Know The Certainty | Sunday, February 2, 2025

In as much as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus, that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed. (Luke 1:1-4)

Can we really trust the gospels? The evidence says they are eyewitness testimony—and your changed life is part of the proof.

Ideas Have Consequences

I spent much of this week reading a long, dry volume called A History of Western Philosophy by Bertrand Russell. Russell was a very vocal atheist in the first half of the 20th century—one of his best-known books was Why I Am Not a Christian—and many of today's outspoken atheists look back to him. He was also a real scholar of the West, tracing thought from Mesopotamian and Egyptian cultures, to Greece, to Rome, to the radical transformation Rome underwent through early Christianity, Catholicism, and scholasticism, up to the modern era.

What became clear to me is that much of the thinking of well-known modern philosophers is rather nonsensical. Many were carnal, debauched men, funded by patrons and benefactors who made it possible for them to live exceedingly carnal lives and to write down very strange things. The challenge is that their strange ideas took hold and gained traction, shaping Western culture especially over the last 100 to 150 years.

In 1948 Richard Weaver released a book called Ideas Have Consequences, and that is evident in the thinking of these carnal philosophers. But one idea with truly great consequences was penned by a Jewish convert to Christianity in the first century, recorded in Colossians chapter 2.

Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; and you are complete in Him, who is the head of all principality and power. (Colossians 2:8-10)

When Christ Is at the Center

The core of Paul's philosophy places Christ at the top—at the center of your life and of entire cultures. When an individual or a culture is christocentric, where Christ is the focus and at the top of the hierarchy, He radically transforms for the better the lives and cultures that have Him seated in the middle. Look at history over the last 2,000 years and it is demonstrably the case: those individuals and cultures with Christ at the center of their worldview produce the greatest benefits for the most people.

Yes, that's a bold claim, but I don't think it's refutable. Two thousand years ago, a group seen as uneducated and untrained turned the world upside down—I'd actually say right side up—for the gospel of Jesus Christ. How? At the most basic level, they spent three to three and a half years with an itinerant Jewish rabbi from Nazareth, then wrote and spoke about their experiences. What they wrote and preached radically transformed all of human culture for the good.

In the earliest days these ragtag followers were opposed by the Jewish religious leaders in Jerusalem. Brought before the Sanhedrin and forbidden to speak in Jesus' name, here is how the educated elite assessed them:

Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were uneducated and untrained men, they marveled. And they realized that they had been with Jesus. (Acts 4:13)

They could tell these were fishermen from Galilee—you can hear a regional accent and instantly label someone. We give British or Scottish accents extra IQ points; other accents we demean. That's what was happening with Peter and John. Yet the religious elite marveled, because something of note was in these men.

A Message That Opened Blind Eyes

Decades later these same bold disciples, and others with them, recorded their experiences of Jesus in what we know as the four gospels and the rest of the New Testament. Their followers then spread throughout the known world, preaching and writing about the life, ministry, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. That message turned the world right side up. It opened blind eyes, brought people out of darkness into light, and loosed them from bondage. That was their explicit mission:

To open their eyes, in order to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in Me. (Acts 26:18)

When I talk this way about the gospel, the obvious question from skeptics is: how do we know that what Peter, John, and Paul declared is true? That's a valid question, and I believe the answer is yes—but why? Many in our culture want to know.

The Practical Proof

One answer I've already alluded to is what I'd call the practical proof of the gospel: it changes individual lives and cultures. You will know a tree by its fruit. When we see the good fruit of the gospel, it leads us back to the root and tells us we should investigate. I recently heard Joe Rogan—a guilty pleasure of mine, I confess—essentially say that Christianity is obviously true in the sense that it changes people. He's at least acknowledging a practical demonstration of the message's validity. Jesus said, "Wisdom is justified by all her children" (Luke 7:35)—outcomes matter.

Looking around this room, I see individuals whose very lives are a testimony to the power of the gospel. But is there other evidence supporting the proposition that the gospels—and specifically the synoptic gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, which give a brief, very similar synopsis—are valid and true?

The Skeptic's Challenge

The leading skeptic of our day is critical New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. If the History Channel does a segment on Jesus, Ehrman is their chief scholar. A former evangelical who turned away from the faith after some tragedy, he is now a skeptic of the gospel.

What does he say about Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John? He says we can't trust them because they were written 50 to 70 years after the life of Jesus, by people who had never been to Judea and were not eyewitnesses. Is that valid? That's the question we must answer. How do you determine that something happened in the past? You listen to trusted individuals who were near the events. Ehrman claims these were written by people who didn't even know the eyewitnesses—and that's the challenge we must address.

You can do the research; I encourage you to. But I've done the research so you don't have to—stacks of books, classes on canonicity, years of reading scholarship that is often heady and dry. There are three lines of evidence I think are important: practical proofs (changed lives and cultures), historical proofs (external evidence), and literary proofs (internal evidence).

The Historical and Literary Proofs

The external, historical evidence is that early Christian authors in the late first and early second centuries—near to the actual eyewitnesses—believed it was the eyewitnesses themselves, or their associates, who recorded Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Matthew (Levi) was a disciple who saw Jesus' ministry. John, the last gospel written around 90 AD, was an eyewitness. Mark and Luke were written by near associates of eyewitnesses—Mark very likely recording Peter's message, and Luke recording the witness associated with Paul.

Even better are the internal, literary proofs. Consider the words of the author of Luke. Luke is part one of a two-volume set; Acts is part two. The Gospel of Luke opens by addressing "most excellent Theophilus" (Luke 1:3)—Theophilus means "lover of God," likely the benefactor who funded Luke's groundwork of gathering eyewitness testimony. Acts opens the same way:

The former account I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach, until the day in which He was taken up... (Acts 1:1-2)

So "the former account" is the Gospel of Luke, and Acts is the second volume, both by the same author. In Acts 16, on Paul's second missionary journey, Paul meets a convert named Luke. From Acts 17 onward, whenever Luke is with Paul, the narrative switches to "we"—"we traveled from here to there"—and when he stops walking with Paul, the "we" disappears. So Bible teachers and scholars conclude that Luke, whom we meet in Acts 16, is the author of both books.

Dating the Gospels

Why does this matter? Because of how Acts ends. Acts 28 ends abruptly—it just goes off a cliff. Many love that spiritually, because the acts of God through His church continue. But from a literary standpoint it implies that the recording simply stopped at that point. The book ends with Paul still alive, in prison in Rome awaiting the trial that would eventually lead to his beheading—his first imprisonment, roughly 62 AD.

That means Acts was written around 62 AD. Book one, the Gospel of Luke, was written before that. And Luke refers to Matthew and Mark as written before him—somewhere between 55 and 60 AD. That places Matthew, Mark, and Luke within 25 years of the crucifixion.

Would you trust an orderly account written 25 years after the events? Consider 9/11 in 2001—about 25 years ago. Most of us could write a pretty valid, trustworthy account of that day. These are recordings of eyewitnesses, or their associates, within 25 years of the events.

A fascinating literary confirmation: in 1 Timothy 5:17-18 the Apostle Paul quotes the Gospel of Luke. If he quotes it, Luke must already have existed. Paul wrote that letter around 64-65 AD, which means the Gospel of Luke was written before that.

Why the Skeptics Insist on a Late Date

So why does Bart Ehrman insist these were written 50 to 70 years later by non-eyewitnesses? His primary reason is an event in 70 AD—the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem by Titus that August. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Jesus predicts that destruction: "Do you see this temple? Not one stone will be left upon another." In 70 AD, exactly as Jesus predicted, that happened.

If you're a skeptic of miracles, of the power of God, of Jesus' ability to predict the future, then you'll insist the gospels must have been written after 70 AD—because otherwise Jesus is more than a mere man, and you can't admit that. But it's not as obvious as Ehrman would like.

So here is point number one: the evidence shows the gospels were based on eyewitness accounts of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. It is a contested, bold claim, but theologians and scholars have researched it for 2,000 years, and the research substantiates it. The only reason skeptics remain skeptical is that they do not believe in the resurrection—because if these are eyewitness accounts of the resurrection, then Jesus is more than a mere man. He might be who He said He is: the one true God incarnate. Can you see why a skeptic is skeptical? They don't want to admit that.

That You May Know the Certainty

I realize this sounds more like the introduction to a graduate lecture on canonicity than a normal Sunday morning. Why am I doing it? Because critics in our hypercritical culture discourage your trust in the gospels, telling you you're a fool to believe documents written by non-eyewitnesses decades later. I am saying these things because I want you to know the certainty of the things in which you are instructed. That is exactly why Luke wrote (Luke 1:1-4)—so that you might know the certainty.

These are not cleverly devised fables. Peter writes:

For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty. (2 Peter 1:16)

The gospels are not merely the story of Jesus; they are Roman biography of His life, ministry, death, burial, and resurrection. Paul, John, Peter, and Matthew didn't make these stories up. They were eyewitnesses who went about for the rest of their lives—many until they were martyred—declaring the power of the kingdom of God, and they turned the world right side up.

A Message That Saves and Transforms

Point number two: the gospel is a radically powerful message that saves and transforms individuals and cultures. I'll keep saying this until I have no breath left, because it is demonstrably true. Many of you here are what the Bible calls living epistles—living letters declaring this reality. Paul told the church at Corinth that their very lives proved the validity of the message.

Point number three: my changed life is a testimony and witness of the power of the gospel. When the religious leaders dragged Peter and John before the Sanhedrin and charged them to stop speaking in Jesus' name—in Acts 3, again in Acts 4, again in Acts 5—they had a problem. These untrained, unlearned men were bold. But there was an even bigger problem.

Before they preached in Acts 4, there had been a lame man begging at the gate of the temple. Peter and John said to him, "Silver and gold I do not have, but what I do have I give you: In the name of Jesus, rise and walk." They took him by the hand and he was healed. So when Peter and John stood before the council and were told not to speak of Jesus, that man was standing there—whole, no longer lame.

And seeing the man who had been healed standing with them, they could say nothing against it. (Acts 4:14)

Your Life Is the Answer

So when you meet the neighbor, coworker, family member, or friend who is skeptical, their skepticism is valid and their questions deserve answers. But here is one of the answers: I once was blind, but now I see. Your changed life is a powerful demonstration that the gospel is true. It has radically transformed the world for the better.

I received a card this week that helps demonstrate this. After last week's message, someone in the church wrote:

"Dear Pastor Miles, I thought I would share why I continued at Cross Connection Church even after the friends who introduced us left years ago. I don't attend because your sermons are warm and fuzzy—in fact, a lot of what you and our other wonderful pastors say is challenging to hear. But little by little, slowly, over the years, I noticed I was becoming more forgiving, less susceptible to the cutting words of others. I had less hurt and less to forgive. When someone needed help and I had what it took, I thanked God for the opportunity, without a thought about why they were in that situation. I even started to think about wives being called to submit to their husbands as an opportunity to be like Christ. I had become a master at hardening my heart to certain people and aiming to win as much as possible. Now I'm focused on how best to use the gifts God has given me to serve others, knowing the outcome is up to God. If anyone ever tells you again that you're not teaching the word of God, please be assured that no other word could have had this effect on my life besides the living, powerful, sharp, piercing, discerning word of God."

The word of God is living and powerful, sharper than any two-edged sword. It divides asunder soul and spirit, joint and marrow, and discerns the thoughts and intents of the heart.

Give the Evidence a Fair Hearing

It's perfectly fine to be skeptical and to have questions about the claims Christians make. If the faith cannot stand up to the scrutiny of questions, it's not worth dedicating your life to. But if you're going to ask those questions, you must give the evidence a fair and honest hearing—the literary, historical, and practical proofs of the gospel—to find out whether the message is verifiable. If the fruit is good, then it's worth asking whether the tree and root are good also.

One final encouragement. If you're a Christian, it is essential that you allow the word of God to convict you and the Spirit of God to transform you. Because if your neighbor, coworker, or son or daughter who used to go to church does not see in you the fruit of the gospel, they have every reason to question whether it's actually true—or whether you actually believe it.

The gospel should be evident in the increase of love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, faithfulness, and self-control. It is a challenging message—it challenges our intellect to believe that a crucified man rose from the dead and is God incarnate. But when I see in your life that fruit, which you did not produce or buy on Amazon, then I know I should take a look. That person has the joy I don't have, the peace I wish I had, the self-control and kindness I know I lack—and would to God those would increase in my life and yours.

Closing Prayer

Father God, I thank You for this book of books that we have. I thank You that it can stand up to the scrutiny of skepticism and questions. I thank You that we can know the certainty of the things in which we have been instructed. And Lord, I thank You that these are not just words on paper, but words that have power to transform us holy and completely from the inside out. So God, I pray that You would convict us if in any way we are not demonstrating the fruit of the Spirit. Holy Spirit, work in us to prune away any branch that does not bear fruit, so that we would produce good fruit—love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, faithfulness, self-control, and all that goes with it—that it would be evident to us and to others. God, continue to transform us. Help us to be lights in a dark place, a city set on a hill that cannot be hidden, living epistles to a world in desperate need of the love letter that is the gospel. Work in us, we pray, in Jesus' name. And all those that agreed said amen.