23 January 2011

Why Believe in Jesus of Nazareth?

Today, as part of my Lord's Day observance, I watched the excellent documentary, The Case for Christ, based on Lee Strobel's book by the same name. In the film, Strobel, a journalist for the Chicago Tribune and former atheist, ably presents the evidence--collected over the course of years and with a journalist's critical eye--for belief in Christ.

Here are just a few highlights of the film:

The historical reliability of the Gospels. Strobel argues that, while one may choose to believe or not to believe that the four canonical Gospels (i.e. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) are divinely inspired, one cannot deny that they are reliable historical sources. He notes the scholarly consensus that the Gospels were written within the lifetime of the Apostles (i.e. before 90 A.D.). In other words, they were authored by, or with the assistance of, eyewitnesses to Jesus life, death, and resurrection. Further, since the proclamation of these Gospels was a community event, and that many of these eyewitnesses were still living in the community, they surely would have corrected the Gospel accounts had they strayed from the truth.

Strobel also easily refutes the argument that the Gospels are unreliable due to inconsistencies among the different accounts. He demonstrates that these inconsistencies are relatively insignificant and observes that, in a court of law, were the testimonies of many witnesses identical, the first objection would be "collusion", that the witnesses had conspired to produce a false testimony. In this respect, the small variations among the four Gospels only add to their credibility; they do not detract from it.

The consistent witness to the personality of Jesus. Strobel also refutes the argument that it is impossible to know who Jesus really was or what He really did, considering the proliferation of apocryphal "gospels" and other scriptures, particularly originating from the Gnostics (an early Christian sect that taught that matter was inherently evil and that salvation was achieved through esoteric knowledge, in Greek, "gnosis"). These Gospels, however, are universally recognized by scholars as being written well after the Apostolic era, and present a portrait of Jesus that is often disconsonant with the earlier, eye-witness accounts of Jesus and His ministry.


The joint witness of the empty tomb and the blood of the martyrs. For Strobel, as for most Christians, the primary issue is Jesus' resurrection from the dead. He observes several idiosyncrasies (as we might call them) about the Gospel accounts of the resurrection. For instance, the Gospels report that it was women (including Mary Magdalene, a woman with a dubious past) that were the first witnesses to the resurrection. Strobel argues that, had the story been fabricated, the Gospel authors certainly would not have relied on the witness of women, distrusted as they were in first century Palestine. Further, the Gospels report that it was Joseph of Arimathea, a member of the Sanhedrin (the Jewish governing body that condemned Jesus to death), who offered his new tomb for the burial of Jesus. Surely the Gospel authors would not have reported this potentially embarrassing fact had they fabricated the story. Finally, Strobel observes that after His resurrection, Jesus appears not to a select few, but to hundreds of people. Many, if not most, of these early witnesses to the resurrection gave up their lives in martyrdom rather than deny what they saw with their own eyes, and heard with their own ears, and touched with their own hands. And not only these, but others who were initially opposed to Jesus, such as the Pharisee Saul of Tarsus (a.k.a. Paul the Apostle). It is highly unlikely, Strobel argues, that people would choose to die for what they knew was false.

Strobel, fine journalist that he is, has certainly done his homework. I highly recommend this film to both believer and skeptic alike.

Watch the entire film here (or on Hulu.com):

No comments: