|
Not With Words of Wisdom |
|
by David A. DePra |
|
In the last 200 years, there has arisen an attack on Christianity |
|
by those who demand historical proof that it is the Truth. This attack |
|
has not only come from those who make no claim of being Christian, |
|
but it has also come from those who do. |
|
The "Jesus Seminar" is a case in point. This was a recent |
|
gathering of liberal scholars. When they were done, they had |
|
decided that most of the sayings of Jesus Christ, as recorded by the |
|
gospels were, in fact, things Jesus never said. The gospels, these |
|
experts claim, are not eye-witness accounts of actual events. |
|
Rather, they are a compulation of myths which grew up around |
|
Jesus -- written a couple of hundred years after the apostles died. |
|
Now, what proof do they have of any of this? None. Not a shred |
|
of proof. No other ancient document says these things. There are |
|
no historical accounts that would lead a person in this direction. |
|
What they do have is this: They claim to have the expert ability, |
|
through years of study, to read the gospels and come to the |
|
conclusion that they do NOT portray actual events. They claim to |
|
be able to "read between the lines" and discern that the tone and |
|
vocabulary and method of writing used could not have been a |
|
product of the first century. They claim to have such insight that it |
|
enables them to see what millions of Christians have not seen for |
|
two thousand years: That Christianity is a myth. |
|
For instance, most of these experts say that Judas never really |
|
existed. They say he was a myth -- and worse. They claim that he |
|
was created by Christians to embody the Jews whom they hated. |
|
Judas was, according to them, was a product of anti-Sematism. |
|
The worst denial these experts put forth is that Jesus -- whom |
|
none of them deny existed -- was NOT raised from the dead. They |
|
claim He was buried in a shallow grave and his body eaten by |
|
dogs. No proof of this, mind you. But to them, this makes the most |
|
sense. It fits into what they, as experts, believe was the most likely |
|
scenerio. The most likely scenerio, according to them, was NOT |
|
the one recorded in the Bible, and the one for which thousands of |
|
Christians, including the original eye-witnesses, died for over the |
|
last two centuries. |
|
If one thing should strike us as rather strange, it is this: Why |
|
would a person even want to be a professor of theology or a bible |
|
scholar to begin with -- if they didn't believe Jesus was raised from |
|
the dead? Why, if Jesus was NOT God, and the Bible is a lie, |
|
would a person convinced of that continue on in that field? It seems |
|
more likely that if you came to the conclusion that Christianity was |
|
based on a myth, that you would find another line of work. Afterall, |
|
we are not talking here about mere historical inaccuracies. We |
|
are talking about Truth itself. We are talking about GOD. |
|
Why the Rejection? |
|
Let's ask some other questions: The Bible claims to be the |
|
Truth. So why would I reject it from a historical, factual standpoint, if |
|
I have no alternative "proof?" It is one thing to choose to reject a |
|
document in favor of another. But it is utter nonsense to reject a |
|
document when I HAVE no other. Especially if the one I'm rejecting |
|
has been accepted for thousands of years by believers. |
|
For instance, if I have a historical document which states that |
|
John Doe lived in 1000 A.D., and have nothing on hand to refute that, |
|
why would I reject that? I do not need to ACCEPT it, mind you, but |
|
upon what basis do I reject it? The most I should do is hold it at |
|
arm's length until I obtain more information. |
|
With the Bible, however, we do not merely have a neutral piece |
|
of written history -- which we can neither prove or disprove. There is |
|
NOTHING out there which has ever come along to disprove the |
|
Bible. There has been plenty to verify it historically. So why reject |
|
it -- even if only from an historical point of view -- if that is the case? |
|
And here's another question: How do you prove Jesus did NOT |
|
say something? Put aside, for a moment, whether you BELIEVE |
|
what He said. How do you PROVE He didn't say it? |
|
Of course, eventually the intimidation factor kicks in when you |
|
argue with such experts. They have doctorates in their field. They |
|
surely must have knowledge about these things which we cannot |
|
begin to have. How could so many of them be wrong? |
|
The Truth is, they ARE wrong. Every one of them. And it is |
|
probably accurate to say that they are guilty of willful neglect, if not |
|
something worse. Yet as believers, how are we to address these |
|
issues? On what level are we to meet those who demand historical |
|
proof of Christianity? What answer shall we give? |
|
What the Bible Says |
|
There is compelling historical evidence which verifies the |
|
resurrection of Jesus Christ. There is also historical proof that the |
|
Bible is an accurate document. But the fact is, there are always |
|
going to be people who doubt the most evident facts. There |
|
always have been. |
|
There was a television program on last week which claimed |
|
the 1969 landing on the moon was a hoax. They have an air-tight |
|
case, they claim. They KNOW, and the rest of us don't. We live in |
|
the age of conspiracy theories and making money through |
|
sensationalism. All you have to do is remember Y2K. We had |
|
experts telling us the facts then, too. And in that case, the experts |
|
were proven wrong -- dead wrong. |
|
The sobering fact is, even historical facts are interpreted |
|
subjectively. You can make them mean what you want. Proof is |
|
proof to those who believe it is proof. So again, we come back to |
|
the real issue: The condition of the heart. It is the condition of my |
|
heart -- not my brains -- which determines HOW I interpret facts. |
|
That is why two experts can look at the same facts and come to |
|
opposite conclusions. |
|
Christians are actually wasting their time trying to win logical or |
|
historical arguments with people. Christianity is not the outcome |
|
of a logical argument. It is not the outcome of a historical research |
|
project. Christianity is what happens when God redeems man. It |
|
is the outcome of the Word becoming flesh. |
|
We make a big mistake if we think God is the least bit concerned |
|
about winning an argument with someone who will not believe. God |
|
is not concerned about it at all. He doesn't come down and prove |
|
anything to people. He doesn't do signs and wonders. He doesn't |
|
care how much people scoff or how much people mock Him. He |
|
just says, "The Truth is evident for anyone who really wants it." And |
|
He leaves it at that. |
|
Does that seem unfair?. Not if the Truth IS evident to anyone who |
|
wants to know. Because if it IS evident, then God has been as fair |
|
as anyone could imagine. And we are without excuse. |
|
The fact is, none of these issues are ever solved by coming up |
|
with the right logic and winning the argument. They aren't solved |
|
by historical proof or bits of papyri. The issue here is not in the |
|
head. It is in the heart. The Truth is evident to anyone who wants |
|
to know. But many people don't want to know it. They want to |
|
DISPROVE it. |
|
One of the most amazing things about the way God has worked |
|
for the last two-thousand years is His complete disregard for |
|
trying to prove Himself to us. He could have had Jesus, after the |
|
resurrection, walk into Jerusalem, and He could have had it |
|
recorded. He did not. Or He could have seen to it that there were |
|
many more historical accounts written about Jesus, other than the |
|
Bible. But He did not. |
|
Why? Because if the only reason I believe Jesus is the Son of |
|
God is because some historical account says so, then I have a |
|
problem. The new birth is not the result of my believing a history |
|
lesson. It is the result of a revelation of myself as a sinner, and the |
|
revelation of Jesus as My Saviour. |
|
This, of course, leaves Christians open to ridicule. It means |
|
we may be left looking as if we are blinding believing things we |
|
cannot prove. But so what? We do not look that way to God. We |
|
look that way to people who have already rejected the Truth. And |
|
God has already told us the reason they have rejected it: Because |
|
they don't want it. Period. |
|
The Evident Truth |
|
God does not mince words about the evidence around us. He |
|
plainly says that we are without excuse if we deny He exists. |
|
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all |
|
ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in |
|
unrighteousness. Because that which may be known of God is |
|
manifest in them; for God hath showed it unto them. For the invisible |
|
things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being |
|
understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and |
|
Godhead; so that they are without excuse. (Rom. 1:18-20) |
|
Here we are told that the plain evidence that God exists is not |
|
only all around us, but also within us. It is only because people |
|
REFUSE to believe and submit to God, and are looking for a way |
|
out of being accountable to Him, that they say He doesn't exist. |
|
Now note: Nowhere in this passage does it talk about historical |
|
evidence. Neither is the issue of scientific proof addressed. In fact, |
|
when this passage was written, there was NO formal scientific proof |
|
available. No books on science. No colleges. Yet God said, "The |
|
evidence is all around you and in you. You KNOW. And you are |
|
without excuse for refusing to believe." |
|
The conclusion is inescapable: Historical and scientific |
|
evidence is fine. There is plenty of that available in favor of God, |
|
the Bible, and Christianity. But in the final analysis, that is rarely |
|
what God points to as proof of His existence, and as evidence that |
|
we need a Saviour. What God points to is the moral conscience of |
|
man, and the evidence of creation all around us. THAT, according |
|
to God, is enough -- IF we really want to know the Truth. |
|
The Power of the Gospel |
|
For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of |
|
God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and |
|
also to the Greek. (Romans 1:16) |
|
The "power of the gospel" does not reside in whether we can |
|
prove it historically -- even though we CAN. It does not reside in a |
|
good argument or in a wonderful piece of physical evidence. The |
|
power of the gospel lies in the fact that God Himself has taken the |
|
initiative to reveal to us His Son. The fact that many refuse to |
|
believe Him does not do away with the fact. |
|
We live in a callous age. There is almost no one who has not |
|
at least heard of Jesus Christ. But it was not so in the first century. |
|
There were no newspapers, televisions, or radios. Everything was |
|
word of mouth. Even Bibles were scarce. But God revealed the |
|
Truth to people. In fact, the Truth came with such power that it |
|
turned the world upside down. |
|
Imagine being a disciple preaching the gospel in those days. |
|
You would walk into a town filled with Greeks. Paganism was |
|
rampant. No one believed in the one true God, let alone Jesus |
|
Christ. Probably no one had even heard of Jesus. Yet you would |
|
preach the Truth of salvation. Some would receive Christ. Some |
|
would not. |
|
Now let's ask: What would convince those who received Christ? |
|
A clever argument? Historical evidence? No. It is impossible for |
|
those things to convert a person. Rather, Jesus said that no one |
|
could come to Him except the Father draw them. (see Jn. 6:44) |
|
In other words, God Himself was moving through the message of |
|
the Truth. HE was revealing Jesus to people. Not intellectually |
|
nor emotionally. But in reality. |
|
Note the words of the apostle Paul: |
|
..... But to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the |
|
cross of Christ should be made of none effect. For the preaching of |
|
the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are |
|
saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy |
|
the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding |
|
of the prudent. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the |
|
disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this |
|
world? For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom |
|
knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to |
|
save them that believe. (I Cor. 1:17-21) |
|
If I have to possess a doctorate in theology in order to REALLY |
|
know Jesus Christ, and understand the Bible, then there is no power |
|
in the Truth. If I have to go to college or seminary to REALLY know |
|
the Truth, or even TEACH the Truth, then there is no power in the |
|
gospel. Education is wonderful and has it's place. But it is NOT |
|
how we grow in the grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ. It is not |
|
how we come to see the Truth. The Truth only comes by revelation, |
|
and that by the Spirit of God. |
|
In response to those who would attack Christianity today, on the |
|
basis of historical evidence, the church has made a big mistake. |
|
We have almost admitted that they are approaching the issue on |
|
the correct level by trying to argue with them on that level. God says |
|
we cannot argue people into the Truth. God has already told us |
|
that to those who perish we are fools. We need to stop trying to |
|
to escape this and preach the gospel the way God wants us to |
|
preach it: By letting the power of the gospel -- not the power of our |
|
arguments -- save people. |