Notes for Chapter Four: The Documentary Evidence

1. Josh McDowell, "The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict", Thomas Nelson, 1999, p. 34

2. "…the only other ancient text that can even try to compare to the MSS evidence for the New Testament (5,686 Greek) is Homer's Iliad, with a mere 643 copies." Norman Geisler and Peter Bocchino, "Unshakable Foundations", Bethany House, 2001, p. 257
* "The quantity of New Testament material is almost embarrassing in comparison with other works of antiquity…Next to the New Testament, the greatest amount of manuscript testimony is of Homer's Iliad, which was the bible of the ancient Greeks. There are fewer than 650 Greek manuscripts of it today. Some are quite fragmentary. They come down to us from the second and third century AD and following. When you consider that Homer composed his epic about 800 BC, you can see there's a very lengthy gap." Bruce M. Metzger, Ph.D., as quoted by Lee Strobel, "The Case for Christ", Zondervan Publishing House, 1998, p. 78

3. "Eighty-eight undisputed papyri manuscripts have so far been found…The papyri witness to the text is invaluable because it comes from within the first 200 years after the New Testament was written." Norman Geisler, "Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics", Baker Books 1999, p. 533
* "However, the New Testament has a fragment within one generation of its original composition. Whole books appear within 100 years of the original, most of the New Testament within 250 years from the date of its completion." Norman Geisler,and Peter Bocchino, "Unshakable Foundations", Bethany House, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 2001, p. 257
(The fragment referred to by Geisler as dating to within one generation from its original composition is the Rylands Fragment - a portion of John's Gospel found in Egypt dating to AD 117 - 138. This is thought by many to be the oldest extant New Testament manuscript fragment. However, Carsten Peter Thiede and Matthew D'Ancona set forth a convincing case for the Magdalen Papyri, a portion from Matthew's Gospel, as dating from within the first century. See: "Eyewitness to Jesus", Doubleday, 1996)

4. "The interesting and important thing about the late-second-century text is this: at that early date there was already a wide diversity of variants. These variants were of course mostly quite minor in character, but they show that there had been no recent systematic editing of the documents to make them conform to some standard version." John W. Wenham, "Christ and the Bible", Downer's Grove, Ill., 1973, p. 178

5. "Not a single teaching of the Christian faith is affected by these variations, nor is any major historical aspect of the Gospel narratives or early Christianity affected." Alister E. McGrath, (Professor of Historical Theology at Oxford University and Principal of Wycliffe Hall, Oxford, consulting editor at "Christianity Today"), "In the Beginning: The Story of the King James Bible and How it Changed a Nation, a Language, and a Culture", Anchor Books, a Division of Random House, N.Y., 2001, p. 242
* "The real text of the sacred writings is competently exact, nor is one article of faith or moral precept either perverted or lost, choose as awkwardly as you will, choose the worst by design, out of the whole lump of readings." Charles Fremont Sitterly, "Text and Manuscripts of the New Testament," in The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (Chicago: Howard-Severance Co., 1915).

6. This story cited in John Dominic Crossan's "The Birth of Christianity: Discovering What Happened in the Years Immediately Following the Execution of Jesus", Princeton University Press, 1998.

7. "But as the numbers of Christians increased, their open rejection of pagan beliefs and their denial of imperial divinity appeared to many Romans to threaten the stability of the empire. The first large-scale persecution of Christians occurred in the city of Rome during the reign of the emperor Nero in AD 64, and other purges followed." Time Frame, 400 BC - AD 200, "Empires Ascendant", Time Life Books, 1987, p. 85

8. "Martin Hengel of Tubingen University noticed that the following well-documented technique customary in the making of scrolls at the time ensured the very early preservation of authors' names: Scrolls with literary texts had tags glued to them…They fulfilled the same purpose as the spine of a modern book: One does not have to open a book in order to find out who wrote it and what its title is." Carsten Peter Thiede and Matthew D'Ancona, "Eyewitness to Jesus", Doubleday, 1996, p. 15

9. "If, as is usually argued today, the earliest Gospels were anonymous or lacked titles, because of the pressing need to distinguish them in community libraries, a variation of titles would have inevitably arisen, whereas in the case of the canonical Gospels (in contrast to that of countless apocryphal writings) we can detect nothing of this." Martin Hengel, "Studies in the Gospel of Mark", London, 1985, pp. 81-82

10. "Paul's authorship of seven of the letters remains virtually undisputed. First Thessalonians, the earliest known Christian text (dating to about 50 CE), is universally ascribed to Paul, along with Galatians, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Romans, Philippians, and Philemon." Jeffery L. Sheler, (U.S. News and World Report religion writer) "Is the Bible True?", Harper Collins Publishers Inc., 1989, p. 36

* "There is, however, general agreement that Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon are authentically Paul's." James L. Kugel (Starr Professor of Hebrew Literature at Harvard University and Professor of Bible at Bar Ilan University in Israel), "The Bible as it Was", Belknap Press, 1997, p. 596

* "In fact, except for the so-called Pastoral Epistles and Ephesians, it would be next to impossible to find any competent present-day scholarship that denies the Pauline authorship of the corpus of letters purporting to have been written by him." John Warwick Montgomery, "History and Christianity", Downers Grove, Illinois, Intervarsity Press, 1971, p. 19

* "Ignatius of Antioch tells the Ephesians that Paul mentions them in every letter. Polycarp of Smyrna, collector of the letters of Ignatius, refers to those of Paul. Somewhat earlier, Clement of Rome certainly knows I Corinthians, and he probably knows others as well." Robert M. Grant, "Historical Introduction to the New Testament", Harper & Row, 1963, p. 171

11. "Am I not an apostle? Am I not free? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? Are ye not my work in the Lord?" 1 Corinthians 9:1
* "And last of all he [Jesus] was seen of me also, as one born out of due time." 1 Corinthians 15:8

12. "Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more: Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless. But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ. Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ." Philippians 3:4-8

13. Many don't realize just how radical the change in Paul actually was. Montgomery explains: "…he applies to Jesus the Greek word Kyrios, 'Lord, which was used in the pre-Christian Greek translation of the Old Testament (the Septuagint) as the equivalent of the most important Hebrew name of God, Yahweh, or YHWH. Note the implications of this. Paul, a monotheistic Jew, trained under the great Rabbi Gamaliel and therefore conversant with the Old Testament, ascribes to Jesus a word employed to render into Greek the most holy name of the one God." John Warwick Montgomery, p. 50-51.
Notice the parallel passages in Isaiah 45:22-23, where it is said of God that every knee shall bow and every tongue shall swear. Paul writes in Philippians 2:10-11 that at the name of JESUS every knee shall bow and every tongue confess. What in the world happened to Paul to radically change his conception of the God of the Old Testament, and of Jesus? That he actually encountered the risen Saviour is the best explanation.

14. Sir William Ramsey, “St. Paul the Traveler and Roman Citizen”, Hodder and Stoughton, 1897, Reprint, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1979, p. 395

15. We can deduce this from the mention of Gallio as Proconsul during Paul’s visit there (Acts 18): According to C.J. Hemer, inscriptions at Delphi help to establish a fixed chronology for Paul’s life.
* “As Proconsul of Achaea, Gallio would have governed for one year only, beginning on July 1, and most scholars are certain this occurred in AD 51-52 – a rare absolute date in the chronology of Paul’s history.” C.J. Hemer, “The Journeys of St. Paul”, James Harpur, 1997, p. 50

16. 1 Corinthians 15:1-8

17. Ramsey, p. 154
Some may argue against the chronology outlined in this point simply because it is based in part on the Book of Acts, which most scholars claim is full of accretions and is therefore of only secondary importance. This attitude is a direct result of one’s own antisupernaturalistic bias, and flies in the face of the overwhelming amount of historic evidence to the contrary. Nevertheless, a person could grant the critic the right to exclude the Book of Acts from the discussion and still arrive at the conclusion that the first proclamation of the resurrection in Jerusalem was very close in time to the crucifixion. I think it can reasonably be believed that the resurrection was being preached within 5 years – maximum- of the crucifixion. Follow the reasoning:

Paul states that he had to flee Damascus in a basket over the wall because his preaching there aroused opposition. Paul tells us this was during the reign of Aretas (2 Corinthians 11:32). This is undoubtedly Aretas IV, who ruled from 9 BC to AD 40:
* “It was about A.D. 39 or 40, during the reign of Caligula, or perhaps in 36, that Aretas for a brief period held Damascus.” John D. Davis, “A Dictionary of  the Bible”, 4th Ed., The Westminster Press, 1924, p. 52

* “One of the greatest of the Nabataeans was Aretas IV, who ruled from about 9 B.C. till A.D. 40.” J.A. Thompson, “The Bible and Archaeology”, Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, 1962,  p. 285

* “At this time [Damascus] was ruled by Aretas IV (9 B.C. – A.D. 40).” F.F. Bruce, “Paul Apostle of the Heart Set Free”, Eerdman’s Publishing Co., 1977,   p. 81

This fixed chronological point established, we may state confidently that AD 40 is the latest possible date for Paul’s daring escape. What was Paul doing there in the first place? Preaching. For how long? Who knows? Let’s say six months.

What happened before his arrival in Damascus? Paul states in Galatians 1 that he spent some time in Arabia. How long was that stay? We have no idea, but to give the critic the benefit of the doubt, let’s say it too was only 6 months. What happened before that? Paul says that prior to his sojourn in Damascus, he met the risen Saviour (1 Corinthians 15:8). What was he doing prior to his conversion experience?
Paul states that he was actively persecuting the church. How long was that going on? Paul makes it sound like he did a lot of damage to the church in Galatians 1:14-15, so we must assume a persecution period of at least several months. But how did the church grow to the kind of proportions it needed to in order to pose a threat to the religious leaders and elicit the kind of persecution and hatred displayed by Paul? How long did this growth period take? If we again assume several months then I think we can piece together a very reasonable timeline of events, based solely on the writings of the apostle Paul, which by the way, are universally accepted as genuine by Christian and non-Christian scholar alike. Working backward, the timeline is as follows:

* Paul escapes Damascus in a basket (AD 40)
* Paul preaching at Damascus (six months)
* Stay in Arabia (six months)
* Paul’s conversion (AD 38)
* Paul persecuting the church (six months)
* Church growth period (six months)
* 1st claims of Christ’s resurrection in Jerusalem (AD 37)
* The Crucifixion (AD 32-33)

According to this very reasonable timeline based on the accepted writings of Paul, the maximum distance, time-wise, between the crucifixion and the resurrection claims, is 5 years. I’ve been very generous here. Almost certainly the gap between the two events was much smaller. Nevertheless, even accepting the 5 year distance, serious questions remain: How did such a claim ever get off the ground if there was no evidence for it? How was it so widely believed if Christ’s body was still in the tomb? What motive would the original followers of Jesus have had to steal his body and claim that He was raised from the dead? Was this a master plan to trick the world into honesty and righteous living? Such suppositions are harder to swallow than the resurrection itself.

18. See Reason 22

19. Merrel Tenney, “New Testament Survey”, Revised Ed., Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1985, p. 430-431

20. “A…list of great importance was the Muratorian Canon, named for the Italian historian and librarian who first found it in the Ambrosian Library at Milan. The manuscript itself is not older than the seventh century, but its contents probably belong to the last third of the second century, about 170 A.D.”  Tenney, p. 408

21. “[I was] a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief. And the grace of our Lord was exceeding abundant with faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.” 1 Timothy 1:13-15

22. “After Jesus: The Triumph of Christianity”, Reader’s Digest Association Inc., 1992, p. 10
* Craig L. Bloomberg, Ph.D., interview with Lee Strobel, “The Case for Christ”, Zondervan, 1998, p. 33

23. Ramsey, p. 396

24. “The Christian Church and the Jews”, in “The Eerdman’s Handbook to the History of Christianity”, 1987, p. 50
* “Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible”, James Strong, LL.D., S.T.D., revised by John R. Kohlenberger III and James A. Swanson, Zondervan, 2001, p. 1736

25. “It is worth noting that the Jewish official in charge of the supply of water to the temple at the time of Christ was called Nakdimon ben Gurion. This man may actually have been the Nicodemus (“a ruler of the Jews”) who is mentioned in the fourth gospel.” A.C. Bouquet, “Everyday life in New Testament Times”, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1953, p. 40

26. Concerning the resurrection story being propagated by the early church, Montgomery observes, “[For the disciples to have fabricated] detailed accounts of Jesus’ resurrection would have been to fly in the face of the ethic their master preached and for which they ultimately died.” Montgomery, p. 77

27. “If you were to take the sum total of all authoritative articles ever written by the most qualified of psychologists and psychiatrists on the subject of mental hygiene – if you were to combine them and refine them and cleave out the excess verbiage – if you were to take the whole of the meat and none of the parsley, and you were to have these unadulterated bits of pure scientific knowledge concisely expressed by the most capable of living poets, you would have an awkward and incomplete summation of the Sermon on the Mount. And it would suffer immeasurably through comparison. For nearly two thousand years the Christian world has been holding in its hands the complete answer to its restless fruitless yearnings. Here…rests the blueprint for successful human life with optimum mental health and contentment.” Psychiatrist J.T. Fisher, as quoted by Montgomery, p. 65

28. John Warwick Montgomery agrees, stating, “We know from the Mishna that it was Jewish custom to memorize a Rabbi’s teaching, for a good pupil was like a ‘plastered cistern that loses not a drop’ [Mishna Aboth, II.8.]. And we can be sure that the early church, impressed as it was by Jesus, governed itself by this ideal.” p. 37-38

29. “Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses…” Luke 1:1-2

30. “…we shall add a matter of primary importance a tradition regarding Mark who wrote the Gospel, which he [Papias] has given in the following words: ‘And the Presbyter said this. Mark having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately whatsoever he remembered. It was not, however, in exact order that he related the sayings or deeds of Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor accompanied Him. But afterwards, as I said, he accompanied Peter, who accommodated his instructions to the necessities, but with no intention of giving a regular narrative of the Lord’s sayings. Wherefore, Mark made no mistake in thus writing some things as he remembered them. For of one thing he took special care, not to omit anything he had heard and not to put anything fictitious into the statements.” Eusebius, The Church History, iii.39

31. “All that Christianity asks of men…is, that they would be consistent with themselves; that they would treat its evidences as they treat the evidence of other things; and that they would try and judge its actors and witnesses, as they deal with their fellow men, when testifying to human affairs and actions, in human tribunals. Let the witnesses be compared with themselves, with each other, and with surrounding facts and circumstances; and let their testimony be sifted, as if it were given in a court of justice, on the side of the adverse party, the witness being subjected to rigorous cross-examination. The result, it is confidently believed, will be an undoubting conviction of their integrity, ability, and truth.” Simon Greenleaf, Royal Professor of Law, Harvard University, “The Testimony of the Evangelists, Examined by the Rules of Evidence Administered in Courts of Justice”, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House, 1965 (reprinted from 1847 edition).

* “I say unequivocally that the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ is so overwhelming that it compels acceptance by proof which leaves absolutely no room for doubt.” Sir Lionel Luckoo, Attorney with 245 consecutive murder acquittals, knighted twice by Queen Elizabeth, former Justice and Diplomat, cited by Ross Clifford, “The Case for an Empty Tomb”, Albatross Books, 1990, p. 112

32. “…if the gospels had been identical to each other, word for word, this would have raised charges that the authors had conspired among themselves to coordinate their stories in advance, and that would have cast doubt on them.” Lee Strobel, “The Case for Christ”, Zondervan, 1998, p. 45

33. “There is enough of a discrepancy to show that there could have been no previous concert among them; and at the same time such substantial agreement as to show that they all were independent narrators of the same great transaction.” Simon Greenleaf, “The Testimony of the Four Evangelists”, Grand Rapids, Baker, 1984, vii, cited in Strobel, p. 58

“My own conviction is, once you allow for the elements I’ve talked about earlier – of paraphrase, of abridgment, of explanatory additions, of selection, of omission – the gospels are extremely consistent with each other by ancient standards, which are the only standards by which it’s fair to judge them…If the gospels were too consistent, that in itself would invalidate them as independent witnesses. People would then say we really have only one testimony that everybody else is just parroting.”  Craig L. Blomberg Ph.D., interview with Lee Strobel, p. 57-58.

* “The frank and artless narratives of the Bible are so obviously indifferent to the appearance of consistency, and show so clearly that irregularity which is the sure mark of honest handwork in the Oriental rug and of spontaneity in human testimony, that they have often lured opponents into attempts at destructive cross-examination which have only brought the Bible’s truth and consistency into clearer light.” Irwin Linton, “A Lawyer Examines the Bible”, W.A. Wilde Company, 1943, p. 89

* “Now, in historical researches, a reconciled inconsistency becomes a positive argument. First, because an impostor generally guards against the appearance of inconsistency; and secondly, because when apparent inconsistencies are found, it is seldom that anything but truth renders them capable of reconciliation. The existence of the difficulty proves the absence of that caution which usually accompanies the consciousness of fraud; and the solution proves that it is not the collusion of fortuitous propositions which we have to deal with, but that a thread of truth winds through the whole, which preserved every circumstance in its place.” William Paley, “Horae Paulinae”, cited by Dave Hunt, “In Defense of the Faith”, Harvest House Publishers, 1996, p. 89

34. “Women were on a very low rung of the social ladder in first-century Palestine. There are old rabbinical sayings that said, ‘Let the words of the Law be burned rather than delivered to women’ and ‘Blessed is he whose children are male, but woe to him whose children are female.’ Women’s testimony was regarded as so worthless that they weren’t even allowed to serve as legal witnesses in a Jewish court of law.” William Lane Craig, PH.D., D.TH., interview with Lee Strobel, p. 217-218

35. See Archaeologist Randall Price, “The Stones Cry Out”, Harvest House Publishers, 1997, pp.42-43. Price cites as his sources:
• Bryon McCane, “Let the Dead Bury Their Own Dead”: Secondary Burial and Matthew 8:21-22”, Harvard Theological Review 83, 1990, pp. 31-43
• Eric Meyers, “Jewish Ossuaries: Reburial and Rebirth”, Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1971 and “Theological Implications of Ancient Jewish Burial Custom”, Jewish Quarterly Review 62, 1971-72, pp. 95-119

36. Isaiah chapters 11 and 35, and Zechariah chapter 14 are examples of numerous such prophecies.

37. This fact is missed by many Jewish folks today, but can be seen by comparing Isaiah 11, which states that the Messiah would come and conquer Israel’s enemies in a military campaign, and set up His kingdom on earth, with Daniel 9:26, which states that the Messiah would be killed at his coming. Daniel also says that after the Messiah’s death, Jerusalem and its temple would be destroyed. The only way to interpret these prophecies is to suppose that the Messiah would come twice. Amazingly, 40 years after modern scholarship has placed the death of Jesus, the general Titus led a military campaign into Jerusalem, effectively razing the city, and the temple, to the ground.

38. “Jesus Christ came into the world at a time of religious and philosophical malaise. His own people the Jews, under the heel of Roman domination, were looking for a political Messiah. When Jesus largely avoided the politically loaded term “Messiah” and presented Himself as a spiritual Redeemer (the Son of Man who must suffer and die as the Servant of the Lord before exaltation to dominion), not even his own disciples understood Him. The Jews in general and the Sanhedrin in particular rejected Him for Barabbas, who was a political revolutionary. Thus Jesus died by Roman crucifixion.” Robert H. Gundry, Ph.D. “A Survey of the New Testament”, Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1970, p. 383

* “Historically it can be proven beyond question that on every important point Jesus’ conception of himself as Messiah differed radically from the conceptions held by all parties among the Jews…the transformation of a human Jesus to a divine Christ was a task of which neither the apostolic company nor Paul was psychologically or ethically capable, even if Jesus had met their stereotyped messianic expectations, which he did not…The single fact that official Jewry crucified Jesus for blasphemy is sufficient ground for rejecting the idea that Jesus fulfilled the messianic dreams of the time.” Montgomery, p. 22, 69

* “In view of all this [first century antipathy toward the heathen in Palestine], what an almost incredible truth it must have seemed, when the Lord Jesus Christ proclaimed it among Israel as the object of his coming and kingdom, not to make the Gentiles Jews, but of both alike children of one Heavenly Father; not to rivet upon the heathen the yoke of the law, but to deliver from it Jew and Gentile, or rather to fulfil its demands for all! The most unexpected and unprepared for revelation, from the Jewish point of view, was that of the breaking down of the middle wall of partition between Jew and Gentile, the taking away of the enmity of the law and nailing it to His cross. There was nothing analogous to it; not a hint of it to be found, either in the teaching or the spirit of the times. Quite the opposite. Assuredly, the most unlike thing to Christ were His times.” Alfred Edersheim, Grindfield Lecturer on the Septuagint at Oxford, “Sketches of Jewish Social Life in the Days of Christ”, (Reprint ed., Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdrmans, 1957), pp. 28-29

39. William Lane Craig, Debate with Frank Zindler , “Atheism vs. Christianity: Where does the Evidence Point?”, debate at Willow Creek Community Church, Zondervan Publishing House (Video), 1994.

40. Peter is not the only individual in the New Testament that is portrayed with “warts and all.” There are numerous other examples. Others include:

a. The disciples’ disputes over which one of them was the greatest (Luke 9:46, 22:24).
b. The disciples’ disbelief of the resurrection report (Mark 16:11)
c. Thomas’ refusal to believe in the resurrection without proof (John 20:25).
d. The disciples’ disbelief in Rhoda’s report that Peter had been released from prison, even though that was the very thing they were no doubt praying for! (Acts 12:12-15).
e. Paul’s outburst toward the High Priest out of ignorance (Acts 23:3-5).

41. James is mentioned not only by Hegesippus, but by the non-Christian historian Josephus in Antiquities XX, 9.1: . “But the younger brother Ananus who, as we said, received the high priesthood, was of a bold disposition and exceptionally daring; he followed the party of the Sadducees, who are severe in judgment above all the Jews, as we have already shown. As therefore Ananus was of such disposition, he thought he had now a good opportunity, as Festus was now dead, and Albinus was still on the road; so he assembled a council of judges, and brought before it the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ, whose name was James, together with some others, having accused them as law-breakers, he delivered them over to be stoned.”

42. Besides the explicit statements of the early church regarding the nobility of James’ character, consider again what Josephus stated regarding the death of James. First, notice his affirmation that it was the Sadducees that seemed to be the dominant religious body in Jerusalem. This agrees perfectly with the political/religious picture painted in the Book of Acts. Second,  Josephus never actually condemns James as a law-breaker but rather makes it clear that it was Ananus who accused him of being such. The sly manner in which the trial and execution was carried out more than hints at the diabolical nature of Ananus, and of James’ innocence.

43. In 1 Corinthians 15:7 Paul states explicitly that the risen Lord appeared to James. In Galatians 1:19, and 2:1-9 Paul reminds the Galatians that he had spoken with James personally at length on at least two occasions.

44. “What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.” Romans 4:1-5

45. “What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? Can faith save him? If a brother or a sister be naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit? Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works; shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works , when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect. And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.” James 2:14-26.

A careful read of James makes clear that he is concerned with the Christian’s practical witness in the world. The examples he cites of people being justified refer to their justification in the sight of men. Paul said that Abraham was justified in the sight of God by faith (referring to Genesis 15:6). James said he was justified when he offered up Isaac (Genesis 22). The fact is, Abraham was justified in the sight of God the moment he believed, but justified in the sight of men by his visual act of obedience in Genesis 22. Consequently he became known as the friend of God. The account of Rahab is identical. Her act of faith justified her in the eyes of other people, in this case, in the eyes of the invading Israelites (Joshua 2, 6:22-25)

46. Why didn’t Jesus openly proclaim His identity as Messiah? The most likely reason is that by Jesus’ time, the term “Messiah” had taken on a very limited, bordering on erroneous, meaning. In the first century, there was expectancy for the Messiah to come and vanquish Rome, thereby re-establishing the nation of Israel as an independent state under the reign and rule of God. This expectation became so strong and widespread that by the time of Christ, many appeared unaware of the Messiah’s other mission, namely, to die as payment for the sins of the world (Isaiah 53:5, Daniel 9:26). It appears that although Jesus never denied being the Messiah, He tended to avoid the politically loaded term in favour of the more obscure “Son of Man.” The Lord, presumably, adopted this latter title because He could fill it with proper meaning at the onset, without first expurgating erroneous connotations that had become attached to it. Such would not have been the case with the term “Messiah.”

47. Here are 2 other coincidences, which appear quite undesigned:
Paul’s hardships in Philippi and 1 Thessalonians – Remember that 1 Thessalonians is universally acknowledged as authentically Pauline. In 2:1-2, Paul states:
“For yourselves, brethren, know our entrance in unto you, that it was not in vain; but even after that we had suffered before, and were shamefully entreated, as ye know, at Philippi, we were bold in our God to speak unto you the gospel of God with much contention.”

Acts 16:12-17:10 record how Paul came to Philippi and was falsely arrested and beaten by the magistrates there. After his departure, the text tells us that Paul passed through Amphipolis and Apolonia and arrived at Thessalonica, where his preaching brought mixed reactions. There, certain unbelieving Jews stirred up the crowds against Paul, forcing him to depart to the city of Berea. It is only natural that during his short stay in Thessalonica, the people would have been well aware of Paul’s hardships in Philippi, his wounds no doubt still visible.

Some might contend that the author of Acts simply read Paul’s letter to the Thessalonians and then tried to write a story for Paul that would harmonize. If this is indeed the case, then the forger was extremely well informed. Many details concerning Philippi and the legal system there are accurate to the time in which the events supposedly took place.
Paul’s fearfulness in Corinth – In 1 Corinthians 2:3 Paul states, “and I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling.” According to Acts 18:9-10, after a heated debate with the unbelieving Jews in Corinth, the Lord appeared to Paul in a vision one night and said, “Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy peace: for I have much people in this city.”

Again, if we suppose that Acts 18 was written in an attempt to create a history around the Pauline letters to the Corinthians, we must suppose that it was created by an expert forger. The legal system and local governor’s name and title are absolutely correct for that time and place. Furthermore, though Paul explicitly states that he arrived in Corinth with much fear and trembling, a casual reading of Acts would not betray this. Only when we stop to consider the Lord’s words to Paul to “Be not afraid” would we detect any apprehension on the part of the great apostle in Corinth. A forger working from 1 Corinthians is more likely to have either commented on Paul’s fears in Corinth outright, or to omit the point entirely. What would not be expected from a forger is the slight hint of Paul’s apprehension through the gentle words ascribed to the Lord in Acts 18:9-10.