In a courtroom, I reasoned, each witness’ testimony can be even more credible, and therefore believable to the jury, if the testimony is not suspiciously identical to the testimony of the other witnesses. And if all of us are a jury of sorts today, considering the credibility and believability of the testimony of these gospel writers, we need to appreciate the fact that each individual gospel witness may have been focusing on distinct nuances of the described events, or listening more intently to certain words uttered by Jesus, perhaps impressed with the Lord’s impact on certain distinct people, whether the Pharisees, or one another, or the person being healed, etc. Yes, these events occurred over two thousand years ago, but our analysis of how we judge the credibility of witnesses hasn’t changed at all. What did these gospel writers and witnesses have to gain by lying or embellishing the truth about what they witnessed or wrote about? Did they have a stake in the outcome of whether or not their writings were believed? Were they paid? Did they stand to gain anything from convincing others of their stories?
In every courtroom in Florida, the jury is instructed on the law to be applied to weighing the credibility of witness testimony. One of the questions which the jurors are instructed to ask themselves and consider when weighing the credibility of a particular witness’s testimony, is has the witness been offered any benefit in exchange for testimony? They are also instructed to ask themselves, has the witness made a prior statement inconsistent with the witness’s testimony in court? These are just two questions that juries are instructed to consider when weighing the testimony of witnesses, so we might as well apply these same standards, and ask these same questions, when weighing the credibility of the testimony of the gospel witnesses. We find from the historical record that these gospel writers were consistent right along with what they wrote, never writing a prior or subsequent statement inconsistent with their gospel accounts. Of even more significance, they each suffered tremendously for their faith, essentially for their testimony and what they wrote. Not only did they receive no benefit in exchange for their testimony, they each actually died a torturous and violent martyr’s death as a result of their testimony!
“Nobody would die for a lie”
The gospel writers had to believe in what they witnessed and wrote about, if willing to die for their beliefs and testimony. They certainly gained credibility with me, once I understood how they suffered and died for their testimony. Nobody, I reasoned, would die for a lie. Would they suffer and die like they did, if they knew that they were lying or just spinning things? Of course not! And for what purpose would any fool do this? To dupe future generations? Some of them were flayed or crucified. Others were burned at the stake or beheaded. They have real credibility. They also wrote very unflattering things about themselves.
Remember, they admit in their writings that they fled when Jesus was arrested, lacking the courage to stay with their Lord and Master, even after admitting that they earlier promised Jesus that they would stay with Him “even unto arrest or death.” Of course, Jesus knew better, telling Peter that he would deny his Lord three times before the rooster crowed. Who would write these unflattering things about themselves, unless they were telling the truth! And who would have the courage and conviction to willingly die a tortured death, even after earlier admitting to being a coward and running away at the time of Christ’s arrest, except a person who was telling the truth about seeing Jesus after His crucifixion, death, burial and resurrection! Even cowards, — and most of us would’ve reacted the same way as the disciples when Jesus was arrested — get courage and conviction when they see their Lord again, after He defeats death! This is the only rational explanation for the behavior of the disciples after Christ’s crucifixion, when compared to their reactions before His crucifixion. They had to have been telling the truth in their gospel accounts when they tell us that they saw Him alive again and spent time with Him after His crucifixion; nothing else makes sense.
“Doubting Thomas”
I was a “doubting Thomas,” to be sure. As a former prosecutor and current trial lawyer, I need real evidence before I’d believe for real. I needed forensic proof, just like Thomas, who said that he wouldn’t believe until he stuck his finger in Jesus’ side. Now that’s forensic proof! I listen to Thomas and I’m reminded of myself. I consider his skepticism as recorded in John’s Gospel, chapter 20, verses 24-29, and comfortably swap the name Thomas with my own: “But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Did’-y-mus, was not with them when Jesus came. The other disciples therefore said unto him, ‘We have seen the Lord.’ But he said unto them, ‘Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.’” Sounds like something I would say.
Why did Joseph of Arimathaea beg Pilate for Jesus’ body? This request was arguably quite courageous, given the fact that Joseph was afraid of the other Pharisees, the ruling Jewish religious leaders. We know that Joseph, the Pharisee, was fearful that his fellow Pharisees would find out that he was a disciple of Jesus, from verse 38 of the 19th chapter of John’s Gospel: “And after this Joseph of Arimathaea, being a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews, besought Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus, and Pilate gave him leave. He came therefore, and took the body of Jesus.” Joseph, then, was a disciple of Jesus, “but secretly for fear of the Jews.” Though he was a frightened, “secret” disciple, he showed a lot of courage and conviction by going to Pilate and boldly beseeching him for the body of Jesus. If not necessarily risking arrest or death, we know that Joseph, “a rich man of Arimathaea … who also himself was Jesus’ disciple” (Matthew 27:57), known also as “an honorable counselor” (Mark 15:43), was certainly risking the loss of prestige, position and power as a Pharisee, or religious leader. He was a powerful witness. His testimony, by his reaction, conduct and risk of exposure or loss, is very credible and compelling. How many people today would risk prestige, position and power, and more, for their belief in the Savior?
All four Gospels record the fact that Joseph of Arimathaea begged Pilate for the body, but John’s Gospel additionally reveals the fact that Nicodemus, the Pharisee who had come to Jesus under cover of night, was also there to help Joseph in the preparation of Jesus’ body for burial. John records this moment in chapter 19 of his Gospel, verse 39: “And there came also Nicodemus, which at the first came to Jesus by night, and brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pound weight.” We know, then, that Nicodemus, like Joseph of Arimathaea, was a believer and “closet” disciple of Christ, so he could have been part of some larger conspiracy of sorts. But what sort of conspiracy? Maybe these closet disciples, Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathaea, joined Mary Magdalene, Mary, the mother of Jesus, and the disciples, in a plot to steal the body and fake the whole resurrection? But if this were true, what was in it for them? They didn’t get any money, prestige or power from convincing others of Jesus’ resurrection; instead, they were ostracized, arrested, tortured, and murdered. These are not desirable objects of a conspiracy. Or, as some conspiracy theorists like to suggest, maybe Jesus didn’t really die after all. Would it have been possible for the disciples to have somehow revived Jesus? Perhaps Christ wasn’t completely dead when they took him from the cross? Certain unbelievers advance this same swoon theory today, attempting to discredit the resurrection. They theorize that Jesus swooned on the cross, and though He appeared quite dead, He somehow managed to survive the torture. Some people will concoct any theory to avoid acknowledging that the resurrection might be true. If it is true, perhaps they will feel accountable, and they certainly don’t want that.
Doesn’t it make sense that the Roman soldiers would have first looked in the tomb, to ensure that Jesus’ body was laid there, before sealing it off with the stone? It defies commonsense and logic for us, the jury, to believe that an entire contingent of Roman soldiers, known then as a Roman Guard, would have sealed the tomb without examining the contents, to ensure that they were not sealing an empty tomb. It’s hard to imagine that there were no soldiers who were curious or responsible enough to have checked out what they were sealing — especially since they were under orders from Pontius Pilate to do things right. The Gospels tell us that the Pharisees went to Pilate after the crucifixion, beseeching the Roman leader to dispatch soldiers to guard the tomb. Why would these religious leaders in Jerusalem want to have Rome, or anyone for that matter, guard the tomb of Jesus, a man they hated? Thankfully, we know the answer. They told Pilate that Jesus’ disciples would steal the body and fake some sort of miraculous resurrection. This conversation is recorded in only one of the four Gospels, in Matthew 27:63,64. The Pharisees said to Pilate, “Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, ‘after three days I will arise again.’ Command therefore that the sepulcher be made sure until the third day, lest His disciples come by night, and steal him away, and say unto the people, ‘He is risen from the dead’: so the last error shall be worse than the first.” Talk about prophecy, or perhaps I should say “self-fulfilling” prophecy. They were prophetic about the body of Jesus leaving the tomb, only they were wrong on the manner in which He left!
Could the disciples have had the Herculean strength to have miraculously rolled away the massive stone that blocked the tomb, after first overpowering the Roman Guard and breaking the Roman seal? It would have been virtually impossible. Why? History records that the Roman Guard was not one or two soldiers; instead, a Guard consisted of 16 soldiers who would stand in a precisely arranged, strategic formation, designed to make it extremely difficult for opposition to penetrate the Guard. It’s almost comical to suggest that a bunch of ragtag fishermen could have overpowered all these Roman soldiers, and penetrated this seemingly impenetrable formation. Even assuming the absurdity of this scenario, why would these disciples have risked death to carry out a plot to steal Jesus’ body? We’re back to square one, straining as jurors to make sense of all this circular reasoning, imagining the disciples risking torture and death for a lie, to fool other people into believing something that they themselves knew to be false.
The best witness, of course, is the evidence of a changed life. That’s right, when there’s no other rational explanation for a radically changed life — other than the reality of what or whom the individual is suggesting as the reason for the change — then you have to consider the truth or credibility of that otherwise inexplicable witness or evidence! It doesn’t happen overnight; it’s a long road, this sanctification process. I’m still walking that road, and I believe I’ll be walking it the rest of my natural life. I’m hoping and praying that it gets easier, with His help. Why, if I’m a true believer, would I still struggle with temptation, give in, get defeated and actually continue to sin? Paul essentially and repeatedly asked and tried to answer the same question in a very tortured way throughout the 7th chapter of Romans. Romans 7:14 - 25 of the New Living translation states this:
“The trouble is not with the law but with me, because I am sold into slavery, with sin as my master. I don’t understand myself at all, for I really want to do what is right, but I don’t do it. Instead, I do the very thing I hate. I know perfectly well that what I am doing is wrong, and my bad conscience shows that I agree that the law is good. But I can’t help myself, because it is sin inside me that makes me do these evil things. I know I am rotten through and through so far as my old sin nature is concerned. No matter which way I turn, I can’t make myself do right. I want to, but I can’t. When I want to do good, I don’t. And when I try not to do wrong, I do it anyway. It seems to be a fact of life that when I want to do what is right, I inevitably do what is wrong. I love God’s law with all my heart. But there is another law at work within me that is at war with my mind. This law wins the fight and makes me a slave to the sin that is still within me. Oh, what a miserable person I am! Thank God! The answer is in Jesus Christ our Lord. So you see how it is: In my mind I really want to obey God’s law, but because of my sinful nature I am a slave to sin.”
I clearly see myself in these words. Thankfully, Paul finally solved the dilemma in that second to the last sentence in verse 25: “Thank God! The answer is in Jesus Christ our Lord.” He drives it home again in the first verse of the next chapter, Romans 8:1: “So now there is no condemnation for those who belong to Christ Jesus.” Paul, like me, tried to control himself on his own power and do it on his own; but like me, he couldn’t. Paul even begged God, as I have, to remove this “thorn” in his “flesh,” but God wouldn’t do it. Why? I suppose that the real reason God wouldn’t remove the thorn from Paul’s flesh, is that God knew Paul’s heart, and therefore, He knew that Paul would feel as though he didn’t need God anymore, if he were able to live thorn-free and get things totally under control on his own, without dependence on God. He basically tells us this in Paul’s second letter to the church at Corinth, recorded in 2 Corinthians 12:7-10: “But to keep me from getting puffed up, I was given a thorn in my flesh, a messenger from Satan to torment me and keep me from getting proud. Three times I begged the Lord to take it away. Each time He said, ‘My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness.’” (The New Living Translation restates God’s response this way: “My gracious favor is all you need. My power works best in your weakness.”)
As an aside, nowhere does the Bible tell us exactly what this “thorn” in Paul’s flesh was really all about. Theologians agree that it was most likely not a literal thorn, but instead was figurative, never defined for any of us, so that all of us could relate! Allegorically it was a stronghold of sorts, a powerful temptation plaguing Paul, tormenting him. That’s right; whatever is tormenting or plaguing each of us could be a stronghold or besetting sin, like Paul’s. To self-relate, we can simply plug in our own addiction, besetting sin, stronghold or torment, within these operative verses in 2 Cor.12:7-10, and imagine that God is talking with us, responding to us, answering our individual “begging” for our own thorn to be removed from our own flesh. What is your torment, your besetting sin or stronghold — that thing which plagues you and tempts you and consumes too much of your time and energy in trying to resist? What is that thing you keep doing that you don’t want to do, or the thing you haven’t been able to do that you want to do? What are those things in your life that Paul was referring to in his own life, the things he was doing that he didn’t want to do? Remember Paul torturing himself with this same dilemma throughout the 7th chapter of Romans? I know my own, and more importantly, God knows mine. He knows yours too.
© 2006 John P. Contini (OK to re-post with attribution and contact info)
---
John P. Contini & Associates, P.A.
1112 SE 3rd Ave.
Fort Lauderdale FL 33316
www.JohnContini.com
John@jpcontini.com
Office: 954.766.8810
Author:
www.Myspace.com/John.Contini
www.Facebook.com/JohnContini
www.Youtube.com/JohnContini
www.Twitter.com/JohnContini
For book orders:
www.DangerRoadtheBook.com 800.957.6476
EBooks are now available!
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
