their own authentic writings are read, uttering the voice and representing the face of each of them severally” (De Praescriptione Haereticorum, Chapter 36; Schaff’s translation.)
Tertullian goes on to discuss each of these ‘authentic writings’ as being found in the very churches to which they were written. He mentions Corinth, Philippi, Thessalonica, Ephesus, and Rome. Around the same time as Irenaeus, he specifically states that their actual original writings still existed.
The Muratorian fragment is a copy of perhaps the oldest known list of most of the books of the New Testament. It was written around 170AD or a little later. Peter 1 and 2 and James are not mentioned in the fragment.
Origen, 184AD to 253AD
Eusebius (324AD) quotes Qrigen in his record of known Apostolic writings which closely resembles the collection of writings we have today.
Peter, Bishop of Alexandria, d 311 AD. In fragment 1, he speaks of the original of the Gospel of John as still existing in his day:
“the copy itself that was written by the hand of the evangelist, which, by the divine grace, has been preserved in the most holy church of Ephesus, and is there adored by the faithful.”
Here we are, about 300AD and in the 4th century with the original writings from the Apostles still in existence. At the time of the First Council of Nicaea in 325AD it is probable they had degraded originals or even first generation copies of the actual originals. Finally in 367AD Athanasius is the first person to identify the same 27 books of the New Testament that are in use today.
All this does not take into consideration the actual manuscripts and fragments we have currently.
The earliest manuscripts of John range from 90AD to 250AD. Now think about that. Above we have shown the probability of an original, hand written by John himself, possibly existing up to 311AD. That means there is a chance that any one of the earliest manuscripts we have of John now, could very well be an original. If not an original, it could be the actual first generation copy.
Craig Evans of Acadia University researched how long manuscripts would have lasted in the ancient world, and whether that might provide some guidance of how long the original might have lasted–and therefore how long they would have been copied. Evans brings together evidence to suggest that literary manuscripts in the ancient world would last hundreds of years, on average. Appealing to the recent study of G.W. Houston, he argues that manuscripts could last anywhere from 75 to 500 years, with the average being about 150 years.
This also supports the probability of having in our possession an actual original or first generation copy. Of course there is no way to know for sure but one thing is sure; we can NOT say for sure that we don’t have an original or the earliest copy. The possibility exists that we do. This also makes it very hard to say that we have a corrupted version of the original now. Since the originals and quotes from the originals lasted so long in the early church history we can with certainty through textual criticism know what the originals actual taught. Given the vast amount of early manuscripts and early quotes from church fathers, we CAN reliably say that we DO know what the Apostles actually taught from Jesus.
Now lets be clear, no scholar believes we have the actual originals. That would be impossible to validate. Nor is this article making the case that we DO, because, again, we would have to foolproof verifiable way of knowing for sure. What this article IS pointing out is the POSSIBILITY and how ever slight probability of 2 things: (1) The original hand written documents of the Apostles themselves COULD have survived up to the 4th century and (2) The current fragments and manuscripts we have discovered COULD be them or 1st or 2nd generation copies of the originals. This also shows that a statement that the originals were lost early on in its history and the copies were corrupted early is equally unverifiable given the evidences above. Yes there are variants between the earliest manuscripts but that does not disprove that one of the earliest manuscripts is not an original, 1st or 2nd generation copy still. Why make this point?
Bias secular scholars are quick to point out that they believe we don’t know exactly what the originals stated, yet, their claim is equally unverifiable. They avoid the possibility, how ever slight, that we do know and can know what the originals actual stated.
If the Disciples of the Apostles and their Disciples after them did retain original copies, read, and quoted from them, then we can know what the originals stated from their quotes alone; such as the case with Clement of Rome who wrote and quoted from documents he read only 30 years after the Apostles lived and within the same time that John wrote is gospel. Being so close to the Apostles themselves, why would he not have Paul and Peter’s writings? Even Ignatius or Papias for that matter. Irenaeus read documents and wrote around the same time, if not a little after, John wrote his gospel too. Tertullian, only 70 or so years after John penned his gospel even states he knew that the originals still existed. How would he know this? The probability exists that he himself read them. In fact, just from the early church fathers quotes alone, we can construct the entire New Testament except for just 11 verses.
J. Warner Wallace is a Cold-Case Detective, a Christian Case Maker, and the author of Cold-Case Christianity and God’s Crime Scene. He states the following: “Sir David Dalrymple (1726 – 1792AD) a Scottish judge and historian who wrote three volumes on early Christian Church history called, “Remains of Christian Antiquity”. Dalrymple was an expert in the writings of the early Church. It’s alleged that after careful examination of the writings of the Fathers he wrote, “…as I possessed all the existing works of the Fathers of the second and third centuries, I commenced to search, and up to this time I have found the entire New Testament, except eleven verses.”…Early Church Fathers sat at the feet of the apostles and learned from the apostolic eyewitness accounts. These secondary leaders then wrote letters and documents of their own, repeating the claims of their teachers. I focused on the work of Ignatius, Polycarp and Clement and isolated the content of their non-canonical writings to the early Church…It turns out that the Early Church Fathers did, in fact, quote the scripture as it was handed down to them. But even if we can’t reconstruct the entire New Testament (save 11 verses) as Dalrymple is often quoted to have said, the Early Church Fathers did confirm enough of the New Testament claims to validate and authenticate the writings of the apostles. From the non-canonical works of Ignatius and Polycarp (students of John) and the non-canonical work of Clement (a student of Paul) we can determine the following:
Jesus was Predicted by the Old Testament as Described in the New Testament
Jesus is Divine as Described in the New Testament
Jesus Taught His Disciples as Described in the New Testament
Jesus Worked Miracles as Described in the New Testament
Jesus was Born of a Virgin as Described in the New Testament
Jesus Lived, Ministered, Was Crucified and Died as Described in the New Testament
Jesus Rose from the Dead and Demonstrated His Deity as Described in the New TestamentEven if we can’t reconstruct the entire New Testament (save 11 verses) as claimed in the citation of Dalrymple’s work, we really don’t need to. The early disciples of the apostles confirm the content of the apostolic teaching. If skeptics are looking for an early version of Jesus that is less divine, less miraculous and less supernatural, they aren’t going to find it in the writings of the first generation that followed the apostles. Instead, they’re going to find the very same Jesus that you and I know from the writings of the New Testament.” (http://coldcasechristianity.com/2016/can-we-construct-the-entire-new-testament-from-the-writings-of-the-church-fathers/). This is from the early church fathers alone. Not including the earliest manuscripts we have today. The possibility that they quoted from the original documents exists and is actually plausible.
UPDATE* To be clear, the quote from Sir David Dalrymple was a verbal statement to a Dr. Walter Buchanan, which was then told to Rev. John Campbell years down the road which was later published in his memoir by Robert Philip. The specific 11 verses said to have not been found by Sir David Dalrymple were not identified either.
People have probably heard a preacher on the side of the road with a mega phone preaching. Some people stop in listen while others carry on shaking their head. In modern times, most feel that it is not the best approach to evangelism. Some will go as far to say that it is too judgemental and pushes people away from God. But is that true? Is street preaching unbiblical, unnecessary, and harmful? First, we must always look to God’s word and see what his faithful servants have done in the various cultures.
First we can look at Noah. There was no church building to preach in. No temple to preach at. Just him and the world. Peter describes Noah as a preacher or Herold of righteousness (2 Peter 2:5). Of course the world listened and laughed maybe even felt judged and offended as he told them that God was going to judge the world due to their unrighteousness. Next we can look at Jonah. He literally walked down the streets of the large city proclaiming that the city will be overthrown if they don’t repent (Jonah 3:1-5). Then we can look at John The Baptist. He came out of the wilderness open air preaching in public (Matthew 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3). Jesus himself preached in public on a hill (Matthew 5-7). Apollos, a disciple of Jesus, explicitly preached in public (Acts 18:27-28). Paul himself didn’t always preach in churches or Jewish temples (Acts 17:22-34) even preached in the market place (Acts 17:17). Given these biblical accounts we can now dive into the important questions:
Is Street / Open Air Preaching Wrong?
Clearly the answer is NO. Jesus did it. Jonah was told by God to do it. The Apostles, lead by the Spirit, did it. In different cultures throughout history. The type of culture or time period does not exclude street preaching.
Is there a best ‘time and place’ to do it?
Again, looking at the biblical accounts, the time and place is everywhere, at all times, with who ever is willing to listen! But this leads to the next question.
Doesn’t it drive away people from the church?
This is a failed excuse by those who don’t want to do it or who feel sympathetic to the sin of the world. Those who feel that people are driven away from being saved by preachers fail to understand or deny God’s Absolute Sovereignty. A quick study of John chapter 6 should answer this false dilemma: John 6:26-40
26 Jesus answered them and said, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled. 27 Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you, for on Him the Father, God, has set His seal.” 28 Therefore they said to Him, “What shall we do, so that we may work the works of God?” 29 Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.” 30 So they said to Him, “What then do You do for a sign, so that we may see, and believe You? What work do You perform? 31 Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, ‘He gave them bread out of heaven to eat.’” 32 Jesus then said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread out of heaven, but it is My Father who gives you the true bread out of heaven. 33 For the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven, and gives life to the world.” 34 Then they said to Him, “Lord, always give us this bread.” 35 Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst. 36 But I said to you that you have seen Me, and yet do not believe. 37 All that the Father gives Me WIIL come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out. 38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 39 This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. 40 For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.”
So who WILL come to Jesus? ALL that the Father HAS GIVEN. How many will be lost? NONE. How many of them who God has given to Jesus come? ALL. But will some of them not come? NO. ALL WILL. Re-read John 6:26-40 and let it sink in.
So how many people will street preachers turn away who have been given to Jesus? NONE. Street Preaching may drive away people, but not the ones God has called. SIN has already driven away those who are ‘driven away’ by street preachers. The lost are still lost, BUT now they have ZERO excuse for sure make God’s judgement on them that much justified.
People that claim to have been driven away from the Church due to ‘offensive’ street preachers clearly were not searching for Jesus but validation from man. Some one that gets extremely offended, yet, has been given to Jesus, WILL, still, come to Jesus eventually. Period. That moment when they were offended by being called a sinner may stick with them and the Holy Spirit may break down the wall in their heart because of it. OR like Pharaoh, God may use that moment to harden their heart further. Who knows, but the result of the street preaching is UP TO GOD. Regardless, EVERYONE who has been GIVEN to Jesus WILL come, no matter how offended they think they are by street preachers.
Are there Good and Bad ways to street preach?
Of course! There is never a moment where we are not to be loving. Even during street preaching and dealing with hecklers, agitators, and aggressively profane people. But LOVE is also speaking the TRUTH. Because Jesus IS TRUTH. Using profanity and personally attacking people is not the way to go about proclaiming the truth and love of Jesus. But don’t forget, the truth of Jesus is offensive to the world. People WILL get offended. Period. Matthew 10:34-36, 15:19-20:
34 “Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; 36 and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household.
19 If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you. 20 Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A slave is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you;
Pointing fingers at people telling them God hates them does NOT honor or bring glory to God. BUT telling them that they are lost and in need of a savior does. One focuses on sin, of which we are all sinners, but the other focuses on Jesus. One hypocritically judges, while the other rightly judges. One points down to man the other points up to Christ Jesus. It is true however that ALL those who have been given to Jesus WILL come, even if the preacher is unloving in his approach BUT the preachers themselves are still held to a standard that which is loving God and their neighbor. When street preaching we must keep Jesus’ words in Luke 6:27-28 in mind: “27 “But I say to you who hear, love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.“
Some preachers were even maliciously bashing Paul behind his back (Philippians 1:17-18). These guys were trying to belittle Paul and assert themselves as authority. Their preaching was out of selfish ambitions. YET Paul rejoices! Why? Because no matter the motives of the preachers, Christ is still proclaimed. Faith comes by hearing (Romans 10:17) and people are still hearing the gospel despite the short comings of the preachers. God is GOD despite the imperfect preachers.
Why then do people get so offended?
John 3:19-21:
19 This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. 20 For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. 21 But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.”
John 3:18:
“He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already…”
They are hateful and offended because they feel judged. This is true, they and the whole world have been judged. Judged and convicted as sinners before a holy and righteous God. Yet, they love their sin more than God’s righteousness. Thus, they hate the messengers. Nothing new. Genesis 19:9 quotes the people of Sodom rejecting Lot’s plea for them to stop their sin “they said, “This one came in as an alien, and already he is acting like a judge; now we will treat you worse than them.”. That’s just like saying “don’t judge me”.
What is the purpose of Street / Open Air Preaching?
This is the most effective way to reach people who refuse to check out a church, who don’t want to or thinking googling anything about gospel and even reaching people who are privately searching but don’t know where to start. There are thousands of reasons why speaking publicly in a public place and reach people who can not normally be reached. The ultimate goal is to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ for all the world to hear. This sparks public conversation and those who hear take it home with them and tell their friends what they heard and saw. Which may lead the friend to do some research. The results are NOT up to the eloquence of the speaker or anything about the preacher himself. The Holy Spirit is the one who works in the heart of the person who hears the message. Regardless of the results, the preacher is called to be faithful to the Lord and proclaim the Lord’s good news.
If you have any questions or comments about this article please contact us or join our discussion forms
Gnosticism is a divers system of spiritual beliefs that incorporated pagan, Greek, and Christian ideals to formulate its own system. Each Gnostic teacher added or changed the Gnostic beliefs to fit their own individualized ideals. The first mentions of some of these Gnostic ideals were developed from the 2nd to 4th century AD. The Church exposed these ideals as unorthodox and unchristian but sadly, even today, we can still see some of the ideals being taught. There are a few primary teachers that developed ideals that are familiar still today: Marcion of Sinope, Valentinus, Theodotus of Byzantium, Arius of Alexandar, Pelagiu, Cerinthus, Menander, Sabellius, Basilides, and Montanus. There are other early Gnostic teachers but their forms of Gnosticism are far more separated from orthodoxy Christianity. These same teachings influence modern religions and movements such as the Word of Faith movement, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormonism, and Islam.
The Gnostic Doctrine of God
The Gnostic Doctrine of Jesus
The Gnostic Doctrine of The Bible
The Church exposing Gnosticism
As exposed above, these modern teachings are not new. Despite the modern continuation of Gnostic teachings, the church addressed and exposed these teachings as heresy a long time ago. You can read the early writings of the church teachers bellow at: https://www.ccel.org/fathers.html.
Despite the centuries of exposing Gnostic ideals as heresy and unorthodox Christianity, modern charismatic evangelical Christian teachers fail to learn what has been exposed and addressed throughout church history. Instead, through ignorance or willful selfishness, they continue to perpetuate heresy under the false claim of Christianity that corrupts essential truths that impact the salvation of their followers.
Read about the Word of Faith movement | Are There Apostles Today? | When An Angel Teaches A Different Gospel | Muhammad, a Prophet of God? | Jesus and Islam | Commonalities of Cults | Is The Watchtower organization of God? | Who Is Jesus Really? | Is God Perfect? Does God Make Mistakes?
If you have any questions or comments about this article please contact us or join our discussion forms
The Apostle John is an extremely important figure when it comes to our knowledge about what Jesus did and taught. He is also extremely important in early church history. He was the son of Zebedee and Salome. His brother was James, who was also one of the Twelve Apostles. He was ready for anything did the most he could out of his love for Christ.
John Coming To Faith
“Going on from there He saw two other brothers, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in the boat with Zebedee their father, mending their nets; and He called them.” (Matthew 4:21). Notice it is Jesus that called John and not the other way around.
John’s Witness of Jesus
John was named as one of the original 12 Apostles (Matthew 10:2). He and his older brother James were nicknamed “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17). The nickname reflected their readiness for anything. When things went down, John was ready. Jesus attempted to find accommodations for the night in one place but was met with opposition from the villagers, simply because His destination was Jerusalem—a result of Jew-Samaritan prejudice. “When the disciples James and John saw this, they asked, ‘Lord, do you want us to call fire down from heaven to destroy them?’” (Luke 9:54). Jesus rebuked the brothers, and they all went to another village. John was ready to throw down, but Jesus was more merciful than John.
John was part of the most inner circle of Jesus where he was granted the opportunity to see some great events. The only witnesses of the raising of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37), of the Transfiguration (Matthew 17:1), and of the Agony in Gethsemani (Matthew 26:37). Jesus specifically only allowed them to witnesses such events (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51). Jesus chose him for specific tasks as well (Luke 22:8)
Not only was he part of the 12 and in the most inner circle, he, himself, was very close to Jesus
(John 13:23, 21:20). He was so close to Jesus in fact, that at the cross, Jesus chose him to be the guardian of His mother, Mary (John 19:25-26).
Having this closeness to Jesus himself allowed for him to inquire in greater detail the teachings of Jesus and the mind of God. (Mark 9:38, 10:35, 13:3)
John and The Crucifixion
John was present at the scene of the Crucifixion. Close enough where Jesus spoke to him while hanging on the cross (John 19:25-26). Therefore he was an eye witness the moment Jesus let up his spirit and physically died on the cross.
John and The Resurrection
Because of his closeness to Jesus, once Mary discovered the empty tomb, she came and told the unofficial leader of the group, Peter, AND John. (John 20:2). It was then John who first recognized the resurrected Jesus (John 21:7). He was a witness of and with the risen Jesus being taught until Jesus’ ascension (Acts 1:2-4).
John and The Accession
John, and the remaining 10 other Apostles were with Jesus when he ascended into heaven (Acts 1:6-11). With his own eyes, he saw Jesus literally ascend to heaven.
John’s Ministry Work
This drew the attention of those who disbelieved in Jesus. John was put in Jail for proclaiming the resurrection of Jesus (Acts 4:1-3, 13).
John then traveled to Samaria (Acts 8:14). But he made sure that all the people of Israel had heard the gospel of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:24). John verified the Apostle Paul and agreed with the need for the gentiles to hear the gospel of Jesus Christ at the Council of Jerusalem around 51AD (Galatians 2:9). John, with the other Apostles, remained about twelve years in this first ministry field, until the persecution of Herod Agrippa I led to the scattering of the Apostles through the various provinces of the Roman Empire (Acts 12:1-17). When Paul came again to Jerusalem after the second and after the third journey (Acts 18:22; 21:17) he seems no longer to have met John there. Some draw the conclusion from this that John left Palestine between the years 52 and 55 AD.
It seems that John then traveled to Ephesus, got arrested, taken to Rome, attempted to be executed but the execution failed, he was then banished to Patmos. Once the Roman Emperor died, he then traveled back to Ephesus where he remained until his death.
According to Tertullian’s testimony (De praescript., xxxvi), John had been thrown into a cauldron of boiling oil before the Porta Latina at Rome without suffering injury. From there he would have been bannished to Patmos.
Early tradition says that John was banished to Patmos by the Roman authorities. This tradition is credible because banishment was a common punishment used during the Imperial period for a number of offenses. Among such offenses were the practices of magic and astrology. Prophecy was viewed by the Romans as belonging to the same category, whether Pagan, Jewish, or Christian. Prophecy with political implications, like that expressed by John in the book of Revelation, would have been perceived as a threat to Roman political power and order. [not to mention not being injured by being thrown into a cauldron of boiling oil would have been viewed as magic]. Three of the islands in the Sporades were places where political offenders were banished. (Pliny, Natural History 4.69–70; Tacitus, Annals 4.30). Eusebius (Church History III.13.1) and others we are obliged to place the Apostle’s banishment to Patmos in the reign of the Emperor Domitian (81-96AD). After Domitian’s death the Apostle returned to Ephesus during the reign of Trajan. In “Dialogue with Tryphon” (Chapter 81) Justin Martyr refers to “John, one of the Apostles of Christ” as a witness who had lived “with us”, that is, at Ephesus. Irenæus speaks in very many places of the Apostle John and his residence in Asia and expressly declares that he wrote his Gospel at Ephesus (Against Heresies III.1.1), and that he had lived there until the reign of Trajan (loc. cit., II, xxii, 5). God spared John from Roman execution so that he would write his letters and ultimately Revelations.
Different Johns?
Some modern scholars argue that there are many different Johns that wrote the various letters attributed to John The Apostle. Eusebius states “It is said that in this persecution the apostle and evangelist John, who was still alive, was condemned to dwell on the island of Patmos in consequence of his testimony to the divine word.” Here Eusebius associates the titles of apostle and evangelist to one John. Then Eusebius then states “It was at this time that the apostle John returned from his banishment in the island and took up his abode at Ephesus, according to an ancient Christian tradition.” So there is no confusion that Eusebius stated that the evangelist John as the same John that was banished and returned to Ephesus. In Chapter 3, he again states “At that time the apostle and evangelist John, the one whom Jesus loved, was still living in Asia, and governing the churches of that region, having returned after the death of Domitian from his exile on the island.” This time, also associating the comment “one whom Jesus loved” with John The Evangelist. Irenæus and Clement of Alexandria. stated (quoted by Eusebius) “The former in the second book of his work Against Heresies, writes as follows: And all the elders that associated with John the disciple of the Lord in Asia bear witness that John delivered it to them. For he remained among them until the time of Trajan…
And in the third book of the same work he attests the same thing in the following words: But the church in Ephesus also, which was founded by Paul, and where John remained until the time of Trajan, is a faithful witness of the apostolic tradition.
Some modern scholars try to make the claim that Revelations or Apocalypse of John was written by a different John. But Irenaeus states this: “Such, then, being the state of the case, and this number being found in all the most approved and ancient copies of the Apocalypse, and those men who saw John face to face bearing their testimony to it” (Chapter XXX). Eusebius states: “After this must be reckoned the epistles of Paul; next in order the extant former epistle of John, and likewise the epistle of Peter, must be maintained. After them is to be placed, if it really seem proper, the Apocalypse of John, concerning which we shall give the different opinions at the proper time. These then belong among the accepted writings.” He states that the Apocalypse of John belongs with all the accepted writings from the Apostles. Secondly, notice, the author is named along with The Apostle Peter. Tertullian validates The Apocalypse of John as authoritative as he uses it to as proof (Book III).
John The Apostle and John The Evangelist are the same person but titles given to the different phases of witness. After being an Apostle of Jesus Christ, he then became an evangelist to all the world about what he had experienced and learned as an Apostle. The different title does not denote a different person. John of Patmos clearly just signifies the location in the discussion about John. Again, does not automatically denote a different John. John The Presbyter is a title that denotes a managing spiritual role within the church. Again, does not denote a different person, just a different role. When considering the life of John, we see that he endured different phases within the church. He went from being an Apostle of Jesus, to Evangelist and proclaiming what Jesus taught. Then, when the church was more established, he took a more Presbyter role in establishing the next generation of leaders. Thus, The Apostle John was also an Evangelist, Presbyter, and Elder.
What about 2 John and 3 John?
In these letters, John identifies himself as an “Elder”. Does this mean it is a different John? Not exactly. Peter calls himself and Elder in 1 Peter 5:1. And there is no question, 1 Peter was written by Apostle Peter. In the Gospel of John, he does not use his own name; because it was not about him. In his letters he does, because of the authority and truth of his witness.
There are similarities between passages in the Johannine epistles and the writings of Polycarp and Papias. Which could make sense considering they were both disciples of John. Irenaeus in Adversus Haereses 3.16.8 (written c. 180), quotes 2 John as authority from the Apostles. The Muratorian Canon seems to refer to two letters of John only but when considering the type of letter 3 John was, a personal letter, it may not have been circulated due to the personal nature of the letter. One factor which helps explain the late attestation of 3 John and the doubts about its authority is the very short nature of the letter; early writers may simply not have had occasion to quote from it. Other possibilities, due to the shortness and similarity to 2 John, it may have been considered part of 2 John. Regardless, All three Johannine epistles were recognized by the 39th festal letter of Athanasius, the Synod of Hippo and the Council of Carthage.
The Disciples of John
Papias; Eusebius, in his “Chronicle” he expressly calls the Apostle John the teacher of Papias (“ad annum Abrah 2114”) as does Jerome also in Ep. lxxv, “Ad Theodoram”, iii, and in Illustrious Men 18. Irenæus also positively designates the Apostle and Evangelist John as the teacher of Papias, and neither he nor any other writer before Eusebius had any idea of a other person named John in Asia (Against Heresies V.33.4).
Ignatius writes to John, calls him the Holy Presbyter and connects this name to being closely related to Mary, the mother of Jesus. Also notice John is absent from them [probably in Patmos or Ephesus at this time] and Ignatius also points out that “She is the lady of our new religion and repentance”. Jesus told John to personally care for his mother and the fact that Ignatius states their faith is “new” shows the closeness to the origins of the faith. (IGNATIUS, First Epistle to St John)
“Polycarp also was not only instructed by apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna, whom I also saw in my early youth, for he tarried [on earth] a very long time, and, when a very old man, gloriously and most nobly suffering martyrdom…There are also those who heard from him that John, the disciple of the Lord, going to bathe at Ephesus, and perceiving Cerinthus within, rushed out of the bath-house without bathing, exclaiming, “Let us fly, lest even the bath-house fall down, because Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within.” And Polycarp himself replied to Marcion, who met him on one occasion, and said, “Dost thou know me?” “I do know thee, the first-born of Satan.” (IRENÆUS, Chapter III).
Who was John, personally?
John was a fisherman in his families fishing business. He then met Jesus and became a disciple of Jesus. He became so close to Jesus he was called the one whom Jesus loved. He was there for it all. The miracles, rare miraculous moments, at the cross, seeing the empty tomb, recognizing the risen Jesus, witnessing Jesus’ ascension, traveling to proclaim Jesus Christ, establishing churches and disciplining some of the most predominate church fathers.
John was ride or die with Jesus. He was ready to throw down at a moments notice if Jesus commanded anything. He was ready to call down fire from heaven to destroy hostel forces for Jesus. Of course, Jesus rebuked them, seeing how unnecessary that was; he was still willing. He was arrested and Roman attempted to execute him but they could not. Despite facing death, the proclaimed Jesus regardless of what the world threw at him. He was threatened, arrested, almost executed, and banished; yet never stopped writing, teaching, and proclaiming.
It was his passion for Christ that gave him the drive and will to continue and do to what ever was asked of him by God. He loved Christ so dearly, his own life did not count. His passion for Christ is seen in his disciples. They thoroughly knew the truth of God, and he ensured they did. He even wrote personal letters to show the love of Christ. He wanted everyone to love Christ the way Christ deserved to be loved; utmost selfless self sacrificial devotion.
What Did John Teach Specifically?
John saw extraordinary things and was empowered by God to do extraordinary things. His testimony and witness was critical for the church. His direct influence was immeasurable. He, himself, (through the power of the Holy Spirit) discipled Polycarp, Papias, and Ignatius. Polycarp (died 155AD) discipled Irenaeus, and Irenaeus (died 202AD) in turn discipled Hippolytus of Rome (died 235AD). Origen of Alexandria (died 255AD) heard Hippolytus preach as a young man. The funeral of Hippolytus was conducted by Justin the Confessor who was also later martyred for refusing to denounce his faith in 269AD; a faith that stemmed all the way down from John The Apostle’s testimony and witness almost 170 years earlier.
When looking at what The Apostle John taught and did, it is hard to recognize his influence in the popular church teachers now. He boldly proclaimed the deepest truths of God, preached about sin and repentance, warned about false prophets and antichrists, and dared to call people out by name. A boldness that more modern preachers would find “too offensive”. Even his teachings about true love do not reflect the ‘self love’ teachings of modern preachers. Does your preacher teach like John The Apostle of Jesus Christ?
If you have any questions or comments about this article please contact us or join our discussion forms
The Apostle Peter, also called Simon Peter or Simeon, son of Jonah or John who was born in the village of Bethsaida in the province of Galilee. He had a brother name Andrew. He was a fisherman by profession with his brother and and the sons of Zebedee, James and John. He was also married. He then met Jesus and his life changed forever. Does your pastor preach and teach like Peter?
Peter Coming to Faith
Peter was a traditional Jew in the sense that he believed in the coming Messiah that has been prophesied in Hebrew scriptures. His brother Andrew was a disciple of John The Baptist and heard him preach about Jesus and started following Jesus. He then went to Peter and told him about Jesus saying, “We have found the Messiah”, and then brought Peter to Jesus. He then became a follower of Jesus and left everything behind (Matthew 19:27). Later, Peter’s mother-in-law was healed by Jesus at their home in Capernaum (Matthew 8:14).
Peter’s Witness of Jesus
Peter was a bold individual who was part of Jesus’ inner circle of 3. He was privileged with seeing the most amazing works of Jesus personally. When Jesus walked on water, Matthew additionally describes Peter walking on water with Jesus for a moment but beginning to sink when his faith wavers. (Matt. 14:28–31). He was present to witness Jesus’ major miracles first hand.
Jesus asks, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” The disciples give various answers. When he asks, “Who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter answers, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God. Jesus then declares: Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Cephas (Peter) (Petros), and on this rock (petra) I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.(Matthew 16:13–19)
He is also frequently mentioned in the gospels as forming with James the Elder and John a special group within the Twelve Apostles (Mark 5:37, 9:2), present at incidents at which the others were not present, such as at the Transfiguration of Jesus (Matthew 17:1).
Peter was most often named first and would speak to Jesus some times on behalf of the other apostles. He sought clarification from Jesus as well (Matthew 15:15, 18:21, 26:33,35; Mark 13:3). But some times, in his boldness, he would not always think before he speaks (Matthew 17:4). One instance he even rebukes Jesus because he failed to understand God’s plan but Jesus sharply corrected him (Matthew 16:22-23)
Later Jesus foretold that Peter would deny him three times before the following cockcrow (Matthew 26:69; Mark 14:72). In the Gospel of John, Peter, in one of the resurrection appearances of Jesus, three times affirmed his love for Jesus, balancing his threefold denial, and Jesus’ forgiveness and reconfirmed Peter.
Peter and The Crucifixion
When Jesus was arrested, one of his companions cut off the ear of a servant of the High Priest. The Gospel of John also includes this event and names Peter as the swordsman and Malchus as the victim.(Jn. 18:10) Luke adds that Jesus touched the ear and miraculously healed it.(Lk. 22:49–51). While on trial, Peter denied knowing Jesus three times just as Jesus said he would. There is no doubt that he would have been present in the crowds (Mark 14:54) that watched Jesus carry his wooden beam to the cross to be crucified.
Peter and The Resurrection
In John’s gospel, Peter is the first person to enter the empty tomb (Luke 24:12), although the women and the beloved disciple see it before him.(Jn. 20:1–9) In Luke’s account, the women’s report of the empty tomb is dismissed by the apostles, and Peter is the only one who goes to check for himself, running to the tomb. He witnessed first hand the empty tomb. The Lord is risen indeed, and has appeared to Simon! (Luke 24:34). And after eight days his disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus came, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, ‘Peace to you!’ Then he said to Thomas, ‘Reach your finger here, and look at my hands; and reach your hand here, and put it into my side. Do not be unbelieving but believing.’ And Thomas answered and said to him, ‘My Lord and My God!’ (John 20:26-28). Peter was there to witness these appearances of Jesus after his crucifixion and empty tomb. When he saw him he knew who Jesus was but also realized that he was a sinner in the presence of The Holy Jesus Christ (Luke 5:8). After Jesus died they went fishing, probably to make some money and go back to the life they once knew but then Jesus appeared to them (John 21:7)
Peter and The Ascension
The disciples all witnessed Jesus Ascension possibly Mary and Jesus’ brothers, of the latter part we can’t be certain but the angels told the disciples that “This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11b)
Peter’s Ministry Work
After walking with Jesus, being there at his arrest, trial, crucifixion, empty tomb, post crucifixion appearances, and lastly the ascension; He had absolute faith in Jesus. He preached the powerful sermon on the day of Pentecost and witnessed the descension of the Holy Spirit and the birth of the Church (Acts 2:14, 3:12). From then on he worked diligently on building Christ’s church (Mark 16:20). At the Council of Jerusalem (c. 40-50), the early Church, Paul and the leaders of the Jerusalem church met and decided to embrace Gentile converts. Acts portrays Peter and other leaders as successfully opposing the Christian Pharisees who insisted on circumcision. His initial work was conducted in Jerusalem but later the traveled to Antioch and Corinth and finally to Rome.
Even in all his ministry work he was not a wealthy person (Acts 3:6). He was persecuted and arrest too (Acts 4:1, 12:1). This did not stop Peter from calling people out publicly (Acts 4:8, 5:3, 29, 8:20). Peter’s ministry work was not just with words but God validated his words with miracles (Acts 5:15, 9:34, 40). But Peter made it absolutely clear that HE is not to be worshiped (Acts 10:25-26)
Peter In Antioch and Corinth
But his upbringing and cultural heritage was still of the Jewish faith. According to the epistle to the Galatians 2:11, Peter went to Antioch from Jerusalem where Paul rebuked him for separating himself from Gentiles. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in his Epistle to the Roman Church under Pope Soter (A.D. 165–174) declares that Peter and Paul founded the Church of Rome and the Church of Corinth, and they have lived in Corinth for some time. “You have thus by such an admonition bound together the planting of Peter and of Paul at Rome and Corinth. For both of them planted and likewise taught us in our Corinth. And they taught together in like manner in Italy, and suffered martyrdom at the same time.” According to the writings of Origen and Eusebius in his Church History (III, 36) Peter would have been the founder of the Church of Antioch and “after having first founded the church at Antioch, went away to Rome preaching the Gospel, and he also, after [presiding over] the church in Antioch, presided over that of Rome until his death” After presiding over the church in Antioch by a while, Peter would have been succeeded by Evodius, and after by Ignatius, who was a student of John the Apostle. He, with Paul, established and appointed leaders of these newly born churches.
Peter In Rome
The writings of the 1st century Church Father Ignatius of Antioch refer to Peter and Paul giving admonitions to the Romans, indicating Peter’s presence in Rome. Church tradition ascribes the epistles First and Second Peter to the Apostle Peter, as does the text of Second Peter itself. First Peter implies the author is in “Babylon”, which has been held to be a symbolic reference to Rome. Eusebius of Caesarea also states: Clement of Alexandria in the sixth [book] of the Hypotyposeis cites the story, and the bishop of Hierapolis named Papias joins him in testifying that Peter mentions Mark in the first epistle, which they say he composed in Rome itself, and that he indicates this, calling the city more figuratively Babylon by these: “She who is in Babylon, chosen together with you, sends you greetings and so does my son Mark.” (1 Pet 5:13) Irenaeus of Lyons wrote in the 2nd century that Peter and Paul had been the founders of the Church in Rome and had appointed Linus as succeeding bishop.
Peter’s Death
Clement I, in his Letter to the Corinthians (Chapter 5), written c. 80–98, speaks of Peter’s martyrdom in the following terms: “Let us take the noble examples of our own generation. Through jealousy and envy the greatest and most just pillars of the Church were persecuted, and came even unto death. … Peter, through unjust envy, endured not one or two but many labours, and at last, having delivered his testimony, departed unto the place of glory due to him…” Clement of Rome was a disciple of the Apostles, who also was personally antiquated with Peter. The big question is DID Peter go to Rome?
The death of Peter is attested to by Tertullian at the end of the 2nd century, in his Prescription Against Heretics, noting that Peter endured a passion like his Lord’s: In his work Scorpiace 15, he also speaks of Peter’s crucifixion: “The budding faith Nero first made bloody in Rome. There Peter was girded by another, since he was bound to the cross“. Origen in his Commentary on the Book of Genesis III, quoted by Eusebius of Caesaria in his Ecclesiastical History (III, 1), said: “Peter was crucified at Rome with his head downwards, as he himself had desired to suffer.” These two early witnesses point to Peter being crucified in Rome.
Jesus even hints at the death by which Peter would glorify God, (Jn. 21:18–19) saying “when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and another will dress you and carry you where you do not want to go.” This is interpreted by some as a reference to Peter’s crucifixion. Acts 12 tells how Peter, who was in Jerusalem, was put into prison by King Herod (A.D. 42–44), but was rescued by an angel. After his liberation Peter left Jerusalem to go to “another place” (Acts 12:1–18). Why was this “another place” not mentioned? Probably due to the time of the the writing of this section of Acts, Luke wanted to protect the location and identity from the authorities. He was a now fugitive who escaped from confinement in Jerusalem. The likelihood he remained in Jerusalem, where he had become more famous, as an Apostle of Christ and now a fugitive would be unlikely. Peter then traveling to Rome and given the accounts by Tertuillian, Origen quoted by Eusebius of his death in Rome would make sense.
The church in Rome was already flourishing when Paul wrote his Epistle to the Romans about AD 57, he greets some fifty people in Rome by name, but not Peter whom he knew. There is also no mention of Peter in Rome later during Paul’s two-year stay there in Acts 28, about AD 60–62. The reason for this is by the time of Paul penning these letters, Peter had already passed away.
WHO was Peter?
All this information about what he did and saw is helpful but who was he personally? We can deduce from the amount written about him what kind of person he was. He owned his own fishing business and owned the boat that Jesus used to preach to the people on the shore. A business he went back to after Jesus was crucified temporarily. But once he saw the risen Christ, his business became secondary to the mission of the Church. He made proclaiming Christ and growing the church his main priority.
While with Jesus, he was the unofficial leader of the group. Not only was he named first when the Apostles were named together but he, himself, took a leadership role. He was part of the inner ciricle of Jesus. He spoke up first, acted first (some times without thinking). He gave THE sermon at Pentecost. He first spoke up and testified about believing that Jesus was the Son of God. He, along with James, lead the Church in Jerusalem and later traveled to Antioch and Corinth to plant churches. He was a leader, assertive, and a ‘go-getter’. He was bold and after being restored by Jesus after his denials, he was fearless.
Despite all that he had done and seen, he was still human; a sinner. Jesus rebuked him on one occasion and Paul even had to rebuke him for segregating himself from the gentile Christians and neglecting them. He related to the Jewish Christians better than the Hellenistic and Greek Christians.
Was Peter The First Pope?
This actually fairly easy to see. First of all, in his letters, he never refers to himself as holding such an office. Secondly the Bible (the other apostle writings) itself does not suggest the existence of such an office. The argument that Jesus called Peter the rock and corner stone of the church also fails in numerous areas. First, Jesus was the corner stone that was thrown away, not Peter. Secondly in Peter’s own writings he describes (1 Peter 2:4) he describes the entire church body as “like living stones”. This relates to what Jesus actually told him about being a stone within the church. Yes, he was the part of the first stones (and the other apostles) (Matthew 16:18) that were the foundations of the church, but Jesus was the corner stone of the entire church. Peter himself recognizes that the corner stone is Jesus, not himself (1 Peter 2:7). Peter did not have a special authority over the other apostles (Acts 15:1-23; Galatians 2:1-14; 1 Peter 5:1-5) but it is the Apostles together that were authoritative due to their witness (Ephesians 2:19-20), not Peter alone. Paul does NOT call on believers in various churches to receive Titus, Timothy, and other church leaders based on their authority as bishops or their having apostolic authority, but rather based upon their being fellow laborers WITH him (1 Corinthians 16:10; 16:16; 2 Corinthians 8:23). Peter himself, along with other areas in scripture call people to test what they are taught with scripture and not the authority of a pope (Matthew 5:18; Psalm 19:7-8; 119:160; Proverbs 30:5; John 17:17; 2 Peter 1:19-21). Lastly, Peter himself calls Jesus as THE Shepherd and Overseer of the church, not a pope (1 Peter 2:25). The idea and office of Pope came about later in history and was not part of the teachings of the Apostles.
What Did Peter Teach Specifically?
There is A LOT we can learn about Peter and how it relates to our day. Peter is not politically correct, especially in our day. He preached about sin and repentance. He talked about hell and false prophets. His teachings about Christian living in a wicked world would make churches like Joel Osteen’s fall away. In fact he seems to hint at their coming (2 Peter 2:1-4) and contradicts a lot of the teachings of the Health Wealth and Happiness preachers (1 Peter 2:3,8,18, 2:10, 16, 5:10, and many more, see references above). He also supported that a true godly marriage is between a Man and Woman (1 Peter 3:1-7). He was bold and offended a lot of people, so much so, he was arrest and threatened on numerous occasions. In our day in age people would say that he is not Christ-like! Does your preacher teach like Peter, an Apostle of Jesus Christ?
If you have any questions or comments about this article please contact us or join our discussion forms
It is true that we may not currently have the original writings of the Prophets and Apostles BUT when researching the accounts from the early church teachers we can say that there exists a real possibility that we actual may have, if not the originals, first or second generation copies of the originals. That’s a big deal. But how can we know that this possibility exists?
Clement of Rome, writing between 70 AD to 90AD:
let us come to the most recent spiritual heroes. Let us take the noble examples furnished in our own generation…Let us set before our eyes the illustrious apostles. Peter…Paul also.(Chapter V)
“The apostles have preached the Gospel to us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ [has done so] from God. Christ therefore was sent forth by God, and the apostles by Christ. Both these appointments, then, were made in an orderly way, according to the will of God. Having therefore received their orders, and being fully assured by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, and established in the word of God, with full assurance of the Holy Ghost”
“Take up the epistle of the blessed Apostle Paul. What did he write to you at the time when the Gospel first began to be preached? Truly, under the inspiration of the Spirit, he wrote to you concerning himself, and Cephas, and Apollos” (Chapter XLVII)
According to Clement of Rome, the church of Corinth still had Paul’s letters. Here we can establish that up to 90AD Paul’s original letters still existed. Clement, in his letter, also quotes from the synoptic gospels and a majority of Paul’s letters. There is no reason not to conclude that the originals did not exist at this point.
Ignatius lived from 35AD to around 108AD. In his writing, he gives a factual gospel presentation which agrees with the known writings of the Apostles (IGNATIUS, the gospel, Chapter IX.)
Irenaeus lived from 130AD to around 202AD. In his well preserved writings he records some key information about the writings of the Apostles.
“who may wish to see the truth, to contemplate clearly the tradition of the apostles manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in a position to reckon up those who were by the apostles instituted bishops in the Churches, and [to demonstrate] the succession of these men to our own times…by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops…that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere…The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone [in this], for there were many still remaining who had received instructions from the apostles…From this document, whosoever chooses to do so, may learn that He, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, was preached by the Churches, and may also understand the apostolical tradition of the Church, since this Epistle is of older date than these men who are now propagating falsehood…the ecclesiastical tradition from the apostles, and the preaching of the truth, have come down to us. And this is most abundant proof that there is one and the same vivifying faith, which has been preserved in the Church from the apostles until now, and handed down in truth… Polycarp also was not only instructed by apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna, whom I also saw in my early youth, for he tarried [on earth] a very long time, and, when a very old man, gloriously and most nobly suffering martyrdom…There are also those who heard from him that John, the disciple of the Lord…Then, again, the Church in Ephesus, founded by Paul, and having John remaining among them permanently until the times of Trajan, is a true witness of the tradition of the apostles. (Chapter III)
“Since, therefore, the tradition from the apostles does thus exist in the Church, and is permanent among us, let us revert to the Scriptural proof furnished by those apostles who did also write the Gospel, in which they recorded the doctrine regarding God, pointing out that our Lord Jesus Christ is the truth” (IRENÆUS, Against Heresies: Book III, Chapter V.)
The Trinity and The Gospel: “…has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: [She believes] in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God” (Chapter X)
“the prophets and the apostles confessing the Father and the Son; but naming no other as God, and confessing no other as Lord: and the Lord Himself handing down to His disciples, that He, the Father, is the only God and Lord, who alone is God and ruler of all; —it is incumbent on us to follow, if we are their disciples indeed, their testimonies to this effect. For Matthew the apostle…Matthew again says, and Luke likewise…John, the disciple of the Lord, preaches this faith, and seeks, by the proclamation of the Gospel…Luke also, the follower and disciple of the apostles, referring…Wherefore also Mark, the interpreter and follower of Peter, does thus commence his Gospel narrative…Also, towards the conclusion of his Gospel, Mark says…(Chapter X, Chapter XI)
“…he says, in the Epistle to the Colossians: “Luke, the beloved physician, greets you.” But surely if Luke, who always preached in company with Paul, and is called by him “the beloved,” and with him performed the work of an evangelist, and was entrusted to hand down to us a Gospel, learned nothing different from him (Paul), as has been pointed out from his words”(Chapter XIV)
“For the apostles, since they are of more ancient date than all these [heretics], agree with this aforesaid translation; and the translation harmonizes with the tradition of the apostles. For Peter, and John, and Matthew, and Paul, and the rest successively, as well as their followers, did set forth all prophetical [announcements], just as the interpretation of the elders contains them.” (The Apostles quoting from the XXL) (Chapter XXI)
“About Marcion: he mutilates the Gospel which is according to Luke, removing all that is written respecting the generation of the Lord, and setting aside a great deal of the teaching of the Lord, in which the Lord is recorded as most dearly confessing that the Maker of this universe is His Father. He likewise persuaded his disciples that he himself was more worthy of credit than are those apostles who have handed down the Gospel to us, furnishing them not with the Gospel, but merely a fragment of it” (Chapter XXVII)
Present miracles and witnesses: “He is the only Son of God. Wherefore, also, those who are in truth His disciples, receiving grace from Him, do in His name perform [miracles], so as to promote the welfare of other men, according to the gift which each one has received from Him. For some do certainly and truly drive out devils, so that those who have thus been cleansed from evil spirits frequently both believe [in Christ], and join themselves to the Church. Others have foreknowledge of things to come: they see visions, and utter prophetic expressions. Others still, heal the sick by laying their hands upon them, and they are made whole. Yea, moreover, as I have said, the dead even have been raised up, and remained among us for many years.” (Chapter XXXII)
Now, that the preaching of the apostles, the authoritative teaching of the Lord, the announcements of the prophets, the dictated utterances of the apostles (Chapter XXXV)
There is a number of important statements by Irenaeus here. Not only does he establish a continuance of the Apostles teachings down to him but also a continuance of witnesses. He points out that writings from the Apostles did exist which Marcion copies and mutilates. And that the Apostles writings have been passed down and entrusted to them. Again, no indication that their original writings were lost at this point in history.
Tertullian, 160AD to 220AD
“Come now, you who would indulge a better curiosity, if you would apply it to the business of your salvation, run over [to] the apostolic churches, in which the very thrones of the apostles are still pre-eminent in their places, in which their own authentic writings are read, uttering the voice and representing the face of each of them severally” (De Praescriptione Haereticorum, Chapter 36; Schaff’s translation.)
Tertullian goes on to discuss each of these ‘authentic writings’ as being found in the very churches to which they were written. He mentions Corinth, Philippi, Thessalonica, Ephesus, and Rome. Around the same time as Irenaeus, he specifically states that their actual original writings still existed.
The Muratorian fragment is a copy of perhaps the oldest known list of most of the books of the New Testament. It was written around 170AD or a little later. Peter 1 and 2 and James are not mentioned in the fragment.
Origen, 184AD to 253AD
Eusebius (324AD) quotes Qrigen in his record of known Apostolic writings which closely resembles the collection of writings we have today.
Peter, Bishop of Alexandria, d 311 AD. In fragment 1, he speaks of the original of the Gospel of John as still existing in his day:
“the copy itself that was written by the hand of the evangelist, which, by the divine grace, has been preserved in the most holy church of Ephesus, and is there adored by the faithful.”
Here we are, about 300AD and in the 4th century with the original writings from the Apostles still in existence. At the time of the First Council of Nicaea in 325AD it is probable they had degraded originals or even first generation copies of the actual originals. Finally in 367AD Athanasius is the first person to identify the same 27 books of the New Testament that are in use today.
All this does not take into consideration the actual manuscripts and fragments we have currently.
The earliest manuscripts of John range from 90AD to 250AD. Now think about that. Above we have shown the probability of an original, hand written by John himself, possibly existing up to 311AD. That means there is a chance that any one of the earliest manuscripts we have of John now, could very well be an original. If not an original, it could be the actual first generation copy.
Craig Evans of Acadia University researched how long manuscripts would have lasted in the ancient world, and whether that might provide some guidance of how long the original might have lasted–and therefore how long they would have been copied. Evans brings together evidence to suggest that literary manuscripts in the ancient world would last hundreds of years, on average. Appealing to the recent study of G.W. Houston, he argues that manuscripts could last anywhere from 75 to 500 years, with the average being about 150 years.
This also supports the probability of having in our possession an actual original or first generation copy. Of course there is no way to know for sure but one thing is sure; we can NOT say for sure that we don’t have an original or the earliest copy. The possibility exists that we do. This also makes it very hard to say that we have a corrupted version of the original now. Since the originals and quotes from the originals lasted so long in the early church history we can with certainty through textual criticism know what the originals actual taught. Given the vast amount of early manuscripts and early quotes from church fathers, we CAN reliably say that we DO know what the Apostles actually taught from Jesus.
Now lets be clear, no scholar believes we have the actual originals. That would be impossible to validate. Nor is this article making the case that we DO, because, again, we would have to foolproof verifiable way of knowing for sure. What this article IS pointing out is the POSSIBILITY and how ever slight probability of 2 things: (1) The original hand written documents of the Apostles themselves COULD have survived up to the 4th century and (2) The current fragments and manuscripts we have discovered COULD be them or 1st or 2nd generation copies of the originals. This also shows that a statement that the originals were lost early on in its history and the copies were corrupted early is equally unverifiable given the evidences above. Yes there are variants between the earliest manuscripts but that does not disprove that one of the earliest manuscripts is not an original, 1st or 2nd generation copy still. Why make this point?
Bias secular scholars are quick to point out that they believe we don’t know exactly what the originals stated, yet, their claim is equally unverifiable. They avoid the possibility, how ever slight, that we do know and can know what the originals actual stated.
If the Disciples of the Apostles and their Disciples after them did retain original copies, read, and quoted from them, then we can know what the originals stated from their quotes alone; such as the case with Clement of Rome who wrote and quoted from documents he read only 30 years after the Apostles lived and within the same time that John wrote is gospel. Being so close to the Apostles themselves, why would he not have Paul and Peter’s writings? Even Ignatius or Papias for that matter. Irenaeus read documents and wrote around the same time, if not a little after, John wrote his gospel too. Tertullian, only 70 or so years after John penned his gospel even states he knew that the originals still existed. How would he know this? The probability exists that he himself read them. In fact, just from the early church fathers quotes alone, we can construct the entire New Testament except for just 11 verses.
J. Warner Wallace is a Cold-Case Detective, a Christian Case Maker, and the author of Cold-Case Christianity and God’s Crime Scene. He states the following: “Sir David Dalrymple (1726 – 1792AD) a Scottish judge and historian who wrote three volumes on early Christian Church history called, “Remains of Christian Antiquity”. Dalrymple was an expert in the writings of the early Church. It’s alleged that after careful examination of the writings of the Fathers he wrote, “…as I possessed all the existing works of the Fathers of the second and third centuries, I commenced to search, and up to this time I have found the entire New Testament, except eleven verses.”…Early Church Fathers sat at the feet of the apostles and learned from the apostolic eyewitness accounts. These secondary leaders then wrote letters and documents of their own, repeating the claims of their teachers. I focused on the work of Ignatius, Polycarp and Clement and isolated the content of their non-canonical writings to the early Church…It turns out that the Early Church Fathers did, in fact, quote the scripture as it was handed down to them. But even if we can’t reconstruct the entire New Testament (save 11 verses) as Dalrymple is often quoted to have said, the Early Church Fathers did confirm enough of the New Testament claims to validate and authenticate the writings of the apostles. From the non-canonical works of Ignatius and Polycarp (students of John) and the non-canonical work of Clement (a student of Paul) we can determine the following:
Even if we can’t reconstruct the entire New Testament (save 11 verses) as claimed in the citation of Dalrymple’s work, we really don’t need to. The early disciples of the apostles confirm the content of the apostolic teaching. If skeptics are looking for an early version of Jesus that is less divine, less miraculous and less supernatural, they aren’t going to find it in the writings of the first generation that followed the apostles. Instead, they’re going to find the very same Jesus that you and I know from the writings of the New Testament.” (http://coldcasechristianity.com/2016/can-we-construct-the-entire-new-testament-from-the-writings-of-the-church-fathers/). This is from the early church fathers alone. Not including the earliest manuscripts we have today. The possibility that they quoted from the original documents exists and is actually plausible.
UPDATE* To be clear, the quote from Sir David Dalrymple was a verbal statement to a Dr. Walter Buchanan, which was then told to Rev. John Campbell years down the road which was later published in his memoir by Robert Philip. The specific 11 verses said to have not been found by Sir David Dalrymple were not identified either.
If you have any questions or comments about this article please contact us or join our discussion forms
Since the foundation of the Church, there have been many claims of supposed truth that has come down from heaven after what Jesus, and The Apostles of Jesus have made known in scripture. Three most notable is what founded Islam, Mormonism, and Jehovah’s Witnesses. All of these claim an Angel revealed something to their founders, different from the gospel that was proclaimed in scripture; either attempting to correct or add to it. But, interestingly, The Holy Spirit knew this would happen and thus specifically said something about it.
Galatians 1:6-9
“I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; 7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!”
Papyrus 46 is the oldest manuscript of Galatians currently discovered. It is dated around the end of the 2nd century. It contains significant portions of Galatians. With it is Romans, Hebrews, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, 1 Thessalonians, and possibly others. The reliability of this is unquestionable. It is important to note the date and relation Galatians has with the other scriptures discovered with it. Though the original was written before this manuscript, the date of this specific manuscript is only two of three generations from Jesus himself. Secondly, it is also in agreement with all that which is revealed in the other letters discovered with it. This is important later.
People, at the time of this writing, were ‘deserting’ the true gospel message preached by the Apostles to a ‘different’, ‘distorted’, and ‘contrary’ gospel. The source of the ‘different’, ‘distorted’, and ‘contrary’ gospels came either from men or even spirits. The Holy Spirit, through Paul, declares that even if the Apostles themselves begin distorting the original gospel preached, they are wrong. Even if an Angel from heaven came and taught a distorted gospel, they are also wrong. In other words, there is no other gospel no matter the source; natural (men) or supernatural (spirits) besides the original gospel that was first proclaimed.
The True Gospel
This is the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ which includes the person and work of Jesus. Jesus, The Son of God and God Himself, willingly, humbly, and voluntarily came down from heaven, to be born of a virgin, lived a perfect sinless life, and was the perfect sacrificial lamb to once and for all atone for the sins of all those who believe. He then rose from the dead three days later validating his power over death and the power as the source of eternal life. This is The Gospel message proclaimed by Jesus and The Apostles. But, as time went on, human nature lead some to teaching something different, distorted, and contrary to this.
Gnosticism
This is a general term given to different early teachings. Some of these early ideas are still apparent in cults and other religions today. There are similar ideas in all these teachings. They deny the foundational aspects of The Gospel message: The sufficiency of scripture, the incarnation of God as The Son and the sufficiency of Jesus death on the cross. Some even deny the death of Jesus on the cross all together. These Gnostics claimed that the source for their teachings came from divine sources and heightened states of spiritual awareness. When people fail to understand and believe Galatians 1:6-9, their hearts and minds are open to just about any claim.
Islam
Around 610AD Mohammed, in a cave on Mt. Hira, hears the an angel who he believes to be Gabriel tell him that Allah is the only true God. Right off the bat, this conflicts with what The Holy Spirit made known 500 years earlier (Galatians 1:8). This belief system is different and contrary to what which was made known by Jesus and the Apostles. It denies that Jesus was the Son of God and God in the flesh. It denies that Jesus even died on the cross. It denies Jesus’ sufficient atoning death for sin and denies the sufficiency of scripture. In 746AD John of Damascus wrote about the claims of Islam where he said that Mohammad’s ideas of what Christianity believed derived from an Arian monk; of which Arianism is a distortion of the The Gospel as well. Not only would Mohammad’s understanding of Christianity be influenced by a distorted gospel to begin with, but he then created his own system from there. Regardless, at the premise, the birth of Islam conflicts with Galatians 1:8. Either Galatians is false, or Muhammad’s teaching of a ‘different’, ‘distorted’, and ‘contrary’ gospel is false, both can not be true.
Mormonism
On Sept. 21, 1823 an angel revealed to Joseph Smith of the location of golden tablets and told him that he had been chosen to translate the book of Mormon. The book of Mormon created an entire new system of religious beliefs that splintered off from Christianity. A basic problem of the book of Mormon is that there are no archeological evidences to support any of its extreme historical claims. Mormonism denies that Jesus is the One Triune God, in fact, Mormonism teaches that there is more than one god. They deny the bodily resurrection of Jesus and the sufficiency of his death to forgive all sins once and for all. They also deny the sufficiency of scripture alone and require other divine writings to aid in ‘correctly’ interpreting scripture. Just like in Muhammad’s situation, Either Galatians is false, or Mormonism’s teaching of a ‘different’, ‘distorted’, and ‘contrary’ gospel is false, both can not be true.
The Easy Way Out
When an unverifiable person jumps up and declares that he has been given a vision or told by an angel to write a divine writing; it is then easy for them to explain away any true contradictions with scripture. In the case with Galatians, it is then easy to say something like “God isn’t talk about me, but others after me”. Or, even, claim that Galatians is a corruption of the original. And people have no choice but to accept this unverifiable claim. The major difference between Muhammad, Joseph Smith, and others who make this argument is that God never actually verified their claim for others to see. Muhammad never performed any miracles and his prophecies failed. Joseph Smith never performed any visible verifiable miracles. The prophecies of the Jehovha’s Witnesses are continually failed and have been re-explained and failed again. The Apostles were healing the blind and crippled and raising the dead to life. Aside from the biblical recorded accounts, early church teacher, Papias, validated this as he knew of people who were raised from the dead in his day. Membership growth and wining Wars do not validate someone’s spiritual truth claim. Atheist church membership is growing and atheists have caused and won many wars. Declaring “I will raise myself from the dead three days after I die” and then doing just that is validation. Declaring that Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life, then raising people from the dead is validating the source of power. Anyone can claim that Galatians is wrong. A 12 year old can just make that sort of claim just to reject the authority and justify themselves, but again, that does not make is so. Its easy to make any claim, deny facts, and avoid being verifiable.
Not a Forgery
So how do we know that Galatians is not a later forgery with the name of Paul as the author later inserted? Well, its quite simple actually. We just compare the vocabulary, writing style, theological point of view, cultural first hand knowledge, and presupposed historical situation to all the other Pauline writings. Clement of Rome (and other early ancient church teachers) quoted from Romans and he wrote around 90 AD. So we have outside sources to validate Paul’s Letter to the Romans. When comparing such validated letters we see the commonalities of the letters from one author style. Such is with Galatians, it is the same in vocabulary, writing style, theological point of view, and presupposed historical situation as the other validated Pauline writings. Now of course no one now saw Paul pen the letters first hand; just like all other ancient writings, yet, given the evidences, we can be certain that this letter is in fact from Paul. Even in Islam, Muhammad never wrote anything; Joseph Smith never showed the supposed Gold Tablets to anyone; Jehovah’s Witnesses only have the unverifiable claims (and failed prophecies) of their founders.
This is a major problem for Islam, Mormons, and Jehovah’s Witnesses. They are forced to claim that the words in Galatians are not of Paul but must be later insertions and corruptions. They are forced to go against the certainty of evidence support for the authenticity of Galatians. Because if they admit the truth of Galatians, they are then exposed to the truth stated by Paul in Galatians 1:6-9. So, of course, they take the easy way out and just flat out deny it.
Conclusion
Sense we can be certain that Paul, an Apostle of Jesus Christ validated by the other Apostles (Galatians 1:18-19, 2:9; Acts 9:26-29), wrote Galatians and a copy exists from the 2nd century we can conclude that his statement in Galatians 1:6-9 is from an Apostle of Jesus Christ validated by the other Apostles. Therefore, the Apostolic statement must be true. That if anyone and even an angel preaches a different gospel message, it is wrong. Islam, Mormons, and Jehovah’s Witnesses do just that, preach a different gospel from other angels. But unlike them, he is validated by Apostolic support and miracles through preaching the true gospel and declaring Jesus as Christ and eternal Son of God. Sense Galatians 1:6-9 is true, the claims of Islam, Mormons, and Jehovah’s Witnesses can not be.
If you have any questions or comments about this article please contact us or join our discussion forms
How do we know Jesus died on the cross? We must look at the historical evidences recorded for us in ancient history. What evidence is there? We have the ancient accounts from Jewish historians, Syrian philosopher, ancient Roman historians and writers, and archeological evidence support; all within the 1st and 2nd century. With all this evidences, what can we reliably conclude?
Outside of the Biblical witnesses (the synoptic gospels) we first look to the closest culture associated with Jesus and his death; Judaism.
JEWISH HISTORY
Two researchers, Edwin Yamauchi and John P. Meier, have constructed a copy of the “Testimonium” of Flavius Josephus (37-101AD; wrote ~45 years after Jesus) with the probable later Christian insertions removed. In parentheses are what is found in the Arabic manuscript. The following paragraph is Yamauchi’s:
“About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man (And his conduct was good and he was known to be virtiucous) For he was one who wrought surprising feats and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing amongst us, had condemned him to be crucified, those who had in the first place come to love him did not give up their affection for him. (They reported that he had appeared to them after his crucifixion and that he was alive). And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.”
Here Josephus the Jewish historian records that Jesus was condemned by crucifixion. Josephus does not have to be believe in Jesus in a religious sense to admit and record a historical event regarding what happened to Jesus. Being a anti-christian source, he records this event as an actual historic occurrence. Given his time of writing and area of association, he would have known witnesses of this event.
Later in Jewish records we see in The Babylonian Talmud, a commentary on Jewish laws composed between A.D. 500-600 (Neusner/Green, 69), contains a text about Jesus’ death. The Tractate Sanhedrin (43a) states:
Jesus was hanged on Passover Eve. Forty days previously the herald had cried, “He is being led out for stoning, because he has practiced sorcery and led Israel astray and enticed them into apostasy. Whosoever has anything to say in his defense, let him come and declare it.” As nothing was brought forward in his defense, he was hanged on Passover Eve.
SYRIAN HISTORY
Secondly we can look at Mara Bar-Serapion who wrote around 70AD (~35 years after Jesus); He was a Syrian philosopher and a non-christian. When giving historical examples of innocent people being killed, he gives this example:
“…Or the Jews by murdering their wise king?…After that their kingdom was abolished. God rightly avenged these men…The wise king…Lived on in the teachings he enacted.”
The Jews never murdered their kings of the past. Jesus however was mockingly called “king of the Jews” on the cross. It was an argument that even Jewish leadership used to get Rome to approve his crucifixion. 35 years after Jesus was murdered, Rome destroyed Jerusalem. But “the wise King lived on in the teachings he enacted”. Thus Serapion was indirectly stating that Jesus was a real person of history that was killed.
ROMAN HISTORY
Third, we see as recorded by Cornelius Tacitus (56-120AD); a very trusted Roman historian, senator, proconsul of Asia, and defiantly a non-christian who wrote around 116AD (~80 years after Jesus) an interesting statement:
“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.”
Tacitus records that Jesus “suffered THE extreme penalty” by Rome, which was crucifixion.
Then Lucian of Samosata (120-180AD; ~115 years after Jesus) was a satirist and Roman comedian who very negative and sarcastically critical of Christians. He wrote several books and in a negative since, unintentionally affirms Jesus’ death:
“The Christians. . . worship a man to this day – the distinguished personage who introduced this new cult, and was crucified on that account. . . . You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains their contempt for death and self devotion . . . their lawgiver [taught] they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take on faith”
Lucian also affirms the historic event of Jesus’ crucifixion.
The image above is roughly 1st to the late 3rd century dating which depicts a person crucified with a donkey head being worshiped by a person to the left. The words engraved at the bottom translate “Alexamenos worships [his] God,” This was mocking a person named “Alexamenos” for worshiping “[his] God” who was on the cross. Origen reports in his treatise Contra Celsum that the pagan philosopher Celsus made the same claim against Christians and Jews:
“For the sake of such a monstrous delusion, and in support of those wonderful advisers, and those wonderful words which you address to the lion, to the amphibious creature, to the creature in the form of an ass, and to others, for the sake of those divine doorkeepers..”
Tertullian, writing in the late 2nd or early 3rd century, reports that Christians, along with Jews, were accused of worshiping such a deity. He also mentions an apostate Jew who carried around Carthage a caricature of a Christian with ass’s ears and hooves, labeled Deus Christianorum Onocoetes (“the God of the Christians begotten of an ass”).
Thus, through this insulting graffiti in ancient Roman culture, we see that Christians were worshiping someone who was crucified. The donkey head is the derogatory depiction of Jesus, as it was taught that Jesus, the king, entered Jerusalem on a donkey also the donkey itself depicted how Roman society felt about Jesus himself. None the less showed the culture making fun of someone who was crucified.
HISTORY OF ROMAN CRUCIFIXION
What we know about Roman crucifixion is that it was extremely successful. A heal bone found of a young male with a nail hammered through it was discovered in Jerusalem around 1968. The skeletal remains are dated to 1st century AD. This shows that the Romans would use nails on people to hold them to the crucifixion blank. His arm bones revealed scratches where the nails had passed between. Both legs were badly fractured, most likely from a crushing blow meant to end his suffering and bring about a faster death. The young male was a Jew. The bones were found in an ossuary, or bone box, inscribed several times with Yehohanan’s name (“Yehohanan son of Hagakol”). The tombs were part of a large Jewish cemetery of the Second Temple period (second century B.C. to 70 A.D.). Archeologist Vassilios Tzaferis describes:
“During this period, it was customary to collect the bones of the deceased after the body had been buried for almost a year and the flesh had decomposed. The bones were then reinterred in an ossuary. The practice of collecting bones in ossuaries had a religious significance that was probably connected with a belief in the resurrection of the dead. But this custom was also a practical measure; it allowed a tomb to be used for a prolonged period. As new burials became necessary, the bones of earlier burials were removed and placed in an ossuary. Reburial in an ossuary was, however, a privilege for the few; not every Jewish family could afford them. Most families reburied the bones of their dead in pits. The use of stone ossuaries probably began during the Herodian dynasty (which began in 37 B.C.) and ended in the second half of the second century A.D… We also found a considerable quantity of pottery in the tomb. Because all the pottery was easily identifiable, we were able to date the tomb quite accurately… According to Josephus, Alexander Jannaeus crucified 800 Jews on a single day during the revolt against the census of 7 A.D… Accounts of the suppression of the revolt of Spartacus in 71 B.C. tell how the Roman army lined the road from Capua to Rome with 6,000 crucified rebels on 6,000 crosses. After the Romans quelled the relatively minor rebellion in Judea in 7 A.D. triggered by the death of King Herod, Quintilius Varus, the Roman Legate of Syria, crucified 2,000 Jews in Jerusalem. During Titus’s siege of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., Roman troops crucified as many as 500 Jews a day for several months… In peacetime, crucifixions were carried out according to certain rules, by special persons authorized by the Roman courts. Crucifixions took place at specific locations, for example, in particular fields in Rome and on the Golgotha in Jerusalem. Outside of Italy, the Roman procurators alone possessed authority to impose the death penalty. Thus, when a local provincial court prescribed the death penalty, the consent of the Roman procurator had to be obtained in order to carry out the sentence.” (“Crucifixion—The Archaeological Evidence” by Vassilios Tzaferis originally appeared in Biblical Archaeology Review, Jan/Feb 1985, 44-53.)
Even if Jesus was to had survived after being brought down from the cross, just unconscious, the burial ritual of the Jewish culture would have suffocated him regardless. Given what we know now medically, the wounds he would have suffered, the lack of nutrition, dehydration, wound infection, and burial suffocation; he could still not have survived.
ISLAMIC RECORD
About 630 years after Jesus, Ibn Ishaq (d. 761 CE/130 AH) reports of a brief accounting of events leading up to the crucifixion. But about 200 years after Ibn Ishaq, the idea of Jesus’ crucifixion changed to the idea that he only appeared to be crucified or that he did die for only a few hours before being raised to heaven. Al-Tabari (d. 923 CE/310 AH) records an interpretation attributed to Ibn ‘Abbas, who used the literal “I will cause you to die” (mumayyitu-ka) in place of the metaphorical mutawaffi-ka “Jesus died”, while Wahb ibn Munabbih, an early Jewish convert, is reported to have said “God caused Jesus, son of Mary, to die for three hours during the day, then took him up to himself.” Tabari further transmits from Ibn Ishaq: “God caused Jesus to die for seven hours”, while at another place reported that a person called Sergius was crucified in place of Jesus. Ibn-al-Athir forwarded the report that it was Judas, the betrayer, while also mentioning the possibility it was a man named Natlianus. Al-Masudi (d. 956 CE/343 AH) reported the death of Christ under Tiberius. But then, Ibn Kathir (d. 1373 CE/760 AH) suggested that a crucifixion did occur, but not with Jesus and that ‘The servant and messenger of God, Jesus, remained with us as long as God willed until God raised him to Himself.’ It seems that the Islamic idea of Jesus’ pseudo-death follows the early traditions of Gnostic teachings in that Jesus himself did not die but was replaced at the cross by someone one else who appeared to look like Jesus on the cross. Yet other Islamic teachers such as Ja’far ibn Mansur al-Yaman (d. 347 AH/958 CE), Abu Hatim Ahmad ibn Hamdan al-Razi (d. 322 AH/935 CE), Abu Yaqub al-Sijistani (d. 358 AH/971 CE), Mu’ayyad fi’l-Din al-Shirazi (d. 470 AH/1078 CE ) and the group Ikhwan al-Safa affirm that Jesus did die by Crucifixion, and not substituted by another man. It is important to note two things: (1) The Islamic reports of Jesus not dying by crucifixion are at least 900 years after Jesus! (2) They affirm Gnostic teachings which have been proven to be unreliable historically and philosophically. The inconsistent accounts within Islam make it impossible to validate Islamic sources as historically reliable.
CHRISTIAN RECORD
It is easy to write off The Bible as a bias source of the historical event of Jesus’ crucifixion but the same can be said for all the non-christian sources that deny it. The fact that there exists non-christian sources that affirm Jesus’ crucifixion is compelling in and of itself. But is the biblical record of Jesus’ death unreliable? According to non-christian secular scholars and historians such as E. P. Sanders and Maurice Casey, who are bold enough to admit, that, The Bible is reliable enough to know that he did in fact die. The biblical manuscripts describing the crucifixion of Jesus were not only writing during the time crucifixion was still practiced but other ancient records of crucifixion and archeological finds all affirm what The Bible details.
The Rylands Library Papyrus P52 is a biblical manuscript dated 90AD to 150 AD records a small portion of the story of Jesus’ crucifixion. Which the fragment can be possibly dated to only 60 or so years after Jesus. Clement of Rome who wrote around 90AD and affirms the death of Jesus in Chapter 16 of 1 Clement. Ignatius (born around 35 AD and died around 108AD) affirms Jesus’ crucifixion in his letter to the Smyrnaeans. Polycarp of Smyrna (born around 69AD and died around 155AD) affirms Jesus’ crucifixion in his letter to the church in Phillipi.
THE PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE
Ancient Jewish history records Jesus’ death on the cross. Syrian philosopher affirms his death as an historic event. Ancient Roman historians and writers affirm Jesus’ death as an historic event. Early church teachers affirm Jesus’ death. Later some Islamic writers even affirm Jesus’ death. Currently, well respected secular scholars affirm that the Bible’s record of Jesus’ death is reliable. We can in fact conclude given the preponderance of evidence that Jesus did in fact die by crucifixion.
Is the Quran today the same as the original teachings from Muhammad himself? Of course Sunni Muslims would say yes. In fact, all Muslims must agree that they are, but, in the Shiite sect of Islam, not all are in full agreement of the source of the final product of the original teachings. To remove Christian bias, we will look at the historical quotes from Muslims themselves and see how accurate the Quran is.
Did Muhammad Write The Quran?
There are no eyewitnesses anywhere in the Qur’an who said they saw Muhammad talk to an angel, nor did anyone say he met or talked with Allah. The teachings of Muhammad, came from Muhammad himself, only, verbally. Muhammad did not know how to read or write.
“Before this, you did not read any book, nor did you write anything with your hands”. (29:48). Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered prophet (7:157)
So if Muhammad could not read or write, who wrote it? The Qur’an was revealed gradually over a period of 23 years to his followers, who then memorized what he said and in some cases write it down on various formats. It was written on leaves and bone and such. The majority of the teachings of Muhammad were memorized by his followers.
Muhammad himself did not perfectly memorize all that was revealed to him.
Narrated Abdullah ibn Mas’ud: … (Muhammad said) I am only a human being and I forget just as you do; so when I forget, remind me … (Sunan Abu Dawud: bk. 3, no. 1015; also Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 1, bk. 8, no. 394)
So, when the divine revelation was forgotten, they simply replaced the divine revelation with something they felt was better or similar.
We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it … (Qur’an 2:106, Saheed International)
So the importance of his followers to memorize what he taught was very important.
Did Muhammad’s Reciters Perfectly Transmit His Teachings?
The battle of Yamama in 632AD, after Muhammad’s death, made his followers realize the need to write his teachings down. Over 700 Muslims were killed, over 400 were followers who had his teachings memorized were killed. What if everyone who only had it memorized were all killed?
Muhammad’s close friend, Salim, who had memorized a great deal of what Muhammad taught, was one of the over 400 reciters killed in the battle of Yamama.
“Abdullah bin ‘Amr mentioned ‘Abdullah bin Masud and said, “I shall ever love that man, for I heard the Prophet saying, ‘Take (learn) the Qur’an from four: ‘Abdullah bin Masud, Salim, Mu’adh and Ubai bin Ka’b.’”(Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 61, Number 521)
Zuhri reports, ‘We have heard that many Qur’an passages were revealed but that those who had memorised them fell in the Yemama fighting. Those passages had not been written down, and following the deaths of those who knew them, were no longer known; nor had Abu Bakr, nor `Umar nor `Uthman as yet collected the texts of the Qur’an. (John Burton, The Collection of the Qur’an, pp. 126-127, Abu Bakr `Abdullah b. abi Da’ud, Kitab al-Masahif’, ed. A. Jeffery, Cairo, 1936/1355, p. 23:)
Different Versions of The Quran?
Here we already see, as recorded by Muslim sources, that portions of the teachings of Muhammad were lost. However, during the reign of Abu Bakr, Hafsah (a wife of Muhammad) kept for herself a written copy of Muhammad’s teachings and kept it until 667AD. In fact, there were others who also had memorized the teachings of Muhammad in different dialects and versions.
“Masruq reported: We used to go to Abdullah Bin Amr and talk to him. Ibn Numair said: One day we made a mention of Abdullah Bin Masud, whereupon he said: you have made mention of a person whom I love more than anything else. I heard Allah’s Messenger as saying: Learn Qur’an from four persons: Ibn Umm Abd (i.e., Abdullah Bin Masud – he started from him – then Muadh bin Jabal and Ubayy bin Kab, then Salim the ally of Ali Hudhaifa. (Sahih Muslim, Book 031, Number 6024)
“Anas is reported to have said: Four persons collected the Qur’an during the lifetime of Allah’s Messenger and all of them were Ansar: Muadh Bin Jabal, Ubayy Bin Kab, Zaid Bin Thabit, Abu Zaid. Qatada said: Anas, who was Abu Zaid? He said: He was one of my uncles. (Sahih Muslim, Book 031, Number 6029)
“Narrated Ibn Mas’ud: I heard a person reciting a (Quranic) verse in a certain way, and I had heard the Prophet reciting the same verse in a different way. So I took him to the Prophet and informed him of that but I noticed the sign of disapproval on his face, and then he said, “Both of you are correct, so don’t differ, for the nations before you differed, so they were destroyed.” (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 4, bk. 56, no. 682)
“Concerning the arrangement of the Qur’an in the manuscript of Abd Allah ibn Mas’ud, Al-Fadl ibn Shadhan said, “I found in a manuscript of `Abd Allah ibn Mas’ud the surahs of the Qur’an in accordance with the following (different) sequence … These are one hundred and ten surahs.” (Al-Nadim, p. 53)… One of our reliable friends has informed us, saying that the composition of the surahs according to the reading of Ubayy ibn Ka’b is in a village called Qariyat al-Ansar, two parasangs from al-Basrah, where in his home Muhammad ibn Abd al-Malik al-Ansari showed us a Qur’anic manuscript, saying, “This is the copy of Ubayy which we have, handed down from our fathers.” I looked into it and ascertained the headings of the surahs, the endings of the revelations, and the numbers of verses. … one hundred and sixteen surahs. (Al-Nadim, pp. 58-61)
The witness accounts to differing renderings between Masud’s version and Ubayy’s version. Both of them were reciters of Muhammad. A discovery of the early San’a 1 (Standford 07) manuscript proves there were different versions of the Quran outside of Ziad’s version.
Due to the loss of a great deal of followers who only had Muhammad’s teachings memorized, Abu Bakr appointed Zaid ibn Thabit to compile all remaining Muhammad teachings. Aside from potentially losing the teachings of Muhammad, there was a growing issue of differences between the different reciters of the teachings; this was also causing confusion and conflict.
“Hudaifa b. al Yeman came to `Uthman direct from the Aderbaijan and Armenian frontier where, uniting the forces from Iraq and those from Syria, he had had an opportunity to observe regional differences over the Qur’an. “Commander of the faithful,” he advised, “take this umma in hand before they differ about the Book like Christians and Jews.” `Uthman sent asking Hafsa to lend him the sheets [inherited by her father, `Umar, from Abu Bakr, and now in her possession] “so that we can copy them into other volumes and then return them.” She sent her suhuf to `Uthman who summon Zaid, Sa`id b. al `As, `Abdul Rahman b. al Harith b. Hisham and `Abdullah b. al Zubair and commanded them to copy the sheets into several volumes. Addressing the group from Quraish, he added, “Wherever you differ from Zaid, write the word in the dialect of Quraish for it was revealed in that tongue.“… When they had copied the sheets, `Uthman sent a copy to each of the main centers of the empire with the command that all other Qur’an materials, whether in single sheet form, or in whole volumes, WERE TO BE BURNED…‘ (Burton, pp. 141-142- citing Ahmad b. `Ali b. Muhammad al `Asqalani, ibn Hajar, “Fath al Bari“, 13 vols, Cairo, 1939/1348, vol. 9, p. 18)
“Ibn Abbas reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: “If there were for the son of Adam a valley full of riches, he would long to possess another one like it, and the son of Adam does not feel satisfied but with dust.” And “Allah returns to him who returns (to him).” Ibn Abbas said: I do not know whether it is from the Qur’an or not; and in the narration transmitted by Zuhair it was said: I do not know whether it is from the Qur’an, and he made no mention of Ibn Abbas. (Sahih Muslim: bk. 5, no. 2285)
The Official Version, Not Authorized by Muhammad?
The solution? Create a single source text in one specific approved rendering and dialect (Quraish, the Ziad version) and burn the rest. But some of those who were closest to Muhammad disagreed with conforming to Ziad’s version. By this time, Umar took power after Abu Bakr and then Uthman after him. Hafsah, a wife of Muhammad, refused to give hers so that it would not be burned. Even Abdullah Bin Masud, a direct follower of Muhammad, disagreed with Ziad’s version.
“Abdullah bin Masud reported that (he said to his companions to conceal their copies of the Qur’an) and further said: He who conceals anything shall have to bring that which he had concealed on the Day of Judgment, and they said: After whose mode of recitation do you command me to recite? I in fact recited before Allah’s Messenger more than seventy chapters of the Qur’an and the companions of Allah’s Messenger know that I have better understanding of the Book of Allah (than they do), and if I were to know that someone had better understanding than I, I would have gone to him. Shaqiq said: I sat in the company of the companions of Muhammad but I did not hear anyone having rejected that (that is, his recitation) or finding fault with it. (Sahih Muslim, Book 031, Number 6022).
This consolidation effort continued because of the continued discrepancies between the different teachings. Abdullah’s variant readings were attacked by those who were in power.
Narrated Ibrahim: The companions of ‘Abdullah (bin Mas’ud) came to Abu Darda’, (and before they arrived at his home), he looked for them and found them. Then he asked them: “Who among you can recite (Qur’an) as ‘Abdullah recites it?” They replied, “All of us.” He asked, “Who among you knows it by heart?” They pointed at ‘Alqama. Then he asked Alqama. “How did you hear ‘Abdullah bin Mas’ud reciting Surat Al-Lail (The Night)?“ Alqama recited:
“By the male and the female.” (Qur’an 92:3)
Abu Darda said, “I testify that I heard the Prophet reciting it likewise, but these people want me to recite it:
“And by Him Who created male and female.” (Qur’an 92:3)
But by Allah, I will not follow them.” (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 60, no. 468; also Sahih Muslim: bk. 4, no. 1799-1802)
‘Yazid b. Ma`awiya was in the mosque in the time of al Walid b. `Uqba, sitting in a group among them was Hudaifa. An official called out, ‘Those who follow the reading of Abu Musa, go to the corner nearest the Kinda door. Those who follow `Abdullah’s reading, go the corner nearest `Abdullah’s house.’ Their reading of Q 2.196 did not agree. One group read, ‘Perform the pilgrimage TO GOD’ The others read it ‘Perform the pilgrimage TO THE KA’BAH.’ Hudaifa became very angry, his eyes reddened and he rose, parting his qamis at the waits, although in the mosque. This was during the reign of `Uthman. Hudaifa exclaimed, ‘Will someone go the Command of the Faithful, or shall I go myself? This is what happened in the previous dispensations.’ He came over and sat down, saying, ‘God sent Muhammad who, with those who went forward, fought those who went back until God gave victory to His religion. God took Muhammad and Islam made strides. To succeed him, God chose Abu Bakr who reigned as long as God chose. God then took him and Islam made rapid strides. God appointed `Umar who sat in the midst of Islam. God then took him also. Islam spread rapidly. God next chose `Uthman. (Burton, p. 143, Abu Bakr `Abdullah b. abi Da’ud, “K. al Masahif”, ed. A. Jeffery, Cairo, 1936/1355, p. 11;)
We were sitting in the mosque and `Abdullah was reciting the Qur’an when Hudaifa came in and said, ‘The reading of ibn Umm `Abd! [ie. `Abdullah] The reading of Abu Musa! By God! if I am spared to reach the Commander of the Faithful, I will recommend THAT HE IMPOSE A SINGLE QUR’AN READING!’ ‘Abdullah became very angry and spoke sharply to Hudaifa who fell silent. (Burton, p. 142, Abu Bakr `Abdullah b. abi Da’ud, “K. al Masahif”, ed. A. Jeffery, Cairo, 1936/1355, p. 13)
Hudaifa said, ‘The Kufans say, “the text of `Abdullah“; the Basrans say, “the text of Abu Musa“. By God! if I reach the Commander of the faithful, I WILL RECOMMEND THAT HE DROWN THESE READINGS.” (var. Masahif) `Abdullah said, ‘Do and God will drown you, but not in water!’ (Burton, pp. 146-147- citing Abu Bakr `Abdullah b. abi Da’ud, “K. al Masahif”, ed. A. Jeffery, Cairo, 1936/1355, p. 13).
“The Syrians,” we are told, “contended with the `Iraqis, the former following the reading of Ubayy ibn Ka`b, the latter that of `Abd Allah ibn Mas’ud, each accusing the other of unbelief.” (Labib as-Said, The Recited Koran: A History of the First Recorded Version, tr. B. Weis, et al., Princeton, New Jersey: The Darwin Press, 1975, p. 23)
As the political preasure against Abdullah mounted, eventually, Ziad’s version (Utmanic textual tradition) became the source for the current rendering of the Quran. But, still remains some issues.
The Incomplete Teachings of Muhammad
When Umar heard people declaring that they knew the entire Qur’an, he said to them: “Let none of you say, ‘I have learned the whole of the Koran,’ for how does he know what the whole of it is, when much of it has disappeared? Let him rather say, ‘I have learned what is extant thereof’” (Abu Ubaid, Kitab Fada’il-al-Qur’an).
Ziad’s versions was also dependent on Abu Musa’s reciting of Muhammad’s teachings but with that came a problem. He forgot some of what Muhammad taught.
Abu Musa al-Ash’ari sent for the reciters of Basra. They came to him and they were three hundred in number. They recited the Qur’an and he said: You are the best among the inhabitants of Basra, for you are the reciters among them. So continue to recite it. (But bear in mind) that your reciting for a long time may not harden your hearts as were hardened the hearts of those before you. We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bara’at. I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it: “If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust.” And we used to recite a surah which resembled one of the surahs of Musabbihat, and I have forgotten it (Sahih Muslim 2286).
Not just there, but other places where teachings of Muhammad had been forgotten.
We used to recite a surah similar to one of the Musabbihat, and I no longer remember it, but this much I have indeed preserved: ‘O you who truly believe, why do you preach that which you do not practise?’ (and) ‘that is inscribed on your necks as a witness and you will be examined about it on the Day of Resurrection’. (As-Suyuti, Al-Itqan fii Ulum al-Qur’an, Page 526).
Another one of Muhammad’s wives (Aishah) also noticed that some verses were being left out. Even teachings relating to stoning and breastfeeding were not included in Ziad’s version because, well, one of her written records was eaten by a goat.
A’isha . . . said, “Surat al-Ahzab (33) used to be recited in the time of the Prophet with two hundred verses, but when Uthman wrote out the codices he was unable to procure more of it than there is in it today [i.e. 73 verses].” (Abu Ubaid, Kitab Fada’il-al-Qur’an)
“It was narrated that Aishah said: “The Verse of stoning and of breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed, and the paper was with me under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and ate it.” (Sunan ibn Majah 1944).
When considering all this, we see that the current version of the Quran is lacking a lot of Muhammad’s teachings. Of what was consolidated we can only truly conclude that it is the version of Ziad and what he chose to include. Even in his version, it still lacks all the teachings that were lost when followers of Muhammad were killed or simply forgot what he said. Those who disagreed with his version were attacked and their versions were eventually burned. But we don’t need their copies to know that the current version of the Quran is incomplete. The testimony from those who were close to Muhammad himself prove this. This leads to more questions regarding the reliability of the Quran.
Perfect Preservation?
How do we know Abdullah’s version is not the actual or more acurate words of Muhammad? It is historically recorded that his version was different. If both Abdullah and Ziad were both followers of Muhammad, who decided that Ziad’s version was the true version? Ziad? Because he had political backing? Does politics and power determine truth? That is actually a minor problem.
The real problem is the claim that the Quran has been perfectly preserved. This is logically not possible given the historical evidences from Muslim sources. By their own witness, passages have been lost, forgotten, and cherry picked to create the Quran we have today. The only thing that can be stated is that Ziad’s version has been preserved, but not all the teachings of Muhammad. In fact, it is not clear that Ziad’s versions is the perfect preservation of Muhammad’s teachings because it differed from Abdullah’s versions of what Muhammad taught. Not to mention there were other versions that may have also differed that were lost and burned.
The one thing that we can conclude is that Ziad ibn Thabit is the primary source for the modern Quran.
Surah 15:9 boldly declares “Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur’an and indeed, We will be its guardian.” But what happens if this declaration fails? Given the Muslim sources recording the loss of verses and forgotten verses it is proven to not have been completely guarded. This means the angels and chosen followers of Allah were unable safe guard the preservation of the revelations of Muhammad perfectly. How then can it be divine and not just the teachings of Ziad ibn Thabit?
A claim that can be made is that Ziad ibn Thabit’s version of the remaining teachings of Muhammad have been perfectly preserved. This is only true if we leave out the facts of the loss of teachings prior to Ziad’s final product. But then, who are Muslims really following? The teachings of Ziad ibn Thabit? They can’t say the teachings of Muhammad because, as shown above, some of his teachings have been lost AND others differed from Ziad’s version. So they can not say for sure they are following the teachings of Muhammad. The claim of a supernatural mathematical system that proves the perfect preservation only validates Ziad ibn Thabit’s version because it is not possible to include the calculations of teachings that were lost, forgotten, and burned.
If you have any questions or comments about this article please contact us or join our discussion forms
There are many subgroups of the Christian faith. These subgroups tailor their teachings and focuses in different ways. That is exactly how the Body of Christ functions BUT there are some groups that claim to be ‘Christian’ when in fact, they are not. Some deny being ‘Christian’ but claim to have similar beliefs and ‘more correct’ views than that of orthodox Christianity; but how can you identify a cult?
The Teachings
Cults proclaim a NEW teaching or a more correct teaching revealed by a NEW prophet or writing. Regardless of the source for their teaching, it is new a part from Christian orthodox. They may even teaching an old teaching that was NEW in prior history but which is still outside of orthodox Christianity. New writings are generated by the new prophet or group and followers are obligated to rely on the new writing along with or instead of The Bible. Essentially, Cults teach that The Bible is not enough, cherry picked sections are only ones correct, or over all incomplete.
The Rituals
Cults push followers to focus on their works by adhering to certain rituals or even abstaining from certain Christian orthodox acts such as communion and baptism. Some even morph these acts and teachings of the acts to fit their new or more correct revelations. Some rituals include financial indebtedness and status gains. Essentially, they become controlling, isolating, and works based.
Verifiable
Their revelations and teachings tend to be non-verifiable and use circular reasoning to justify them. A prophet is a prophet because it was revealed to him that he was. Or the writings are divine because they were written by someone who said his writings are divine. Some claim that they were given revelations in visions or by angels, and that’s that. Essentially, the founder and their writings are unverifiable and have to be believed simply based on claim alone.
Morality
Cults typically strive to be ‘good’ and do good. They attempt to satisfy psychological, emotional, and intellectual issues of their followers. They make their followers feel accepted and feel as though they have a purpose. Some even provide financial security and promises of material and spiritual rewards. But, this begins to fall apart once someone starts to question the groups teachings and wants to leave the group for what ever reason. Those who question and desire to leave are guilt tripped, become more isolated, and more controlled by the group and its leadership. The threat of destruction from God or their version of holy judgement is often deployed. Those who do leave are shunned, and persecuted. Those who remain in the group are caused to be depend greatly on the group.
Limit Learning
Cults often limit the source of their followers studies. The groups that use the bible as part of their system discourage studying the bible alone and require the use of their writings. This indoctrination allows for the cult to interpret how they want the bible to be interpreted to match their new teachings while at the same time allow the follower to feel as though they are learning what the bible says; even when they are not. This is another form of manipulation and control.
If you have any questions or comments about this article please contact us or join our discussion forms
If a religion completely dependent on who the Watchtower claims to be (sole divinely inspired interpreters of Gods word) conflicts with what is stated in their own bible translation and contain errors in their teachings, can they be of God? The question really is, if they were found to be false, are their followers truly genuine truth seekers who have the freedom to see it? Deuteronomy 18:21-22
21 You may say to yourselves, “How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the Lord?” 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the Lord does not take place or come true, that is a message the Lord has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously, so do not be alarmed.
We will even quote from The New World Translation:
“When the prophet speaks in the name of Jehovah and the word is not fulfilled or does not come true, then Jehovah did not speak that word. The prophet spoke it presumptuously. You should not fear him.’”
Clear and explicit.
With what God stated: lets consider Watchtower End Time prophecies
1888 “In this chapter we present the Bible evidence proving that the full end of the times of the gentiles, i.e., the full end of their lease of dominion, will be reached in A.D. 1914; and that the date will be the farthest limit of the rule of imperfect men. And be it observed, that if this is shown to be a fact firmly established by the Scriptures, it will prove; Firstly, that at that date the Kingdom of God, for which our Lord taught us to pray, saying, Thy Kingdom come, will obtain full, universal control, and that it will then be set up, or firmly established, in the earth, on the ruins of present institutions.” (The Time Is At Hand, 1888, p. 76, 77)
1889 “Be not surprised, then, when in subsequent chapters we present proofs that the setting up of the Kingdom of God is already begun, that it is pointed out in prophecy as due to begin the exercise of power in A.D. 1878, and that the ‘battle of the great day of God Almighty (Rev. 16:14) which will end in A.D. 1914 with the complete overthrow of earth’s present rulership, is already commenced. The gathering of the armies is plainly visible from the standpoint of God’s word.” (Studies in the Scriptures, Vol. 2, The Time Is At Hand, 1889 Ed., p. 101. The 1915 Edition of this texts changed “A.D. 1914” to read ‘A.D. 1915’)
1889 “In the coming 26 years, all present governments will be overthrown and dissolved.” (C.T. Russell, Studies in the Scriptures, Vol. 2, p. 98-99, 1889)
1889 “Remember that the forty years’ Jewish Harvest ended October A.D. 69, and was followed by the complete overthrow of that nation; and that likewise the forty years of the Gospel age harvest will end October, 1914, and that likewise the overthrow of ‘Christendom,‘ so-called, must be expected to immediately follow.” (Studies in the Scriptures, Vol. 2, p. 245)
1897 “Complete destruction of the ‘powers that be’ of ‘this present evil worlds – political, financial, ecclesiastical – about the close of the Time of the Gentiles; October A.D. 1914.” (C.T. Russell, Studies in the Scriptures, IV, p. 622, 1897)
“But bear in mind that the end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble.” Zion’s Watch Tower 1894 Jul 15 p.226
“Our thought is, that 1925 is definitely settled by the Scriptures. As to Noah, the Christian now has much more upon which to base his faith then Noah had upon which to base his faith in a coming deluge.” Watch Tower 1923 Apr 1 p.106
“… the remaining months before Armageddon.” Watchtower 1941 Sep 15 p.288
“Shortly, within our twentieth century, the “battle in the day of Jehovah” will begin against the modern antitype of Jerusalem, Christendom.” The Nations Shall Know That I Am Jehovah p.216
1942 “Now, with Armageddon immediately before us, it is a matter of life or destruction. Those who would be of the Lords other sheep that shall compose the great multitude of Armageddon survivors and live joyfully on earth forever must find the answer to a very personal question, and very important.” (Watchtower, April 1, 1942, p. 139)
1968 “Just think, brothers, there are only about ninety months left before 6,000 years of mans existence on earth is completed… The majority of people living today will probably be alive when Armageddon breaks out, and there are no resurrection hopes for those who are destroyed then. So, now more than ever, it is vital not to ignore that spirit of wanting to do more.” (Kingdom Ministry, March 1968, p. 4 [note: 1968 + 90 months = 1975])
1968 “But what about today? Today we have the evidence required, all of it. And it is overwhelming! All the many, many parts of the great sign of the last days are here, together with verifying Bible chronology.” (Awake!, Oct. 8, 1968, p. 23)
The following talk which was given at the 1967 District Convention in Wisconsin, by District Overseer Charles Sunutko “Something to reach out for and it just seems it has given all of us so much more energy and power in this final burst of speed to the finish line. And that’s the year 1975. Well, we don’t have to guess what the year 1975 means if we read the Watchtower. And don’t wait ’till 1975. The door is going to be shut before then. As one brother put it, “Stay alive to Seventy-Five“”
These examples straight from The Watchtower themselves are problematic in light of
Deuteronomy 18:21-22. So the END started in 1876 and completed in 1914, or should complete in 1925, or was Armageddon suppose to happen in 1941 and Christ earthly reign ended in 1975? If WW2 was Armageddon, then what happened to the END? What about the battle in the day of Jehovah? It is now the 21st century. These dates continue to fail but they kept kicking the can down the road through the years.
When did Jesus’ 2nd coming happen?
1879 “Christ came in the character of a Bridegroom in 1874…. at the beginning of the Gospel harvest.” (Watchtower, Oct 1879, p. 4)
“…the ‘battle of the great day of God Almighty (Rev. 16:14) which will end in A.D. 1914 with the complete overthrow of earth’s present rulership, is already commenced. (Studies in the Scriptures, Vol. 2, The Time Is At Hand, 1889 Ed., p. 101. The 1915 Edition of this texts changed “A.D. 1914” to read ‘A.D. 1915’)
1889 “In the coming 26 years, all present governments will be overthrown and dissolved.” (C.T. Russell, Studies in the Scriptures, Vol. 2, p. 98-99, 1889)
What happened to the complete overthrow of earth’s present rulership and were all present governments will be overthrown and dissolved by 1914? That is a big problem. To explain away this major falsehood they change what the bible says. Even changing what the bible says, this still does not negate the fact of what was explicitly stated by Jehovah’s Witnesses divinely inspired leaders who were believed to be of God. Since they are proven not of God, why are their teachings still believed? This disproves the foundations of the religion. That major issue aside, how do they then explain away the false teachings?
When Jesus did not show up on their date, they were forced to explain away the failure. They did this by seizing on a secondary meaning of one Greek word used in conjunction with Christ’s coming again. That word was parousia meaning “a being present, presence,” “a coming,” “an arrival.”
They would teach that Jesus did “come” and was “present” on their date, 1914, but since He did this in heaven, those on earth could not see it! His coming was conveniently invisible! All Jehovah’s Witnesses must believe this today. This particular Greek word was used in two scriptures, 2 Thessalonians 2:8 and 1 Thessalonians 3:13.
It is very clear that Christ will make an “appearance” which we will all see with our own eyes at “His coming.” Not so with the deliberately altered version of the Jehovah’s Witnesses which reads, “Then indeed, the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will do away with by the spirit of his mouth and bring to nothing by the manifestation of his presence” (New World Translation).
Notice how the word “presence” is used instead of “coming.” It is an acceptable translation from the Greek, but the presence is obviously not invisible, as the Jehovah’s Witnesses teach, since the whole phrase is “manifestation of his presence.” A “manifestation” comes from the root word “manifest,” which, according to the Doubleday Dictionary means, “to make plain to sight or understanding.”
Ignored by the Jehovah’s Witnesses are the other Greek words used along with parousia to describe the second coming of Christ. To be really accurate we need to look at them all, not just selected, isolated scriptures that can be twisted to suit one’s preconceived ideas.
Contradicting Themselves
Besides the failed prophecies and debunked divine leaders, there are other issues.
1989 “Back in 1904, the book The New Creation called attention to this new organization that came into existence in the first century C.E. (Studies In The Scriptures, Series VI, Study V, entitled “The Organization of the New Creation”) Owing to its view of what the end of the Gentile Times would mean, that book did not envision the remarkable organizational work that was due to take place after the crippling effects of the first world war of human history.” (The Watchtower; Sept. 1, 1989; p. 12-13)
How did divinely inspired foundational Godly leaders fail to see such a “remarkable” work?
1968 “True, there have been those in times past who predicted an “end” to the world, even announcing a specific date. Yet nothing happened. The ‘end’ did not come. They were guilty of false prophesying. Why? What was missing? Missing from such people were God’s truths and the evidence that He was using and guiding them.” (Awake, Oct. 8, 1968)
“Those” are the divinely inspired foundational Godly leaders, now being marginalized because of their disproven claims. Here later divinely inspired foundational Godly leaders admit to the previous problem. So, if divinely inspired foundational Godly leaders can be guilty of false prophesying, how then can you know that any divinely inspired foundational Godly leaders of the same group won’t or are not currently? Because they say so? Well, they have as well.
1972 “Does this admission of making mistakes stamp them [Watchtower] as false prophets? Not at all, for false prophets do not admit to making mistakes.” (Watchtower, Nov. 1, 1972, p. 644)
This is a poor justification for being exactly what they admit, false prophets. So I can blurt out any random future made up prophecy and as long as I admit the mistake, I am not a false prophet?
However, suddenly, there came an end to World War 1. It did not lead on, as Bible students expected, into world revolution and anarchy or the battle of Armageddon. And the sincere worshippers of Jehovah who were in the new covenant with him through his Mediator Jesus Christ, found themselves still in the flesh on the earth. (Man’s Salvation Out Of World Distress At Hand; 1975; p. 98).
They admit there is a problem, so what do they do? Simply by admitting when they are wrong, thus, making them always right? Because they say so? Or because they change what was previously prophesied and marginalize the prophet, makes them right? This does not negate what God stated in identifying false prophets and does not negate the fact they were still wrong.
Changes
1968 “I know enough of what is going on to assure you that, in fifteen years from today, this world is going to be too dangerous to live in.” (Truth That Leads To Eternal Life, p 9, 1968 edition, Quoting USA Secretary of State Dean Acheson in 1960, [1981 edition deleted “in fifteen years from today” ie. in 1975])
Odd that they would delete the specific date after it didn’t happen? Nothing changed. They continue to make failed prophecies and continue following an admitted false prophets, but as long as they admit it they can’t be wrong? (Watchtower, Nov. 1, 1972, p. 644).
1989 “The apostle Paul was spearheading the Christian missionary activity. He was also laying a foundation for a work that would be completed in our 20th century.” (Watchtower, Jan. 1, 1989, p. 12 [bound volume changed “20th century” to “day“])
And again, another change that they have to admit to.
1986 As far back as 1876, Jehovah’ s Witnesses realized that Bible prophecy marked the year 1914 C.E. as a time when major events would take place that would have far-reaching effects on human affairs. They gave the reason for this fact wide publicity. (True Peace And Security; 1986; p. 70)
So now, instead of quoting what was actually said back in 1876, they just rephrase in a way that does not seem false or contradictory. Even the new Watchtower convention video avoids the details and attempts to rephrase the failures. (http://jwsurvey.org/conventions/watchtower-whitewashes-failed-1975-prophecy-2017-convention-video). But what they can’t escape are the historical writings and quotes from their own self proclaimed prophets who were foundational in structuring the beliefs of Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Conclusion
If the Watchtower prophesies falsely, are they of God? Simple question. Since the Watchtower organization can not be from God without first contradicting God (proven above), what does that mean for the religion those prophets founded and continue to perpetuate? Are Jehovah’s Witnesses free to think and question to discern truth and lies?
If you have any questions or comments about this article please contact us or join our discussion forms
Evangelism takes shape in many forms. At times God has random strangers walk up and ask random questions that spark spiritual conversations. Other times major life events causes us to reflect on deeper matters which leads to spiritual conversations. And at times, God even uses the internet. In this case, God chose to use the internet. A devout Jehovah Witness reached out and shared a screen shot image from the JW website about who they think Jesus is. Given the massive importance of the topic, we felt it was necessary to engage in a dialog with this individual but it quickly changed in tempo, tone, and agenda.
THE DISCUSSION
We began to address the question, soon more questions rolled in. As we attempted to address the new questions; the previously answered questions were re posted or asked in a different way. It was odd but we continually attempted to address the same questions in the new re-posts.
The answers were not to the satisfaction of the individual, and as the same questions were re-posted, we noticed that our answers were being left out. Even in some cases, only our references to support our answers remained but our actual answers were cropped out of the screen shot.
The individual’s rebuttals to our answers were in forms of YouTube videos produced by JW or screen shots from the JW website alone (later Wikipedia was used). We then began to focus on bringing to light the unreliability of the NWT and issues with believing what you are told solely based off what the watchtower organization teaches.
The issues with the unreliability of the NWT and sole influence of the watchtower organization were never addressed by the individual. Only more questions and rephrased questions without our answers were continually posted.
As we redirected the focus on the individual’s only sources, we began to notice our replies deleted and left out of screen shots as the same questions were re-posted again and again.
We then would ask follow up questions after we addressed the individuals question. But, our questions were never answered. No big deal, because our answers to their questions still shed light on the issue and brought truth to the odd constant questioning.
Given that this whole discussion (turned into an interrogation) was on Twitter, which limits messages to only 140 characters AND the constant bombardment of questions and re-posted questions; keeping up was becoming rather difficult.
The individual then made comments about how we had an audience. It was then we realized that this was no longer a discussion but an attempt to publicly belittle and vilify. So our focus shifted to the dishonesty of the re-posts and questioning and the unreliable nature of the sources.
Gradually, the questioning turned to more personal attacks and “showing [our] true colors” but the re-posts were manipulated where our answers were purposefully not included in the re-posts; with the accusation of avoiding to give an answer or changing the topics. A clear dishonest accusation so that his audience would feel as though we were doing so. When in fact we did address the topic, gave an answer which was deleted or cropped out of the screen shot in the re-post. So the audience would not be able to see our answers, the original post was also deleted.
As we stood fast and focused on the fact the questions were answered in previous posts about Jesus and The Bible, questioning the reliability of the sources, and pointing out and exposing the dishonesty; we were then blocked.
WHY SHARE THIS?
There are important lessons to be learned here. Those who do not live in the light, hate the light (John 3:30). What is the light in regards to this discussion? The truth about God and Jesus. The whole things started with the true identity of Jesus. This individual may not have hated the person sharing the truth about Jesus but they hated the truth about Jesus: that He is God. How is this hatred? Well, if someone is truly forgiving, merciful, patient, loving, and gracious, there would be no need to block someone if they are having a simple civil spiritual conversation. There would be no need to try and be dishonest and manipulative. But it is the hatred of the light that leads people to become dishonest, manipulative, impatient and intolerant of truth.
Another lesson to be learned is that God WILL be glorified even if the hatred of the individual causes them to reject the dialog. The person who remained patient and gracious in the conversation did so in faithfulness to the Lord despite the turned public interrogation and belittlement. Not to mention, being in the public sphere, God may lead others, who witnessed all this, to be exposed to the truth. For HIS will to be done!
In this day in age, social networks and the internet are a huge tool to reach people around the world. Proclaiming the person and work of Jesus Christ world wide IS the mission; and this is a God given tool to do so.
THESE TYPE OF CONVERSATIONS ARE COMMON
The conversations usually start off civil. A back and forth discussion about spiritual matters. That is a good thing! BUT when the lies become exposed, those who genuinely believe in the lies commonly become more and more hostile; that’s natural. BUT the dialog usually shifts from spiritual matters to personal matters; turns from a discussion to an interrogation in an attempt to shame, discredit, vilify, and belittle the truth speaker through any means necessary like dishonest quoting, and manipulation. When these more extreme attempts fail and are also exposed; the dialog falls apart and the person who hates the truth flees or seeks to silence the truth speaker. Because these situations on social networks, online forums, and conversation tools all over the internet are common, we should expect it BUT hope and pray for the truth to impact their heart by the conviction of The Holy Spirit.
COMMONALITIES TO LOOK FOR
HELPFUL INFORMATION FOR COMMON DISCUSSIONS
We pray that this person considers the truths presented and the Holy Spirit works in their heart and mind to genuinely seek truth. We thank the Lord for this opportunity to Glorify Him through the means that He has offered. We pray that anyone following the conversation is impacted for God’s glory and seek Jesus Christ as their Lord God and Savior.
If you have any questions or comments about this article please contact us or join our discussion forms
The Bible is a collection of ancient manuscripts of the original texts passed down through history. Scholars gather, compile, translate, research and compare all discovered manuscripts and support texts to determine the original biblical texts. This article will discuss an overview of biblical manuscripts and textual criticism; we will explain a brief overview of what Textual Criticism is, creation of source documents to recreate a document that closest resembles the original, what actual biblical manuscripts we currently have to study, and what source documents current bible translations depend on.
MANUSCRIPT AVAILABILITY = INCREASED RELIABILITY
First, we need to understand the vastness of Biblical Manuscripts compared of other non biblical ancient documents. The Greek Philosopher Plato, for example, lived around 427 BC and lived to be about 80 years old. THE oldest surviving manuscript is dated to around 895 AD. That is over a 1,200 year gap from author to current manuscript. It is volume one of two, the second of which has not been discovered. Let us also consider the manuscripts of Julius Caesar. The oldest account of what Caesar said and did comes from Roman Historians in the 2nd century, 100 years after Caesar, BUT the oldest copy of their manuscripts are 900 years or later from the authors, AND only 12 total manuscripts exist. In school, did you ever question the historical reliability of Plato and Julius Caesar?
Now, lets consider Biblical Manuscripts and their dating. John Rylands Fragment, which contains
John 18:31-33, 37-38, is originally dated to 96 AD. This is only 60 years after Jesus walked the earth. The probability that this could be a copy of The Apostle John’s original is plausible. The fragment itself is dated to around 120AD. Only 30 years after John and 90 years after Jesus is the actual copy we have today. The Bodmer Papyrus is originally dated around the 70s AD, 40 years after Jesus and while some of the Apostles were still alive. The papyrus itself is dated to the end of the 2nd century, putting that exact manuscript that we have in our hands within only 130 years from Jesus and the Apostles.
Now, comparing these examples from secular manuscripts with biblical manuscripts we see something very important:
Let us also look at the number of manuscripts we have discovered.
Understandably, Caesar did not write volumes like Plato or biblical authors. But, when comparing volume verses volume of Plato and The Bible we see a HUGE difference. There are 5,550 MORE manuscripts of the Bible than there are of Plato and his discovered manuscripts. The importance of this we will get to later.
Thus, we can see that Biblical Textual Criticism can be more reliable than that of secular ancient texts. Because of the closeness to authorship and the vast amount of manuscripts; we have a more accurate deduction of the original texts can be made.
SYSTEMATIC TEXTUAL CRITICISM
When investigating the New Testament manuscripts it is important that each manuscript is organized in its relation to date of creation and its relation to other manuscripts. a systematic approach introduced in 1981 by Kurt and Barbara Aland organized biblical manuscripts by ‘text type’. A Text-type is organizing manuscripts based on their similarities and putting them into a family of text. Word usage, key words and phrases, location, and outside witnesses can identify what family the text belongs to. When evaluating a family or Text-type, textual critics and then better determine the source of that family.
CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCE
External evidence of each physical witness, its date, source, and relationship to other known witnesses help in determining its family type. Critics will often prefer the readings supported by the oldest witnesses. Since errors tend to accumulate, older manuscripts should have fewer errors. Readings supported by a majority of witnesses are also usually preferred, since these are less likely to reflect accidents or individual biases. Internal evidence that comes from the text itself, independent of the physical characteristics of the document. Shorter readings are general observations that the scribes/copyists tended to add words, for clarification or out of habit, more often than they removed them. Harder readings recognizes the tendency for harmonization or resolving apparent inconsistencies in the text. Applying this leads to taking the more unharmonized reading as being more likely to be the original. The critic may also examine the other writings of the author to decide what words and grammatical constructions match his style. The evaluation of internal evidence also provides the critic with information that helps him evaluate the reliability of individual manuscripts.
Sentence structure, punctuation, word spelling, word usage, and specific details help date when the original or manuscript was written. Older greek manuscripts were written in upper case letters. Later greek manuscripts were written in lower case letters. Also handwriting practices changed; in Greek texts after the year 900 AD, scribes began to increase the use of ligatures in which they began to connect two or more characters much like cursive. Some will detail historic events in present or past tenses which points to a specific time period of authorship. Others will leave out extremely important historic events that would relate to the authors subject; which points to the authorship before the event occurred. Considering all these factors in the manuscript, scholars can be confident in a date range of the writing and its original source.
Finding errors can also help in determining the original of a family of texts. The principle that “community of error implies community of origin.” If two witnesses have a number of errors in common, it may be presumed that they were derived from a common intermediate source, called a hyparchetype.
COMPILING A SOURCE DOCUMENT
Variations in the texts exist and what one omits, the others may retain; what one adds, the others are unlikely to add. Eclecticism allows inferences to be drawn regarding the original text, based on the evidence of contrasts between witnesses. The result of this Eclecticism process is a text with readings drawn from many witnesses. It is not a copy of any particular manuscript, and may even deviate from the majority of existing manuscripts. In a purely eclectic approach, no single witness is theoretically favored. Instead, the critic forms opinions about individual witnesses, relying on both external and internal evidence.
The critic can then proceed to the selection step, where the text of the archetype is determined by examining variants from the closest hyparchetypes to the archetype and selecting the best ones. If one reading occurs more often than another at the same level of the tree, then the dominant reading is selected. After evaluating all related family text types and their variants and supporting evidences, the critic then can compile the hyparchetype into a source document, or a archtype that matches the original.
THE OLD TESTAMENT
Dead Sea Scrolls: These ancient scripts of the OT were written around 150 BC to 70 AD. It contains an impressive complete Isaiah scroll and a large number of Psalms manuscripts. In all, they contained manuscripts of 29 OT books of the current bible.
The Septuagint is a Greek version of an early OT bible. This specific translation quoted a number of times in the New Testament, particularly in Pauline epistles, and also by the Apostolic Fathers and later Greek Church Fathers. We know this from the wording of the quotes. The title in greek μετάφρασις τῶν Ἑβδομήκοντα, means “The Translation of the Seventy” and its symbol is LXX which refers to the seventy Jewish scholars who solely translated the Five Books of Moses into Koine Greek as early as the 3rd century BC. Translations of the Torah into Koine Greek by early Jewish Rabbis have survived as rare fragments only. Pre-Christian Jews such as Philo and Josephus considered the Septuagint on equal standing with the Hebrew text. Manuscripts of the Septuagint have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, and were thought to have been in use among Jews at the time. The New Testament writers, when citing the Jewish scriptures, or when quoting Jesus doing so, freely used the Greek translation, implying that Jesus’ Apostles and their followers considered it reliable.
Later in its history, the Septuagint was widely used by the new Christian sect and thus, the Jewish authority began to denounce its use. They then re-translated the OT in a Hebrew, of which, most new Jewish-Christian converts were not able to read. Irenaeus stated that, concerning Isaiah 7:14, the Septuagint clearly writes of a virgin (Greek παρθένος, bethulah in Hebrew) that shall conceive, while the word almah in the Hebrew text was, according to Irenaeus, at that time interpreted by Theodotion and Aquila (both devout in the Jewish faith) as a young woman that shall conceive. According to Irenaeus, the Ebionites used this to claim that Joseph was the (biological) father of Jesus. From Irenaeus’ point of view that was pure heresy, facilitated by (late) anti-Christian alterations of the scripture in Hebrew, as evident by the older, pre-Christian, Septuagint. This shows the later change of the Hebrew writings contradicting the older, pre-Christian, OT Greek translation.
The LXX is comprised of: 2nd century BC fragments of Leviticus and Deuteronomy. 1st century BC fragments of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, and the Minor Prophets. Relatively complete manuscripts of the LXX postdate the Hexaplar rescension and include the Codex Vaticanus from the 4th century AD and the Codex Alexandrinus of the 5th century.
The oldest extant complete Hebrew texts date some 600 years later, from the first half of the 10th century. The 4th century Codex Sinaiticus also partially survives, still containing many texts of the LXX Old Testament.
The Peshitta was translated into Syriac from Hebrew, probably in the 2nd century AD, and that the New Testament of the Peshitta was translated from the Greek. Earliest manuscript, designated as “5b1”, which is dated to the second half of 5th century. The manuscript includes only Genesis, Exodus, Numbers and Deuteronomy, and the text is more similar to the Masoretic Text. The Codex Ambrosianus designated as “7a1”, dates from the 6th or the 7th century, and includes all the books of the Hebrew Bible. Syr. 341 designated as “8a1”, dating from the 8th century or prior with many corrections, it includes all the books of the Hebrew Bible.
The Vulgate is a late 4th-century Latin translation of the Bible. The translation was largely the work of St Jerome, who, in 382, had been commissioned by Pope Damasus I to revise the Vetus Latina (“Old Latin”) Gospels then in use by the Roman Church. Jerome, on his own initiative, extended this work of revision and translation to include most of the Books of the Bible. Dating from the 8th century, the Codex Amiatinus is the earliest surviving manuscript of the complete Vulgate Bible. The Codex Fuldensis, dating from around 545, contains most of the New Testament in the Vulgate version. The Codex Cavensis is a 9th-century Latin Bible.
The Masoretic Text designated as MT, 𝕸, or 
Not nearly as many manuscripts exist as of the New Testament but quite a lot is know of what the original text meaning is. Though there are variants in the different manuscripts, almost all of the textual variants are fairly insignificant and hardly affect any doctrine. Professor Douglas Stuart states: “It is fair to say that the verses, chapters, and books of the Bible would read largely the same, and would leave the same impression with the reader, even if one adopted virtually every possible alternative reading to those now serving as the basis for current English translations.”
NEW TESTAMENT
The New Testament manuscripts are categorized in 5 ‘families’. Category I – Alexandrian, Category II – Egyptian, Category III – Eclectic, Category IV – Western, and Category V – Byzantine.
Alexandrian Text-type: The Alexandrian text-type is the form of the Greek New Testament that represents the earliest surviving manuscripts. The oldest, near complete manuscript is The Codex Vaticanus and is dated around 300 AD. the Codex Vaticanus originally contained a virtually complete copy of the Septuagint. The Codex Sinaiticus is also of the Alexandrian family and is dated around 330 to 360AD. It originally contained a virtually complete copy of the Septuagint Which are different from the far later Textus Receptus generated by Erasmus. The Codex Alexandrinus dated around 400AD.
A number of substantial papyrus manuscripts of portions of the New Testament survive. The earliest translation of the New Testament into an Egyptian Coptic version — the Sahidic of the late 2nd century — uses the Alexandrian text as a Greek base. The Chester Beatty II and Bodmer II are dated to the 2nd Century. Bodmer VII, VIII, XIV and XV are dated to the 3th century.
Considering these earliest manuscripts and the Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus, and Codex Alexandrinus, not to mention late 1st through 5th century quotes from early church teachers; the new testament message can be compiled from manuscripts no later than the 5th century.
The Western text-type is the predominant form of the New Testament text witnessed in the Old Latin and Peshitta translations from the Greek, and also in quotations from certain 2nd and 3rd-century Christian writers, including Cyprian, Tertullian and Irenaeus. This text type often presents longer variants of text, but in a few places. Papyrus 37, 48, Papyrus Michigan, Oxyrhynchus XXIV are dated to the 3rd century. 0171, Codex Bezae, and some portion of Codex Sinaiticus are Western type dated to the 4th century. Codex Washingtonianus is dated to the 5th century and Codex Claromontanus is dated to the 6th century.
Compared to the Byzantine text-type distinctive Western readings in the Gospels are more likely to be abrupt in their Greek expression. Compared to the Alexandrian text-type distinctive Western readings in the Gospels are more likely display glosses, additional details, and instances where the original passages appear to be replaced with longer paraphrases. Although the Western text-type survives in relatively few witnesses, some of these are as early as the earliest witnesses to the Alexandrian text type. Nevertheless, the majority of text critics consider the Western text in the Gospels to be characterized by periphrasis and expansion; and accordingly tend to prefer the Alexandrian readings.
The Byzantine text-type is the form found in the largest number of surviving manuscripts, though not in the oldest. While considerably varying, it is the basis for the Textus Receptus Greek text. The earliest Church Father to witness to a Byzantine text-type in substantial New Testament quotations is John Chrysostom (c. 349 — 407). The second earliest translation to witness to a Greek base conforming generally to the Byzantine text in the Gospels is the Syriac Peshitta. Although in respect of several much contested readings, such as Mark 1:2 and John 1:18, the Peshitta rather supports the Alexandrian witnesses. The Ethiopic version of the Gospels; best represented by the surviving fifth and sixth century manuscripts of the Garima Gospels and classified by Rochus Zuurmond as “early Byzantine”. Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus is majority Byzantine, Codex Guelferbytanus B, and Uncial 061 are dated around the 5th century. Codex Basilensis is dated in the 8th century. Codex Boreelianus, Codex Seidelianus I and II, Codex Angelicus, Codex Mosquensis II, Codex Macedoniensis, Codex Koridethi, Minuscule 1424, and Codex Vaticanus 354 are dated to the 9th century. Minuscule 1241 is dated o the 12th century.
The Byzantine readings tend to show a greater tendency toward smooth and well-formed Greek, they display fewer instances of textual variation between parallel Synoptic Gospel passages, and they are less likely to present “difficult” issues of exegesis. For example, Mark 1:2 reads “As it is written in the prophets…” in the Byzantine text; whereas the same verse reads, “As it is written in Isaiah the prophet…” in all other early textual witnesses. In that instance, what is being quoted is from Isaiah but also from Malachi. Thus; the Byzantine witness tends to change the wording for a fuller understanding.
The explanation of the wide spread later use of the Byzantine text-type can be explained when Constantine I paid for the wide distribution of manuscripts which came from the group of church teachers who came together to generate a source document of older manuscripts. There are several references by Eusebius of Caesarea to Constantine paying for manuscript production.
John Rylands Papyrus 457, P52 – 125AD
“so that the word of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spoke signifying what kind of death he was going to die.”
ΙΝΑ Ο ΛΟΓΟΣ ΤΟΥ ΙΗΣΟΥ ΠΛΗΡΩΘΗ ΟΝ ΕΙΠΕΝ ΣΗΜΑΙΝΩΝ ΠΟΙΩ ΘΑΝΑΤΩ ΗΜΕΛΛΕΝ ΑΠΟΘΝΗΣΚΕΙΝ
(The words underlined and in bold are what are stated in this fragment)
Codex Sinaiticus – 330 to 360AD
“that the word of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spoke signifying by what kind of death he was about to die.”
να ι ουδενα ϊνα ο λογοϲ του ιυ πληρωθη ┬ ϲημαινω ποιω θανατω ημελλεν αποθνη
(http://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manuscript.aspx?book=36&chapter=18&lid=en&side=r&verse=32&zoomSlider=0)
Textus Receptus – 1500AD – 1600AD
“That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake, signifying what death he should die.”
ἵνα ὁ λόγος τοῦ Ἰησοῦ πληρωθῇ ὃν εἶπεν σημαίνων ποίῳ θανάτῳ ἤμελλεν ἀποθνῄσκειν
(http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/joh18.pdf) (https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/jhn/18/32/t_conc_1015032)
Spanning over 1,475 years, and yet, they literally say the same thing. The Byzantine Text-type (Textus Receptus) also continues the same message, 1,475 years later. This is not even considering the thousands of other manuscripts and comparing all of them. The Diagram below simplistically illiterates this:
COMBINED SOURCE DOCUMENTS
Combining the Greek family of manuscripts into a single document is what came next. In 1516 the Novum Instrumentum omne was published. Compiled by Erasmus and using Byzantine Text-type as its primary source it was a foundational document for early church translations which later generated the King James bible.
The Institute for New Testament Textual Research reconstructed its Greek initial text on the basis of the entire manuscript tradition, the early translations and patristic citations; furthermore the preparation of an Editio Critica Maior based on the entire tradition of the New Testament in Greek manuscripts, early versions and New Testament quotations in ancient Christian literature. This source document from the INTF is called the Novum Testamentum Graece and refers to the Nestle-Aland editions of the translated source document and is currently in its 28th edition, abbreviated NA28 of which the United Bible Societies (UBS) also uses. The critical text is an eclectic text compiled by a committee that examines a large number of manuscripts in order to determine which reading is most likely to be closest to the original.
A new massive Textual Criticism project is underway by the INTF. Editio Critica Maior (ECM) is a critical edition of the Greek New Testament being produced. They acquired over 90% of the known biblical material on microfilm or photo. The project Editio Critica Maior is supported by the Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities. It is to be completed by the year 2030. The International Greek New Testament Project (IGNTP) began in 1926 as a cooperative enterprise between British and German scholars to establish a new critical edition of the New Testament. The project was resurrected in 1949 as a cooperative endeavour between British and North American scholars. British and North American cooperation resulted in the publication of a critical apparatus for the Gospel of Luke in the 1980s. Current research focuses on the Gospel of John, and the surviving majuscule manuscripts have been published in print and electronic form. The present committee comprises scholars from Europe and North America.
The Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, abbreviated as BHS, is an edition of the Masoretic Text of the Hebrew Bible as preserved in the Leningrad Codex, and supplemented by masoretic and text-critical notes.
The Eastern Orthodox Bible (EOB) (in progress) is an extensive revision and correction of Brenton’s translation which was primarily based on Codex Vaticanus. Its language and syntax have been modernized and simplified. It also includes extensive introductory material and footnotes featuring significant inter-LXX and LXX/MT variants.
TEXTUAL BASIS FOR BIBLE VERSIONS
These 9 canonical manuscripts and fragment manuscript families of more than 25,000 total manuscripts are then compiled and translated into a single source document reflecting the archtype of the originals.
From these combined archtype source documents, Bible versions are then translated and printed in common languages. There are different types of publication methods. Word for Word translations (formal), thought for thought (dynamic), paraphrased, or a methodical blend.
(KJV) (NASB) (NIV)
There are about 5,800 Greek manuscripts, 10,000 Latin manuscripts and 9,300 manuscripts in various other ancient languages including Syriac, Slavic, Ethiopic and Armenian of the New Testament. Professor D. A. Carson states: “nothing we believe to be doctrinally true, and nothing we are commanded to do, is in any way jeopardized by the variants. This is true for any textual tradition. The interpretation of individual passages may well be called in question; but never is a doctrine affected.“
EP Sanders, Arts and Sciences Professor of Religion at Duke University, who himself is nonchristian and open secular historian honestly stated: “Historical reconstruction is never absolutely certain, and in the case of Jesus it is sometimes highly uncertain. Despite this, we have a good idea of the main lines of his ministry and his message. We know who he was, what he did, what he taught, and why he died. ….. the dominant view [among scholars] today seems to be that we can know pretty well what Jesus was out to accomplish, that we can know a lot about what he said, and that those two things make sense within the world of first-century Judaism.” All this, he concludes, comes from the vast amount of manuscripts and evidence of the bible.
Some of the actual photo copy of manuscripts can be viewed and studied at:
Conclusion
To claim that we can not know what the original text said is to then discredit every ancient historical writing ever written about anyone from Alexander The Great to Plato to Julius Caesar himself. The fact is there is vast amounts of hard proof and outside evidences that lead even secular historians to admit that we can know details about ancient persons, including Jesus and ancient Israel. Christians who doubt and nonchristians who discredit do so because of willful ignorance of current evidences. We CAN know and we do know, because God has allowed us to know, through preserving what he has preserved; found in the 25,000 hard copy manuscripts we have today and the vast amount of outside biblical support and evidences as well.
Also read Did the Apostles distort what Jesus taught? | Modern Secular Historians and The Bible | Early Accounts of Christianity from Non-Christians | Why The Disciples of The Apostles Matter Today | Apologetics main page
If you have any questions or comments about this article please contact us or join our discussion forms
There is a belief in fundamentalist Christian groups that the King James Bible is the most reliable biblical text and some even claim it is the only true Bible translation. They are firm in the loyalty to the KJV and trust it is the closest version to the original texts of scripture and some claim it is the exact same as the originals in translation. But is this true? To figure this out we will look at the KJV sources, translation, author, and consider God’s prevision of his Word through textual criticism.
Also read Modern Secular Historians and The Bible | Early Accounts of Christianity from Non-Christians | Why The Disciples of The Apostles Matter Today
CONCLUSION
Erasmus compiled source texts for the KJV using text types that he chose and that which were only available to him at that time. It was a monumental task and effort. He is a respected translator and scholar as well. Despite all this, there exists scores of evidence to show that his source text for the KJV was more flawed than current bible translated source texts. There have been more discoveries of biblical manuscripts and more earlier church father quotes and their notes about more ancient texts to guide us, now, in more accurate textual criticism to determine better biblical translations. This is why most modern scholars favor the Alexandrian text types and the source documents that use the Alexandrian text type as their primary sources. To claim that the King James Bible is a divine translation in the English language and all other translations are ‘of the devil’ is to ignorantly or selfishly avoid the evidence against this. Given the historical record and considering all evidences; we can conclude that the King James translation is not the best in and of itself.
Also read What Makes Christianity The True Faith? | What is ‘Doctrine’ and does it matter? | Why Are There So Many Translations? | Has The Bible Changed?
Some people think that being a good neighbor is serving the Lord, but then just leave it at that. Others feel that living a ‘gospel’ lifestyle is good enough so proclaiming the gospel to your neighbor is not necessary. Some still, avoid conversations about spiritual things and justify themselves with ideas like “my neighbor sees my gospel lifestyle” or “I do nice things for my neighbor, so they see God through that”. But is that actually serving and Glorifying God and actually loving your neighbor; Are we actually taking the REAL opportunities that God places us in to proclaim the good news of Jesus Christ?
To be quite frank, those examples above are not being faithful to the Lord. There is no such thing as a ‘gospel lifestyle’ because The Gospel is a spoken message that we are called to speak and teach. The second example does mean anything at all really; atheists and Buddhist monks can do ‘nice’ things for their neighbor too; but both are in vain because the person and work of Jesus is still not made known.
Some Christians fail to see the opportunities to participate in God’s eternal plan for their neighbor. Other times, they recognize an opportunity but for one excuse or another, they justify not taking advantage of the observation. Largely in part to the fact they fail to understand how immensely important that opportunity is and how vast the weight and value of it really is. Serving the Lord is being faithfully pro-active.
THE IMPORTANCE, VALUE, AND WEIGHT
If you the person you were speaking with was going to die a horrific death driving to Walmart following meeting with you; would you not try and stop them from going to Walmart? or at least warn them? See, that is just a risk of physical death. What if the risk was ETERNAL DEATH AND ETERNAL SEPARATION FROM GOD. Isn’t that important enough to have some sort of urgency to proclaim the gospel to them? Is their physical AND spiritual rightness with God worth the conversation and gospel presentation? Isn’t the responsibility and calling to proclaiming the greatest message in all the universe, that you hold, heavy enough to give to someone who needs it?
If Christians DO understand the importance, value and weight of the gospel, why then do some not proclaim it when there is an obvious opportunity and invitation to do so? For a number of reasons.
There is a 5th reason for why some do not serve the Lord and give witness of the Gospel:
5. They do love their neighbor, they trust God, believe in the truth and power of the Gospel, and are not concerned about what their neighbor thinks; they just don’t know what to say or how to say it. They are unaware of how easy and simple it actually is.
WHAT IS A REAL OPPORTUNITY?
What is meant by a REAL Opportunity is not going door to door or yelling on the street corner. Though real opportunities may come from those, Lord willing. A real opportunity to give a gospel presentation is when the subject, situation, and individuals are willing and conducive to the discussion. If, in a natural conversation, your neighbor says something like “hey, I got a question…” and its a spiritual question; boom, that is a wide open door for a gospel conversation and presentation. That is a NATURAL and INVITING, REAL opportunity to glorify God and proclaim the Gospel. Even uninviting/hostel natural invitations into spiritual conversations can be real opportunities.
Sometimes, some people just want to debate and argue. But does that matter? Sometimes the Lords wants others around who are listening to hear the message; even if the debater is unwilling to listen or accept the message. Sometimes, in the debaters mind, they refuse the message, but in their heart, they hear it; and it effects them at a later date. The point is, God’s Will will be done over all the hearers no matter the situation. A REAL opportunity can be a nice and intimate conversation with a peaceful neighbor that happened naturally in a conversation OR a real opportunity can be forced on your lap in a hostel situation where you are called on by a aggressive individual to give your ‘opinion’. Either way, it was in God’s Will for YOU to give an account for the truth that is in you; the person and work of Jesus Christ — the gospel.
SEEING THE REAL OPPORTUNITY
Being able to spot the opportunity, in a lot of ways, is God himself tapping you on the shoulder and pointing to the situation; making you aware of the opportunity. If it was not for God, we would never realize or be aware of the opportunity. BUT, WHEN, we do see the opportunity, we are put in a spot of decision. To act on that opportunity or run/hide from it. We run and hide from it for the reasons previously listed above.
WHAT DO WE SAY?
When we act on the obvious and real opportunity; we keep in mind our hearer and where they are at in life. We consider their attitude and demeanor toward ‘religion’ and God. We ALWAYS want to be KIND in our words. Wise as a serpent and soft as a dove (Matthew 10:16). We know, as revealed by God in his Holy Word, that those who do not believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, are not saved. BUT we do NOT, as the first thing we say to them, that they are going to Hell. WHY NOT? Because there is no understanding of the vastness and horrible nature of Hell. To them, that is only a vain insult. Because there is no actual meaning or truth of Hell, your statement, even though maybe be true in some ways, has no actual kind value to them. It is vain and unfruitful to spit out all kinds of truths that have not realized value or meaning unless you are saved in the first place. That’s like explaining The Trinity to someone who doesn’t believe Jesus actually existed. Clearly a different issue needs to be addressed first; like the actual historic existence of Jesus. Without that, explaining The Trinity wouldn’t mean anything. This brings us to the next critical question:
WHERE DO WE START?
We want to be lovingly and kind-fully tactful in our approach to a genuine and real opportunity to proclaim the gospel to people outside of the church (Colossians 4:5-6; Matthew 10:16). We need to consider the person and situations. After we evaluate the person and situation we can better address their more urgent needs and issues. BUT no matter the different word choices and the unique dynamic issues each individual faces; there is one core and primary message to ALWAYS start with that is THE cause for changing hearts and minds of hearers: The GRACE of God.
THE GRACE OF GOD
This truth alone is responsible for the drawing, calling, convicting, converting, and unwavering faith of ALL believers. The GRACE of God impacts ALL aspects of life. It is also the one single truth that propels Christianity above ALL other man-centered religions. God’s UNMERITED FAVOR. The favor we DO NOT and CAN NOT earn. The favor that WE DO NOT and WILL NEVER deserve. The GRACE that we needed from birth till the day we leave this world. The GRACE that we need with how we interact with our neighbor and even how we interact with God himself. Without God’s Grace, this blog is useless, you reading this is pointless, and life itself is vain. BUT because God has been GRACIOUS toward us by allowing us to exist despite how offensive we are; here we are, discussing how to explain this kind of Grace to others. Without understanding the amazing Grace of a Holy and Just God, we can not really fully understand other truths. Why? Because understanding God’s Grace is understanding God’s eternal nature, motivations, purposes, and desires. From there, it NATURALLY leads to all primary truths of the Gospel message.
PRIMARY TRUTHS:
1. God sent his ONLY Son, Jesus, to live the life that we can not live. Why? Because God desires his creation to know him, love him, and worship him. Because we can not live the perfect life that a Holy and Just God requires. Because imperfection, corruption, and unholiness can not be in his perfect, uncorrupted and holy presence. Because God is perfectly just and right, unholiness needs to be addressed.
2. Jesus was crucified and physically died as the perfect payment for sin. Why? Because only the perfect value in Jesus can cover the cost of our imperfection and sin. Why? Because if we tried to pay for each others sins, sin would remain; and God’s justice would still require something to satisfy what was still remaining. Jesus, alone, satisfies the perfect justice of God because he alone is perfect.
3. Jesus rose from the dead three days later and appeared to the Apostles and over 500 people. Why? Because Jesus expressed how he is the Son of God, divine, holy, and in perfect union with God The Father; thus proving his power over absolute bodily death. Why? Because he is exactly who he said he is and purposely made witnesses of this fact for all time. Whom then went throughout the world, as instructed by Jesus, to proclaim this truth; the truth of who he is and what he did.
4. All whom believe in this truth, of the person and work of Jesus Christ, will be made new, spiritually alive, right before God, and given eternal life. Why? Because this was God’s plan for all those who believe. God desires mercy. Willing to forgive. Grants the free gift of salvation and eternal life. And did it all through his Son.
5. But, God, in his love and justice; gives people exactly want they desire. Either life with him through his Son, or life without him. Either way, the issue of unholiness and imperfection still has to be addressed at the end of this life. Why? Because God is perfectly Just and perfectly loving. BUT through his perfect GRACE he offers everyone the gift of his Son’s life for theirs so that they may have eternal life with him.
Explaining these 5 truths in light of God’s Sovereign Grace is the most loving conversation anyone can ever have in this life. Period. Debating evolution verses creationism, church worship styles, and if having a beer is a sin or not are SECONDARY to the gospel message.
HOW TO BE PREPARED
Its not always how prepared you are but how confident you are in these truths. We need to study the gospel for ourselves as often as possible. We need to examine ourselves so that KNOW the person and works of Jesus Christ. Through this reinforced understanding and emboldened faith; we are confidently equipped to proclaim the gospel to others. In simple terms; study the gospel message. Know it. Preach it to your self. Study the following:
THE ROMAN ROAD
This is a good string of verses that express the Gospel:
1 Peter 3:15 states “but honor the Messiah as Lord in your hearts. Always be ready to give a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you.”
NATURALLY ADDRESS OTHER ISSUES
Discussing the Grace of God and The Gospel will naturally be lead to addressing other issues like SIN or Jesus’ Divinity. Sometimes these side conversations can help shed more light on the gospel, but in some cases can distract from giving a full gospel message. It is important to address all questions but also to ensure that a full gospel message is heard. Some times it is best to first give the 5 primary truths, then go back and address questions.
A REAL LIFE SETTING
In a public setting, strive for more personal side conversations with someone who seems obviously interested. Pull people aside or get contact information with the agreement to discuss this deeper in a more private setting. If its an open public debate, keep in mind of the audience and everyone else who is listening and not just the person arguing and debating. In more local private settings, having personal direct conversations is most effective.
CHURCH ATTENDANCE
Inviting people to church won’t hurt and can be good; but church attendance has never saved anyone. Keep in mind the person who you are talking to, don’t invite them to church if they already made it clear they are not willing to attend church. Instead, host the spiritual conversation there at that time or at a later time at a location they are willing to go. The location is not important really, it is the conversation that is of utmost importance. Go wherever the Holy Spirit is leading.
THE HOLY SPIRIT
It is critical that we be sensitive to the leading of The Holy Spirit. He will lead us who to talk to, where to talk to them, and what to talk about. As we proclaim the gospel we NEED to understand that it is NOT us who are leading them to salvation. WE DO NOT lead anyone to salvation; God does. The Holy Spirit works through us as we are willing to be lead. Regardless, God’s Will is going to be done in that persons life whether we are willing to participate or not.
NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT
Because God’s Will will be done and we are just serving him and being used by The Holy Spirit for God’s Glory; we can’t mess it up. We may give the worst gospel presentation ever given but in what ever way God sees fit, may use any word we have spoken for the hearer. We may give the greatest gospel presentation ever given, but if God’s Will is not to draw that person to Himself, than there is no amount of perfectly elegant words we can use to change that fact. We are just a servant of The Lord seeking the best for our neighbor while seeking to Glorify God. We serve through proclaiming the gospel, the results of our service are completely up to God.
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED
There may be a lot of questions left unanswered, there may be no one who seemed to be impacted by the gospel message; regardless, proclaiming the gospel is a success. How so? Well, we do not know the hearts and minds of all those who heard it. We can not be sure that all those who received it or rejected it truly feel that way on the inside. But all the possible results is NOT for us to know and decide. Our calling, purpose, and mission is to proclaim the good news of Jesus Christ. Once we have done that; we have done exactly what we were called to do; mission complete. Once his message is proclaimed in a kind loving way that reflects the glory and honor of God; God is glorified through us and that is a chief end in this life, to Glorify God. We can be completely satisfied that God’s Will will be done, He is glorified, we truly love our neighbor, and we have be a faithful servant!
JESUS’ WARNING
Everything sounds good and dandy; except, Jesus already warned us that proclaiming his good news comes at a cost. People will hate us. He did not say may hate but WILL HATE. Because they HATE him (John 15:18-27). This is why he described himself as a sword that will pit father against son and mother against daughter (Matthew 10:34). Why? Because, ultimately, his message is divisive and exclusive. HE is THE ONLY way to God. HE is THE ONLY LIFE. He is THE ONLY TRUTH. And NO MAN can come to God UNLESS through HIM. Period. End of story. Sound negative? Well, given the 5 primary truths stated above; this is a GOOD THING. Good thing he is the only way because he is the only one who can; we cant no matter how hard we try. It gets exhausting, trying hard to be super religious- Jesus gives rest Its hard following rules and laws that we can’t maintain perfectly anyway- Jesus gives freedom. Good thing the price of sin fell on HIM and not you or I? Either He pays for our sin or we pay for it for eternity. That’s a nice free gift from God, if we are willing to accept it and believe it. Pray that we and our neighbor are drawn to The Son of God who is our Lord and Savior.
If you have any questions or comments about this article please contact us or join our discussion forms
I believe in the human right to worship The One Triune God alone:
Who made male and female equal but unique for his glory:
Who made the human race equal but unique for his glory:
Who made mankind good, not perfect:
Whom sinned and all offspring birthed with a sinful nature:
Who grants the free gift of salvation from sin, only through His Son:
Whom will be judged by holy justice for sin:
I believe in Holy Marriage as originated by God:
Between one male and one female:
Male bodily born male and female bodily born female:
I believe mankind is a person, known by God, before birth:
The unborn child from conception is precious and living:
I believe my body is not my own but for God’s glory alone:
To abstain from all sexual immorality outside of God’s originated marriage:
To remain pure and holy for God’s good work:
I believe in the truth in scripture:
The righteous judgements of saints:
And gracious correction and merciful discipline:
Until The Son’s return and the resurrection of the dead:
Until judgement and reward:
I believe then I will be granted my perfected transcendent body:
Not male nor female, not married nor unmarried:
But unified with Christ in the eternal presence of God almighty:
23 lines, 209 words. This ‘Positional’ Creed addresses more common issues in cultures that the church has had to experience throughout history. From Roman culture, to European and American culture, the church has faced the issues of human rights, religious rights, racism, sexism, sexuality, genders, abortion, and accountability. A sound Creed founded in scripture and validated through early church history to have your family memorize, research, and meditate on. Also read and memorize the broad and essential Creed of The Universal Christian Faith.
If you have any questions or comments about this article please contact us or join our discussion forms
I believe in the One true God, who is in three persons:
The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit:
Who is eternal, holy, and perfect:
Almighty, all knowing, and always present:
Just, merciful, gracious, good, loving, and unchanging:
I believe in God the Father, Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth:
And in Jesus Christ, his one and only begotten Son, our Lord:
Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary:
Having two natures; fully God eternal, and fully man incarnate:
He lived the sinless life, fulfilled prophecies, and proven with divine miracles:
Suffered under Pontius Pilate; was crucified, dead and buried: He descended into hell:
The third day he rose again from the dead:
He ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty:
From thence he shall come to judge the living and the dead:
The faithless to eternal hell, and the saints to the new heaven and new earth:
I believe in the Holy Spirit:
Who convicts mankind of sin and is the counselor and perfect helper of saints:
I believe all mankind is sinful and unable to save themselves:
Those who are chosen by God are unconditionally elected by God the Father:
Their sin atoned for once and for all by the work of the Lamb of God on the cross:
And brought into faith and eternally sustained by The Holy Spirit:
The new life of grace and truth in Christ Jesus:
I am saved by God’s grace through this faith in His Son:
I believe in the holy universal church:
The communion of saints:
The symbol of baptism and remembrance in The Lords Supper:
Submission to the elders and deacons who are of the saints ordained by God:
The forgiveness of sins:
The resurrection of the body:
And the life everlasting.
All revealed in Holy Scripture that which has been made complete:
Declared by The Holy Spirit through the Prophets and Apostles:
Which is God’s Holy Word, sufficient for Salvation and sole Authority of the faith:
All for God’s Glory, in all, and through all:
All for His Will to be done for all time, Amen.
36 lines, 358 words. Combining key statements from the disciples of the Apostles, their disciples, The Apostles Creed, The Athanasian Creed, The Chalcedonian Creed, and main doctrines from the Three Forms of Unity; which came down from the Apostles of The Lord as recorded in Holy Scripture.
If you have any questions or comments about this article please contact us or join our discussion forms
Apollinaris was a 3rd generation Christian who could have been influenced by Qaudratus and Aristides and was friends with Melito who was discipled by Polycarp. Church historians after him spoke very highly of him and the soundness of his teachings. He gained notoriety when he wrote treatises against Heresies of his time. He also wrote an apology to the Roman Emperor. It is unclear when he was born and his death is estimated to be before the death of Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius around 177AD.
Sadly no manuscripts remain of his works but we can piece together what he taught by what has been quoted by later church histories and teachers that did have his works. Mostly found in Eusebius’ works and Jerome’s.
Key Teachings
Read his quotes here at Roberts-Donaldson English Translation
Sample Quotes
the Book Concerning the Passover
the true Passover of the Lord; the great sacrifice, the Son of God instead of the lamb
If you have any questions or comments about this article please contact us or join our discussion forms
THE AMERICAN LIFE JOURNAL 
